Crisler Center · at Michigan
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | MICH | |
|---|---|---|
| 0-0 | Record | 0-0 |
| 0-0 | ATS | 0-0 |
| 0-0 | O/U | 0-0 |
ATS = covered-didn’t-push · O/U = overs-unders
Model: projects MICH 86–70 · win probability MICH 92%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 155.3
Model edge
—
No market line yet
Public
—
No split yet for this game
The model has not beaten the closing line: with an edge of 3 or more it went 409-367 in 2025-26. Model record
What could decide it: MICH has more of the edges
MARQ 2, MICH 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: MARQ 29.7%, MICH 34.7%. Defensive: MARQ 65.3%, MICH 71.8%
Three-pointers
MARQ hits 31.7% and allows 32.7%; MICH hits 36.8% and allows 30.4%. Threes are 42.2% and 41.5% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: MARQ 50.5 and allows 50.6; MICH 58.3 and allows 44.6
Turnovers
Turnover rate: MARQ 16.1%, MICH 16.3%. Forced: MARQ 19.3%, MICH 15.2%
Free throws
Free throw rate: MARQ 32.8, MICH 38.0. Allowed: MARQ 32.0, MICH 26.0
Home court
MICH at home. This season: MICH 0-0 at home, MARQ 0-0 away
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: MARQ 64%, MICH 38%. Transfers in: MARQ 3, MICH 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
MARQ offense vs MICH defense
Offense 46th of 366 against a defense 10th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
MARQ has played the 37th-hardest schedule, MICH the 3rd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
MICH offense vs MARQ defense
Offense 5th of 366 against a defense 36th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: MARQ plays 70.9 a game (79th fastest), MICH 71.7 (48th). Faster games mean more points
Market
Open → current
Spread
Open—
no open
Now—
Opening line not available
Total
Open—
no open
Now—
Moneyline
—
Pre-game lines only (ESPN, DraftKings first). After tip-off the line shown is the closing line.
Model vs market
| Market | Model | Model edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spread | — | MICH -16.0 | — |
| Total | — | 155.3 | — |
| Projected score | — | MARQ 69.7 · MICH 85.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | MICH -9.4 | — |
| 1H total | 72.6 | — |
| 1H projected score | MARQ 31.6 · MICH 41 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% | 3-7 30% | |
| 9-1 90% | 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Marquette
32 games played
Straight up
12-20
38% wins
Against the spread
13-19
41% covers · avg −1.6 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-17
47% overs · avg −1.6 pts vs the total
Game by game: lines, results and totals
Lines, results and totalsCover margin by game · points beyond the lineTotal margin by game · points over or under the total
| Date | Opp | Result | Line | ATS | Total | O/U |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 3 | vs | W 80-53 | -24.5 | W +2.5 | 149.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 5 | vs | W 100-82 | -24.5 | L −6.5 | 155.5 | O 182 |
| Nov 9 | vs | L 77-100 | +3.5 | L −19.5 | 156.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 89-49 | -21.5 | W +18.5 | 155.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 82-89 | -8.5 | L −15.5 | 146.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 19 | vs | L 71-77 | -6.5 | L −12.5 | 151.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 85-71 | -25.5 | L −11.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 74-75 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 162.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 75-72 | -17.5 | L −14.5 | 146.5 | O 147 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 76-96 | +11.5 | L −8.5 | 160.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 59-79 | +16.5 | L −3.5 | 154.5 | U 138 |
| Dec 17 | vs | L 69-78 | -6.5 | L −15.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 63-84 | +6.5 | L −14.5 | 151.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 30 | vs | L 73-79 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 57-73 | +17.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 66-65 | -5.5 | L −4.5 | 157.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 73-76 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 146.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 13 | @ | L 68-92 | +15.5 | L −8.5 | 155.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 16 | @ | L 75-80 | +2.5 | L −2.5 | 145.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 19 | vs | W 105-104 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 167.5 | O 209 |
| Jan 23 | @ | L 76-87 | +5.5 | L −5.5 | 161.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 86-62 | +1.5 | W +25.5 | 154.5 | U 148 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 64-69 | +6.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 70-55 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 155.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 10 | @ | L 74-77 | +9.5 | W +6.5 | 144.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 88-96 | +1.5 | L −6.5 | 157.5 | O 184 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 70-76 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 24 | @ | W 76-60 | +2.5 | W +18.5 | 150.5 | U 136 |
| Mar 1 | vs | L 51-62 | -4.5 | L −15.5 | 139.5 | U 113 |
| Mar 4 | @ | W 78-56 | +3.5 | W +25.5 | 161.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 68-62 | +9.5 | W +15.5 | 143.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 87-89 | -4.5 | L −6.5 | 157.5 | O 176 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
UALB
W 80-53
+2.5
5
vs
SOU
W 100-82
−6.5
9
vs
IU
L 77-100
−19.5
12
vs
LR
W 89-49
+18.5
15
vs
MD
L 82-89
−15.5
19
vs
DAY
L 71-77
−12.5
22
vs
CMU
W 85-71
−11.5
28
vs
OU
L 74-75
+0.5
2
vs
VAL
W 75-72
−14.5
6
@
WIS
L 76-96
−8.5
13
@
PUR
L 59-79
−3.5
17
vs
GTWN
L 69-78
−15.5
20
@
CREI
L 63-84
−14.5
30
vs
HALL
L 73-79
−7.5
4
@
CONN
L 57-73
+1.5
7
vs
XAV
W 66-65
−4.5
10
vs
VILL
L 73-76
+0.5
13
@
SJU
L 68-92
−8.5
16
@
DEP
L 75-80
−2.5
19
vs
PROV
W 105-104
−1.5
23
@
BTLR
L 76-87
−5.5
27
vs
CREI
W 86-62
+25.5
31
@
HALL
L 64-69
+1.5
7
vs
BTLR
W 70-55
+11.5
10
@
VILL
L 74-77
+6.5
14
@
XAV
L 88-96
−6.5
18
vs
SJU
L 70-76
+2.5
24
@
GTWN
W 76-60
+18.5
1
vs
DEP
L 51-62
−15.5
4
@
PROV
W 78-56
+25.5
7
vs
CONN
W 68-62
+15.5
11
vs
XAV
L 87-89
−6.5
covered 13didn’t cover 19avg −1.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
UALB
W 80-53
−16.5
5
vs
SOU
W 100-82
+26.5
9
vs
IU
L 77-100
+20.5
12
vs
LR
W 89-49
−17.5
15
vs
MD
L 82-89
+24.5
19
vs
DAY
L 71-77
−3.5
22
vs
CMU
W 85-71
+3.5
28
vs
OU
L 74-75
−13.5
2
vs
VAL
W 75-72
+0.5
6
@
WIS
L 76-96
+11.5
13
@
PUR
L 59-79
−16.5
17
vs
GTWN
L 69-78
−2.5
20
@
CREI
L 63-84
−4.5
30
vs
HALL
L 73-79
+6.5
4
@
CONN
L 57-73
−14.5
7
vs
XAV
W 66-65
−26.5
10
vs
VILL
L 73-76
+2.5
13
@
SJU
L 68-92
+4.5
16
@
DEP
L 75-80
+9.5
19
vs
PROV
W 105-104
+41.5
23
@
BTLR
L 76-87
+1.5
27
vs
CREI
W 86-62
−6.5
31
@
HALL
L 64-69
−10.5
7
vs
BTLR
W 70-55
−30.5
10
@
VILL
L 74-77
+6.5
14
@
XAV
L 88-96
+26.5
18
vs
SJU
L 70-76
−11.5
24
@
GTWN
W 76-60
−14.5
1
vs
DEP
L 51-62
−26.5
4
@
PROV
W 78-56
−27.5
7
vs
CONN
W 68-62
−13.5
11
vs
XAV
L 87-89
+18.5
over 15under 17avg −1.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Michigan
40 games played
Straight up
37-3
93% wins
Against the spread
19-21
48% covers · avg +3.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-23
43% overs · avg −1.6 pts vs the total
Game by game: lines, results and totals
Lines, results and totalsCover margin by game · points beyond the lineTotal margin by game · points over or under the total
| Date | Opp | Result | Line | ATS | Total | O/U |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 3 | vs | W 121-78 | -24.5 | W +18.5 | 156.5 | O 199 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 85-84 | -15.5 | L −14.5 | 168.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 14 | @ | W 67-63 | -7.5 | L −3.5 | 164.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 86-61 | -27.5 | L −2.5 | 159.5 | U 147 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 94-54 | -6.5 | W +33.5 | 148.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 102-72 | -4.5 | W +25.5 | 163.5 | O 174 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 101-61 | +3.5 | W +43.5 | 165.5 | U 162 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 101-60 | -25.5 | W +15.5 | 153.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 9 | vs | W 89-61 | -17.5 | W +10.5 | 156.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 13 | @ | W 101-83 | -19.5 | L −1.5 | 163.5 | O 184 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 102-50 | -40.5 | W +11.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 112-71 | -24.5 | W +16.5 | 161.5 | O 183 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 96-66 | -22.5 | W +7.5 | 173.5 | U 162 |
| Jan 6 | @ | W 74-72 | -24.5 | L −22.5 | 169.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 88-91 | -19.5 | L −22.5 | 169.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 82-72 | -12.5 | L −2.5 | 165.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 81-71 | -18.5 | L −8.5 | 157.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 20 | vs | W 86-72 | -15.5 | L −1.5 | 163.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 23 | vs | W 74-62 | -16.5 | L −4.5 | 165.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 75-72 | -11.5 | L −8.5 | 157.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 30 | @ | W 83-71 | -2.5 | W +9.5 | 149.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 110-69 | -26.5 | W +14.5 | 161.5 | O 179 |
| Feb 8 | @ | W 82-61 | -8.5 | W +12.5 | 161.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 87-75 | -15.5 | L −3.5 | 153.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 86-56 | -15.5 | W +14.5 | 156.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 17 | @ | W 91-80 | -2.5 | W +8.5 | 156.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 63-68 | -3.5 | L −8.5 | 151.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 24 | vs | W 77-67 | -22.5 | L −12.5 | 145.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 27 | @ | W 84-70 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 159.5 | U 154 |
| Mar 5 | @ | W 71-68 | -9.5 | L −6.5 | 146.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 90-80 | -10.5 | L −0.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 71-67 | -12.5 | L −8.5 | 155.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 68-65 | -12.5 | L −9.5 | 161.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 15 | vs | L 72-80 | -4.5 | L −12.5 | 149.5 | O 152 |
| Mar 19 | vs | W 101-80 | -30.5 | L −9.5 | 151.5 | O 181 |
| Mar 21 | vs | W 95-72 | -12.5 | W +10.5 | 161.5 | O 167 |
| Mar 27 | vs | W 90-77 | -9.5 | W +3.5 | 172.5 | U 167 |
| Mar 29 | vs | W 95-62 | -8.5 | W +24.5 | 146.5 | O 157 |
| Apr 4 | vs | W 91-73 | +1.5 | W +19.5 | 157.5 | O 164 |
| Apr 6 | vs | W 69-63 | -6.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | U 132 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
OAK
W 121-78
+18.5
11
vs
WAKE
W 85-84
−14.5
14
@
TCU
W 67-63
−3.5
19
vs
MTSU
W 86-61
−2.5
24
vs
SDSU
W 94-54
+33.5
25
vs
AUB
W 102-72
+25.5
26
vs
GONZ
W 101-61
+43.5
6
vs
RUTG
W 101-60
+15.5
9
vs
VILL
W 89-61
+10.5
13
@
MD
W 101-83
−1.5
21
vs
LAS
W 102-50
+11.5
29
vs
MCN
W 112-71
+16.5
2
vs
USC
W 96-66
+7.5
6
@
PSU
W 74-72
−22.5
10
vs
WIS
L 88-91
−22.5
14
@
WASH
W 82-72
−2.5
17
@
ORE
W 81-71
−8.5
20
vs
IU
W 86-72
−1.5
23
vs
OSU
W 74-62
−4.5
27
vs
NEB
W 75-72
−8.5
30
@
MSU
W 83-71
+9.5
5
vs
PSU
W 110-69
+14.5
8
@
OSU
W 82-61
+12.5
11
@
NU
W 87-75
−3.5
14
vs
UCLA
W 86-56
+14.5
17
@
PUR
W 91-80
+8.5
21
vs
DUKE
L 63-68
−8.5
24
vs
MINN
W 77-67
−12.5
27
@
ILL
W 84-70
+12.5
5
@
IOWA
W 71-68
−6.5
8
vs
MSU
W 90-80
−0.5
13
vs
OSU
W 71-67
−8.5
14
vs
WIS
W 68-65
−9.5
15
vs
PUR
L 72-80
−12.5
19
vs
HOW
W 101-80
−9.5
21
vs
SLU
W 95-72
+10.5
27
vs
ALA
W 90-77
+3.5
29
vs
TENN
W 95-62
+24.5
4
vs
ARIZ
W 91-73
+19.5
6
vs
CONN
W 69-63
−0.5
covered 19didn’t cover 21avg +3.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
OAK
W 121-78
+42.5
11
vs
WAKE
W 85-84
+0.5
14
@
TCU
W 67-63
−34.5
19
vs
MTSU
W 86-61
−12.5
24
vs
SDSU
W 94-54
−0.5
25
vs
AUB
W 102-72
+10.5
26
vs
GONZ
W 101-61
−3.5
6
vs
RUTG
W 101-60
+7.5
9
vs
VILL
W 89-61
−6.5
13
@
MD
W 101-83
+20.5
21
vs
LAS
W 102-50
−3.5
29
vs
MCN
W 112-71
+21.5
2
vs
USC
W 96-66
−11.5
6
@
PSU
W 74-72
−23.5
10
vs
WIS
L 88-91
+9.5
14
@
WASH
W 82-72
−11.5
17
@
ORE
W 81-71
−5.5
20
vs
IU
W 86-72
−5.5
23
vs
OSU
W 74-62
−29.5
27
vs
NEB
W 75-72
−10.5
30
@
MSU
W 83-71
+4.5
5
vs
PSU
W 110-69
+17.5
8
@
OSU
W 82-61
−18.5
11
@
NU
W 87-75
+8.5
14
vs
UCLA
W 86-56
−14.5
17
@
PUR
W 91-80
+14.5
21
vs
DUKE
L 63-68
−20.5
24
vs
MINN
W 77-67
−1.5
27
@
ILL
W 84-70
−5.5
5
@
IOWA
W 71-68
−7.5
8
vs
MSU
W 90-80
+17.5
13
vs
OSU
W 71-67
−17.5
14
vs
WIS
W 68-65
−28.5
15
vs
PUR
L 72-80
+2.5
19
vs
HOW
W 101-80
+29.5
21
vs
SLU
W 95-72
+5.5
27
vs
ALA
W 90-77
−5.5
29
vs
TENN
W 95-62
+10.5
4
vs
ARIZ
W 91-73
+6.5
6
vs
CONN
W 69-63
−14.5
over 17under 23avg −1.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Michigan has the better starters
Position by position: Marquette 0, Michigan 1, even 4
MarquetteBetterMichigan
G C. Porter TR11.2 pts · 3 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 45
→MICHBig
G K. Noland TR17.7 pts · 3.5 reb · 3.6 ast
Score 87
G N. Minessale TR19.7 pts · 4.5 reb · 4.2 ast
Score 97
=Even
G E. Cadeau10.5 pts · 2.7 reb · 5.9 ast
Score 87
G N. James16.4 pts · 3.4 reb · 4.9 ast
Score 99
=Even
G T. McKenney9.9 pts · 2.8 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 88
G A. Stevens7.9 pts · 2.6 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 65
=Even
G R. Gayle7.3 pts · 3.3 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 76
F R. Parham12.5 pts · 4.9 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 87
=Even
C M. Thiam TR12.8 pts · 7.1 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 92
MarquetteBetterMichigan
MARQ offense46th of 366 · +4.2
=Even
MICH defense10th of 366 · +7.4
MARQ defense36th of 366 · +3.1
=Even
MICH offense5th of 366 · +10.9
Backcourt+8.9 · 4 players
←MARQSmall
Backcourt+7.0 · 4 players
Frontcourt+2.5 · 1 player
→MICHSmall
Frontcourt+4.4 · 1 player
Bench+2.8 · 5 players
→MICHSmall
Bench+5.5 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestMARQ betterMICH betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
C. Porter35 min · TRN. Minessale32 min · TRN. James29 minA. Stevens26 minE. JohnstonNewN. WalkerNew
Forwards
R. Parham29 minS. Fru22 min · TRD. Owens16 minC. Hamilton13 minM. Phillips8 minJ. Clark6 min
Guards
K. Noland34 min · TRE. Cadeau27 minT. McKenney22 minR. Gayle21 minH. Eisley1 minR. LiburdNew
Forwards
J. Estrella18 min · TRJ. Reed18 min · TRO. Goodman5 minH. HochbergNewL. CosbyNewQ. CostelloNew
Centers
M. Thiam27 min · TRM. MollerNew
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Matchup stats
2025-26 · rank among 365 teams
Scoring
Points per game
Points per possession
Pace (possessions)
Shooting
Effective FG%
3-point %
3-point attempt rate
Free throw rate
Possessions
Turnover rate
Offensive rebound rate
Assists per game
Defense
Points allowed
Points allowed per possession
Opponent effective FG%
Opponent 3-point %
Turnovers forced
Defensive rebound rate
Steals per game
Blocks per game
| Scoring | ||
|---|---|---|
| 75.2 #160 | Points per game | 87.3 #4 |
| 1.06 #223 | Points per possession | 1.21 #8 |
| 70.9 #79 | Pace (possessions) | 71.7 #48 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.5 #215 | Effective FG% | 58.3 #8 |
| 31.7 #297 | 3-point % | 36.8 #33 |
| 42.2 #133 | 3-point attempt rate | 41.5 #141 |
| 32.8 #243 | Free throw rate | 38.0 #102 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.1 #145 | Turnover rate | 16.3 #157 |
| 29.7 #216 | Offensive rebound rate | 34.7 #55 |
| 15.5 #63 | Assists per game | 18.6 #5 |
| Defense | ||
| 75.8 #213 | Points allowed | 69.5 #55 |
| 1.07 #125 | Points allowed per possession | 0.97 #8 |
| 50.6 #131 | Opponent effective FG% | 44.6 #1 |
| 32.7 #104 | Opponent 3-point % | 30.4 #18 |
| 19.3 #39 | Turnovers forced | 15.2 #270 |
| 65.3 #331 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.8 #70 |
| 9.3 #5 | Steals per game | 5.6 #286 |
| 3.1 #207 | Blocks per game | 6.0 #2 |
Marquette
12-20 in 2025-26 overall · 7-14 in conference · Big East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Xavier87–89
- Wvs UConn68–62
- W@ Providence78–56
- Lvs DePaul51–62
- W@ Georgetown76–60
A week or more of rest.
Michigan
37-3 in 2025-26 overall · 21-2 in conference · Big Ten Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Wvs UConn69–63
- Wvs Arizona91–73
- Wvs Tennessee95–62
- Wvs Alabama90–77
- Wvs Saint Louis95–72
A week or more of rest.