Fiserv Forum · at Marquette
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | MARQ | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 MARQ 78–77 · win probability MARQ 54%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 154.8
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: WIS has more of the edges
WIS 3, MARQ 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: WIS 29.1%, MARQ 29.7%. Defensive: WIS 71.8%, MARQ 65.3%
Three-pointers
WIS hits 36.2% and allows 33.5%; MARQ hits 31.7% and allows 32.7%. Threes are 52.1% and 42.2% of their shots
Turnovers
Turnover rate: WIS 12.8%, MARQ 16.1%. Forced: WIS 14.3%, MARQ 19.3%
Shooting
Effective FG%: WIS 54.5 and allows 51.4; MARQ 50.5 and allows 50.6
Home court
MARQ at home. This season: MARQ 0-0 at home, WIS 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: WIS plays 70.0 a game (119th fastest), MARQ 70.9 (79th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: WIS 54%, MARQ 64%. Transfers in: WIS 3, MARQ 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Schedule so far
WIS has played the 24th-hardest schedule, MARQ the 37th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: WIS 31.5, MARQ 32.8. Allowed: WIS 29.9, MARQ 32.0
Even
WIS offense vs MARQ defense
Offense 44th of 366 against a defense 36th, on the model’s ratings
Even
MARQ offense vs WIS defense
Offense 46th of 366 against a defense 40th, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | MARQ -1.3 | — |
| Total | — | 154.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | WIS 76.8 · MARQ 78 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | MARQ -0.6 | — |
| 1H total | 72.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | WIS 35.9 · MARQ 36.5 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% | |
| 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% | 3-7 30% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
WIS 4–1 MARQWIS leads · 5 games since 2021-22 · WIS 4-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 2025-26 | MARQ 76 @ WIS 96 | WIS -11.5 | WIS W |
| Dec 7, 2024-25 | WIS 74 @ MARQ 88 | MARQ -6.5 | MARQ W |
| Dec 2, 2023-24 | MARQ 64 @ WIS 75 | WIS +2.5 | WIS W |
| Dec 3, 2022-23 | WIS 80 @ MARQ 77 | MARQ -5.5 | WIS W |
| Dec 4, 2021-22 | MARQ 76 @ WIS 89 | WIS -7 | WIS W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Wisconsin
35 games played
Straight up
24-11
69% wins
Against the spread
21-14
60% covers · avg +1.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
22-13
63% overs · avg +3.5 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 96-64 | -20.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | O 160 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 97-72 | -28.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 86-55 | -26.5 | W +4.5 | 156.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 17 | vs | W 94-69 | -25.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 70-98 | +4.5 | L −23.5 | 165.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 104-83 | -6.5 | W +14.5 | 166.5 | O 187 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 63-74 | -5.5 | L −16.5 | 157.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 85-73 | -10.5 | W +1.5 | 155.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 96-76 | -11.5 | W +8.5 | 160.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 60-90 | +1.5 | L −28.5 | 158.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 19 | vs | L 66-76 | -3.5 | L −13.5 | 152.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 88-61 | -26.5 | W +0.5 | 152.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 80-60 | -19.5 | W +0.5 | 157.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 73-89 | +5.5 | L −10.5 | 153.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 6 | vs | W 80-72 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 152.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 91-88 | +19.5 | W +22.5 | 169.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 13 | @ | W 78-75 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 96-87 | -15.5 | L −6.5 | 149.5 | O 183 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 98-71 | -5.5 | W +21.5 | 157.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 25 | vs | L 71-73 | -7.5 | L −9.5 | 158.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 67-63 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 146.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 92-82 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 77-78 | +3.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 10 | @ | W 92-90 | +9.5 | W +11.5 | 153.5 | O 182 |
| Feb 13 | vs | W 92-71 | +1.5 | W +22.5 | 149.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 69-86 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 157.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 84-71 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 71-85 | -5.5 | L −19.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 90-73 | -1.5 | W +15.5 | 153.5 | O 163 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 78-45 | -14.5 | W +18.5 | 153.5 | U 123 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 97-93 | +9.5 | W +13.5 | 154.5 | O 190 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 85-82 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | O 167 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 91-88 | +8.5 | W +11.5 | 158.5 | O 179 |
| Mar 14 | vs | L 65-68 | +12.5 | W +9.5 | 161.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 19 | vs | L 82-83 | -10.5 | L −11.5 | 161.5 | O 165 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
CAM
W 96-64
+11.5
7
vs
NIU
W 97-72
−3.5
11
vs
BALL
W 86-55
+4.5
17
vs
SIUE
W 94-69
−0.5
21
@
BYU
L 70-98
−23.5
27
vs
PROV
W 104-83
+14.5
28
vs
TCU
L 63-74
−16.5
3
vs
NU
W 85-73
+1.5
6
vs
MARQ
W 96-76
+8.5
10
@
NEB
L 60-90
−28.5
19
vs
VILL
L 66-76
−13.5
22
vs
CMU
W 88-61
+0.5
30
vs
MILW
W 80-60
+0.5
3
vs
PUR
L 73-89
−10.5
6
vs
UCLA
W 80-72
+4.5
10
@
MICH
W 91-88
+22.5
13
@
MINN
W 78-75
+1.5
17
vs
RUTG
W 96-87
−6.5
22
@
PSU
W 98-71
+21.5
25
vs
USC
L 71-73
−9.5
28
vs
MINN
W 67-63
−5.5
31
vs
OSU
W 92-82
+5.5
7
@
IU
L 77-78
+2.5
10
@
ILL
W 92-90
+11.5
13
vs
MSU
W 92-71
+22.5
17
@
OSU
L 69-86
−15.5
22
vs
IOWA
W 84-71
+10.5
25
@
ORE
L 71-85
−19.5
28
@
WASH
W 90-73
+15.5
4
vs
MD
W 78-45
+18.5
7
@
PUR
W 97-93
+13.5
12
vs
WASH
W 85-82
−3.5
13
vs
ILL
W 91-88
+11.5
14
vs
MICH
L 65-68
+9.5
19
vs
HPU
L 82-83
−11.5
covered 21didn’t cover 14avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
CAM
W 96-64
+8.5
7
vs
NIU
W 97-72
+11.5
11
vs
BALL
W 86-55
−15.5
17
vs
SIUE
W 94-69
+16.5
21
@
BYU
L 70-98
+2.5
27
vs
PROV
W 104-83
+20.5
28
vs
TCU
L 63-74
−20.5
3
vs
NU
W 85-73
+2.5
6
vs
MARQ
W 96-76
+11.5
10
@
NEB
L 60-90
−8.5
19
vs
VILL
L 66-76
−10.5
22
vs
CMU
W 88-61
−3.5
30
vs
MILW
W 80-60
−17.5
3
vs
PUR
L 73-89
+8.5
6
vs
UCLA
W 80-72
−0.5
10
@
MICH
W 91-88
+9.5
13
@
MINN
W 78-75
+6.5
17
vs
RUTG
W 96-87
+33.5
22
@
PSU
W 98-71
+11.5
25
vs
USC
L 71-73
−14.5
28
vs
MINN
W 67-63
−16.5
31
vs
OSU
W 92-82
+18.5
7
@
IU
L 77-78
−2.5
10
@
ILL
W 92-90
+28.5
13
vs
MSU
W 92-71
+13.5
17
@
OSU
L 69-86
−2.5
22
vs
IOWA
W 84-71
+7.5
25
@
ORE
L 71-85
+3.5
28
@
WASH
W 90-73
+9.5
4
vs
MD
W 78-45
−30.5
7
@
PUR
W 97-93
+35.5
12
vs
WASH
W 85-82
+9.5
13
vs
ILL
W 91-88
+20.5
14
vs
MICH
L 65-68
−28.5
19
vs
HPU
L 82-83
+3.5
over 22under 13avg +3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
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
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Wisconsin has the better starters
Position by position: Wisconsin 2, Marquette 1, even 2
WisconsinBetterMarquette
G E. Elmer TR12.8 pts · 6.1 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 68
←WISSmall
G C. Porter TR11.2 pts · 3 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 45
G T. Autry TR10.9 pts · 3.6 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 61
→MARQBig
G N. Minessale TR19.7 pts · 4.5 reb · 4.2 ast
Score 97
G B. Carrington8.3 pts · 2.4 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 90
=Even
G N. James16.4 pts · 3.4 reb · 4.9 ast
Score 99
F N. Winter13.1 pts · 8.5 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 96
←WISSmall
G A. Stevens7.9 pts · 2.6 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 65
F A. Rapp9.7 pts · 4 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 83
=Even
F R. Parham12.5 pts · 4.9 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 87
WisconsinBetterMarquette
WIS offense44th of 366 · +4.5
=Even
MARQ defense36th of 366 · +3.1
WIS defense40th of 366 · +2.9
=Even
MARQ offense46th of 366 · +4.2
Backcourt+2.0 · 3 players
→MARQBig
Backcourt+8.9 · 4 players
Frontcourt+6.7 · 2 players
←WISBig
Frontcourt+2.5 · 1 player
Bench-2.6 · 5 players
→MARQBig
Bench+2.8 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestWIS betterMARQ betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
E. Elmer31 min · TRT. Autry29 min · TRB. Carrington18 minJ. Janicki17 minH. Jones7 minZ. Kinziger6 min
Forwards
N. Winter31 minA. Rapp23 minV. Onuetu18 min · TRW. Garlock7 minI. RiddleNew
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
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 83.0 #28 | Points per game | 75.2 #160 |
| 1.18 #27 | Points per possession | 1.06 #223 |
| 70.0 #119 | Pace (possessions) | 70.9 #79 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.5 #52 | Effective FG% | 50.5 #215 |
| 36.2 #50 | 3-point % | 31.7 #297 |
| 52.1 #6 | 3-point attempt rate | 42.2 #133 |
| 31.5 #267 | Free throw rate | 32.8 #243 |
| Possessions | ||
| 12.8 #4 | Turnover rate | 16.1 #145 |
| 29.1 #232 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.7 #216 |
| 16.0 #48 | Assists per game | 15.5 #63 |
| Defense | ||
| 76.1 #221 | Points allowed | 75.8 #213 |
| 1.09 #193 | Points allowed per possession | 1.07 #125 |
| 51.4 #178 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.6 #131 |
| 33.5 #152 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.7 #104 |
| 14.3 #327 | Turnovers forced | 19.3 #39 |
| 71.8 #74 | Defensive rebound rate | 65.3 #331 |
| 5.6 #287 | Steals per game | 9.3 #5 |
| 3.1 #198 | Blocks per game | 3.1 #207 |
Wisconsin
24-11 in 2025-26 overall · 16-7 in conference · Big Ten Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs High Point82–83
- Lvs Michigan65–68
- Wvs Illinois91–88
- Wvs Washington85–82
- W@ Purdue97–93
A week or more of rest.
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.