Cintas Center · at Xavier
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | XAV | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 XAV 89–71 · win probability XAV 94%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 159.9
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: XAV has more of the edges
FIU 1, XAV 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
XAV offense vs FIU defense
Offense 31st of 366 against a defense 217th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
FIU has played the 151st-hardest schedule, XAV the 34th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Three-pointers
FIU hits 34.7% and allows 36.2%; XAV hits 36.5% and allows 34.8%. Threes are 32.8% and 40.6% of their shots
Free throws
Free throw rate: FIU 38.6, XAV 28.1. Allowed: FIU 35.9, XAV 32.6
FIU offense vs XAV defense
Offense 144th of 366 against a defense 89th, on the model’s ratings
Home court
XAV at home. This season: XAV 0-0 at home, FIU 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: FIU 0%, XAV 14%. Transfers in: FIU 6, XAV 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: FIU 33.9%, XAV 26.5%. Defensive: FIU 65.2%, XAV 70.5%
Context
Tempo
About 72 possessions: FIU plays 72.4 a game (26th fastest), XAV 71.8 (44th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: FIU 50.6 and allows 52.9; XAV 51.8 and allows 54.1
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: FIU 17.8%, XAV 14.0%. Forced: FIU 20.0%, XAV 15.5%
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 | — | XAV -18.1 | — |
| Total | — | 159.9 | — |
| Projected score | — | FIU 70.9 · XAV 89 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | XAV -10.7 | — |
| 1H total | 74.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | FIU 32 · XAV 42.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | 3-7 30% | |
| 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% | 9-1 90% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
No more games listed yet.
No more games listed yet.
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
FIU
29 games played
Straight up
12-17
41% wins
Against the spread
16-13
55% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% overs · avg +1.3 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 8 | @ | L 66-96 | +21.5 | L −8.5 | 156.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 13 | @ | L 81-98 | +21.5 | W +4.5 | 158.5 | O 179 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 72-80 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 74-61 | -4.5 | W +8.5 | 157.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 89-83 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 154.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 88-65 | -5.5 | W +17.5 | 145.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 81-98 | +22.5 | W +5.5 | 161.5 | O 179 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 86-79 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 161.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 28 | vs | L 94-97 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 152.5 | O 191 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 89-74 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 157.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 76-64 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 64-71 | +1.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 71-79 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 153.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 86-89 | +5.5 | W +2.5 | 175.5 | U 175 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 63-76 | -2.5 | L −15.5 | 168.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 77-83 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 151.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 81-78 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 28 | vs | L 74-78 | -3.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 88-84 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 154.5 | O 172 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 70-80 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 159.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 66-68 | -8.5 | L −10.5 | 147.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 77-64 | -3.5 | W +9.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 89-90 | +9.5 | W +8.5 | 152.5 | O 179 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 70-67 | -3.5 | L −0.5 | 154.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 67-100 | +6.5 | L −26.5 | 161.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 84-76 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 145.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 67-73 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 153.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 92-67 | +1.5 | W +26.5 | 160.5 | U 159 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 72-75 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 152.5 | U 147 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
NEB
L 66-96
−8.5
13
@
LSU
L 81-98
+4.5
24
vs
JMU
L 72-80
−10.5
26
vs
OMA
W 74-61
+8.5
3
vs
FGCU
W 89-83
+7.5
6
vs
JAX
W 88-65
+17.5
16
@
MIA
L 81-98
+5.5
20
vs
LIU
W 86-79
+0.5
28
vs
LIB
L 94-97
+1.5
2
vs
NMSU
W 89-74
+16.5
4
vs
UTEP
W 76-64
+5.5
7
@
JXST
L 64-71
−5.5
10
@
MOST
L 71-79
−5.5
14
@
KENN
L 86-89
+2.5
17
vs
SHSU
L 63-76
−15.5
22
@
UTEP
L 77-83
−7.5
24
@
NMSU
W 81-78
+10.5
28
vs
JXST
L 74-78
−7.5
4
@
MTSU
W 88-84
+9.5
7
@
WKU
L 70-80
−5.5
12
vs
DEL
L 66-68
−10.5
14
vs
LT
W 77-64
+9.5
19
@
LIB
L 89-90
+8.5
21
vs
MOST
W 70-67
−0.5
26
@
SHSU
L 67-100
−26.5
28
@
LT
W 84-76
+10.5
5
vs
MTSU
L 67-73
−7.5
7
vs
WKU
W 92-67
+26.5
10
vs
MOST
L 72-75
−1.5
covered 16didn’t cover 13avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
NEB
L 66-96
+5.5
13
@
LSU
L 81-98
+20.5
24
vs
JMU
L 72-80
−3.5
26
vs
OMA
W 74-61
−22.5
3
vs
FGCU
W 89-83
+17.5
6
vs
JAX
W 88-65
+7.5
16
@
MIA
L 81-98
+17.5
20
vs
LIU
W 86-79
+3.5
28
vs
LIB
L 94-97
+38.5
2
vs
NMSU
W 89-74
+5.5
4
vs
UTEP
W 76-64
−12.5
7
@
JXST
L 64-71
−15.5
10
@
MOST
L 71-79
−3.5
14
@
KENN
L 86-89
−0.5
17
vs
SHSU
L 63-76
−29.5
22
@
UTEP
L 77-83
+8.5
24
@
NMSU
W 81-78
−0.5
28
vs
JXST
L 74-78
+3.5
4
@
MTSU
W 88-84
+17.5
7
@
WKU
L 70-80
−9.5
12
vs
DEL
L 66-68
−13.5
14
vs
LT
W 77-64
−5.5
19
@
LIB
L 89-90
+26.5
21
vs
MOST
W 70-67
−17.5
26
@
SHSU
L 67-100
+5.5
28
@
LT
W 84-76
+14.5
5
vs
MTSU
L 67-73
−13.5
7
vs
WKU
W 92-67
−1.5
10
vs
MOST
L 72-75
−5.5
over 14under 15avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Xavier
33 games played
Straight up
15-18
45% wins
Against the spread
16-17
48% covers · avg −1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
24-9
73% overs · avg +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 66-62 | -12.5 | L −8.5 | 139.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 74-69 | -24.5 | L −19.5 | 156.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 10 | vs | L 68-87 | -3.5 | L −22.5 | 155.5 | U 155 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 62-81 | +15.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 99-69 | -10.5 | W +19.5 | 150.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 77-78 | +10.5 | W +9.5 | 165.5 | U 155 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 78-68 | +5.5 | W +15.5 | 140.5 | O 146 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 88-67 | -13.5 | W +7.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 1 | vs | W 96-74 | -27.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 5 | vs | W 79-74 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 147.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 12 | vs | W 75-57 | -18.5 | L −0.5 | 151.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 17 | vs | L 57-98 | -2.5 | L −43.5 | 151.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 80-77 | +4.5 | W +7.5 | 149.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 31 | vs | L 67-90 | +11.5 | L −11.5 | 144.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 77-86 | +2.5 | L −6.5 | 149.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 65-66 | +5.5 | W +4.5 | 157.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 97-84 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 165.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 89-75 | +1.5 | W +15.5 | 161.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 93-94 | +8.5 | W +7.5 | 155.5 | O 187 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 83-88 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 159.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 28 | @ | L 68-86 | +5.5 | L −12.5 | 145.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 68-66 | -4.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 60-92 | +16.5 | L −15.5 | 147.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 9 | @ | L 82-87 | +16.5 | W +11.5 | 159.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 96-88 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 157.5 | O 184 |
| Feb 17 | vs | L 89-92 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 152.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 75-80 | +4.5 | L −0.5 | 159.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 84-94 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 170.5 | O 178 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 91-84 | -4.5 | W +2.5 | 155.5 | O 175 |
| Mar 3 | vs | L 68-77 | +1.5 | L −7.5 | 144.5 | O 145 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 78-91 | +11.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 89-87 | +4.5 | W +6.5 | 157.5 | O 176 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 68-93 | +17.5 | L −7.5 | 150.5 | O 161 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
MRST
W 66-62
−8.5
6
vs
LEM
W 74-69
−19.5
10
vs
SCU
L 68-87
−22.5
14
@
IOWA
L 62-81
−3.5
18
vs
ODU
W 99-69
+19.5
21
vs
UGA
L 77-78
+9.5
23
vs
WVU
W 78-68
+15.5
28
vs
AMCC
W 88-67
+7.5
1
vs
SFPA
W 96-74
−5.5
5
vs
CIN
W 79-74
+6.5
12
vs
MOST
W 75-57
−0.5
17
vs
CREI
L 57-98
−43.5
20
@
GTWN
W 80-77
+7.5
31
vs
CONN
L 67-90
−11.5
3
@
DEP
L 77-86
−6.5
7
@
MARQ
L 65-66
+4.5
10
vs
PROV
W 97-84
+14.5
14
vs
BTLR
W 89-75
+15.5
21
@
CREI
L 93-94
+7.5
24
vs
SJU
L 83-88
+3.5
28
@
HALL
L 68-86
−12.5
31
vs
DEP
W 68-66
−2.5
3
@
CONN
L 60-92
−15.5
9
@
SJU
L 82-87
+11.5
14
vs
MARQ
W 96-88
+6.5
17
vs
VILL
L 89-92
+1.5
21
@
BTLR
L 75-80
−0.5
25
@
PROV
L 84-94
−4.5
28
vs
GTWN
W 91-84
+2.5
3
vs
HALL
L 68-77
−7.5
7
@
VILL
L 78-91
−1.5
11
vs
MARQ
W 89-87
+6.5
12
vs
CONN
L 68-93
−7.5
covered 16didn’t cover 17avg −1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
MRST
W 66-62
−11.5
6
vs
LEM
W 74-69
−13.5
10
vs
SCU
L 68-87
−0.5
14
@
IOWA
L 62-81
−0.5
18
vs
ODU
W 99-69
+17.5
21
vs
UGA
L 77-78
−10.5
23
vs
WVU
W 78-68
+5.5
28
vs
AMCC
W 88-67
+8.5
1
vs
SFPA
W 96-74
+17.5
5
vs
CIN
W 79-74
+5.5
12
vs
MOST
W 75-57
−19.5
17
vs
CREI
L 57-98
+3.5
20
@
GTWN
W 80-77
+7.5
31
vs
CONN
L 67-90
+12.5
3
@
DEP
L 77-86
+13.5
7
@
MARQ
L 65-66
−26.5
10
vs
PROV
W 97-84
+15.5
14
vs
BTLR
W 89-75
+2.5
21
@
CREI
L 93-94
+31.5
24
vs
SJU
L 83-88
+11.5
28
@
HALL
L 68-86
+8.5
31
vs
DEP
W 68-66
−16.5
3
@
CONN
L 60-92
+4.5
9
@
SJU
L 82-87
+9.5
14
vs
MARQ
W 96-88
+26.5
17
vs
VILL
L 89-92
+28.5
21
@
BTLR
L 75-80
−4.5
25
@
PROV
L 84-94
+7.5
28
vs
GTWN
W 91-84
+19.5
3
vs
HALL
L 68-77
+0.5
7
@
VILL
L 78-91
+15.5
11
vs
MARQ
W 89-87
+18.5
12
vs
CONN
L 68-93
+10.5
over 24under 9avg +6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Xavier has the better starters
Position by position: FIU 0, Xavier 2, even 3
FIUBetterXavier
G T. Saine TR18.1 pts · 2.3 reb · 4.4 ast
Score 91
=Even
G C. Westry TR15.3 pts · 3.7 reb · 5.6 ast
Score 97
G C. Caulker TR7.9 pts · 2.4 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 22
→XAVBig
G T. Washington TR11.9 pts · 4 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 82
G H. Cuevas TR2.6 pts · 1 reb · 0.6 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F N. Chitikoudis TR11.1 pts · 7.7 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 66
F J. Colonel TR4.6 pts · 7.3 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 52
→XAVSmall
F J. Milicevic12.4 pts · 3.9 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 75
F R. Seals TR7.5 pts · 4 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 61
=Even
F R. Aligbe TR9.4 pts · 7.6 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 74
FIUBetterXavier
FIU offense144th of 366 · -4.3
→XAVSmall
XAV defense89th of 366 · -0.2
FIU defense217th of 366 · -5.7
→XAVBig
XAV offense31st of 366 · +6.0
Backcourt-0.8 · 3 players
→XAVBig
Backcourt+6.0 · 2 players
Frontcourt-0.0 · 2 players
→XAVBig
Frontcourt+3.1 · 3 players
Bench-0.9 · 1 player
→XAVBig
Bench+5.4 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestFIU betterXAV betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
T. Saine34 min · TRC. Caulker31 min · TRH. Cuevas13 min · TRN. MendyNewM. BlazerNewC. HallNew
Forwards
J. Colonel26 min · TRR. Seals18 min · TRJ. Payne7 min · TRG. GiceviciusNewC. RingNewS. N'DiayeNew
Guards
C. Westry31 min · TRT. Washington28 min · TRR. Dominguez23 min · TRB. Appelhans13 min · TRM. Wolf2 minK. HouseNew
Forwards
N. Chitikoudis27 min · TRJ. Milicevic26 minR. Aligbe25 min · TRM. Nwoko22 min · TRH. Thole1 minG. PozzatoNew
Centers
K. WestphalNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 77.7 #100 | Points per game | 78.4 #91 |
| 1.08 #197 | Points per possession | 1.09 #149 |
| 72.4 #26 | Pace (possessions) | 71.8 #44 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.6 #210 | Effective FG% | 51.8 #155 |
| 34.7 #137 | 3-point % | 36.5 #39 |
| 32.8 #321 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.6 #156 |
| 38.6 #87 | Free throw rate | 28.1 #341 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.8 #258 | Turnover rate | 14.0 #21 |
| 33.9 #69 | Offensive rebound rate | 26.5 #311 |
| 13.6 #173 | Assists per game | 17.4 #15 |
| Defense | ||
| 79.1 #301 | Points allowed | 80.6 #329 |
| 1.09 #194 | Points allowed per possession | 1.12 #276 |
| 52.9 #264 | Opponent effective FG% | 54.1 #302 |
| 36.2 #313 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.8 #237 |
| 20.0 #22 | Turnovers forced | 15.5 #253 |
| 65.2 #335 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.5 #136 |
| 8.8 #12 | Steals per game | 6.5 #181 |
| 4.4 #43 | Blocks per game | 4.0 #77 |
FIU
12-17 in 2025-26 overall · 8-13 in conference · Conference USA
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Missouri St72–75
- Wvs Western KY92–67
- Lvs MTSU67–73
- W@ Louisiana Tech84–76
- L@ Sam Houston67–100
A week or more of rest.
Xavier
15-18 in 2025-26 overall · 7-15 in conference · Big East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UConn68–93
- Wvs Marquette89–87
- L@ Villanova78–91
- Lvs Seton Hall68–77
- Wvs Georgetown91–84
A week or more of rest.