Conte Forum · at Boston College
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | BC | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 BC 83–63 · win probability BC 96%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 145.1
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: BC has more of the edges
UNH 1, BC 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
UNH offense vs BC defense
Offense 300th of 366 against a defense 83rd, on the model’s ratings
BC offense vs UNH defense
Offense 96th of 366 against a defense 255th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
UNH has played the 237th-hardest schedule, BC the 79th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Shooting
Effective FG%: UNH 46.7 and allows 53.5; BC 47.0 and allows 48.9
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UNH 47%, BC 1%. Transfers in: UNH 3, BC 11. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Three-pointers
UNH hits 30.5% and allows 34.3%; BC hits 29.4% and allows 31.9%. Threes are 43.1% and 42.4% of their shots
Free throws
Free throw rate: UNH 28.5, BC 32.4. Allowed: UNH 35.8, BC 34.6
Home court
BC at home. This season: BC 0-0 at home, UNH 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: UNH plays 68.9 a game (186th fastest), BC 67.5 (257th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UNH 25.7%, BC 28.3%. Defensive: UNH 73.1%, BC 71.4%
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UNH 16.5%, BC 15.4%. Forced: UNH 15.8%, BC 14.8%
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 | — | BC -19.9 | — |
| Total | — | 145.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | UNH 62.6 · BC 82.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | BC -11.7 | — |
| 1H total | 67.9 | — |
| 1H projected score | UNH 28.1 · BC 39.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-9 10% | 1-9 10% | 6-4 60% | |
| 2-8 20% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
UNH 1–0 BCUNH leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · UNH 1-0 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 2022-23 | UNH 74 @ BC 71 | BC -14.5 | UNH W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
New Hampshire
28 games played
Straight up
7-21
25% wins
Against the spread
12-16
43% covers · avg −2.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-13
54% overs · avg +0.7 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 | @ | L 38-88 | +29.5 | L −20.5 | 146.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 75-86 | +15.5 | W +4.5 | 147.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 44-61 | +24.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 105 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 66-98 | +29.5 | L −2.5 | 161.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 47-59 | +5.5 | L −6.5 | 136.5 | U 106 |
| Nov 30 | @ | L 68-72 | +9.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | U 140 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 68-69 | +8.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 88-82 | +5.5 | W +11.5 | 134.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 59-58 | -3.5 | L −2.5 | 138.5 | U 117 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 79-93 | +34.5 | W +20.5 | 157.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 30 | @ | L 55-86 | +31.5 | W +0.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 61-80 | +7.5 | L −11.5 | 139.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 76-80 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 137.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 74-75 | +6.5 | W +5.5 | 143.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 19 | @ | W 65-48 | +1.5 | W +18.5 | 129.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 88-82 | -9.5 | L −3.5 | 135.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 80-72 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 137.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 66-61 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 84-92 | +1.5 | L −6.5 | 131.5 | O 176 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 57-80 | +9.5 | L −13.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 70-76 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 145.5 | O 146 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 63-85 | +2.5 | L −19.5 | 146.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 56-78 | +3.5 | L −18.5 | 151.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 58-61 | -3.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 63-65 | -2.5 | L −4.5 | 141.5 | U 128 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 61-84 | +3.5 | L −19.5 | 138.5 | O 145 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 88-83 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 135.5 | O 171 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 69-84 | +12.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | O 153 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
CLEM
L 38-88
−20.5
9
@
HARV
L 75-86
+4.5
15
@
GMU
L 44-61
+7.5
18
@
PROV
L 66-98
−2.5
26
vs
BRWN
L 47-59
−6.5
30
@
FAIR
L 68-72
+5.5
3
@
DART
L 68-69
+7.5
6
vs
BU
W 88-82
+11.5
17
vs
STO
W 59-58
−2.5
21
@
SLU
L 79-93
+20.5
30
@
NEB
L 55-86
+0.5
3
vs
UVM
L 61-80
−11.5
8
@
NJIT
L 76-80
−6.5
10
@
UMBC
L 74-75
+5.5
19
@
ME
W 65-48
+18.5
22
vs
BING
W 88-82
−3.5
24
vs
UALB
W 80-72
+5.5
29
vs
UML
W 66-61
+1.5
31
@
BRY
L 84-92
−6.5
7
@
UVM
L 57-80
−13.5
12
vs
NJIT
L 70-76
−8.5
14
vs
UMBC
L 63-85
−19.5
19
@
UML
L 56-78
−18.5
21
vs
ME
L 58-61
−6.5
26
@
BING
L 63-65
−4.5
28
@
UALB
L 61-84
−19.5
3
vs
BRY
W 88-83
+2.5
7
@
UMBC
L 69-84
−2.5
covered 12didn’t cover 16avg −2.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
CLEM
L 38-88
−20.5
9
@
HARV
L 75-86
+13.5
15
@
GMU
L 44-61
−39.5
18
@
PROV
L 66-98
+2.5
26
vs
BRWN
L 47-59
−30.5
30
@
FAIR
L 68-72
−7.5
3
@
DART
L 68-69
−10.5
6
vs
BU
W 88-82
+35.5
17
vs
STO
W 59-58
−21.5
21
@
SLU
L 79-93
+14.5
30
@
NEB
L 55-86
−5.5
3
vs
UVM
L 61-80
+1.5
8
@
NJIT
L 76-80
+18.5
10
@
UMBC
L 74-75
+5.5
19
@
ME
W 65-48
−16.5
22
vs
BING
W 88-82
+34.5
24
vs
UALB
W 80-72
+14.5
29
vs
UML
W 66-61
−19.5
31
@
BRY
L 84-92
+44.5
7
@
UVM
L 57-80
−1.5
12
vs
NJIT
L 70-76
+0.5
14
vs
UMBC
L 63-85
+1.5
19
@
UML
L 56-78
−17.5
21
vs
ME
L 58-61
−16.5
26
@
BING
L 63-65
−13.5
28
@
UALB
L 61-84
+6.5
3
vs
BRY
W 88-83
+35.5
7
@
UMBC
L 69-84
+10.5
over 15under 13avg +0.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Boston College
31 games played
Straight up
11-20
35% wins
Against the spread
15-16
48% covers · avg −0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-19
39% overs · avg −4 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 | @ | L 78-83 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 76-47 | -15.5 | W +13.5 | 144.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 59-60 | -17.5 | L −18.5 | 136.5 | U 119 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 76-71 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 142.5 | O 147 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 63-52 | -12.5 | L −1.5 | 135.5 | U 115 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 49-59 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 140.5 | U 108 |
| Nov 23 | vs | L 90-93 | -2.5 | L −5.5 | 140.5 | O 183 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 73-60 | -7.5 | W +5.5 | 138.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 69-78 | +7.5 | L −1.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 67-63 | -17.5 | L −13.5 | 126.5 | O 130 |
| Dec 10 | vs | L 74-76 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 72-61 | -16.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 28 | vs | W 72-64 | -12.5 | L −4.5 | 146.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 53-65 | +6.5 | L −5.5 | 145.5 | U 118 |
| Jan 6 | vs | L 71-79 | +11.5 | W +3.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 62-75 | +21.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 13 | @ | L 50-74 | +15.5 | L −8.5 | 136.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 81-73 | +5.5 | W +13.5 | 141.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 65-62 | +2.5 | W +5.5 | 137.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 64-68 | +7.5 | W +3.5 | 137.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 66-73 | +13.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 49-67 | +26.5 | W +8.5 | 141.5 | U 116 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 68-74 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 64-70 | +3.5 | L −2.5 | 139.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 75-86 | +3.5 | L −7.5 | 144.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 72-80 | +11.5 | W +3.5 | 148.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 70-94 | +15.5 | L −8.5 | 150.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 68-67 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 54-76 | +15.5 | L −6.5 | 143.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 63-72 | +11.5 | W +2.5 | 142.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 77-69 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | O 146 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
FAU
L 78-83
−3.5
6
vs
CIT
W 76-47
+13.5
11
vs
CCSU
L 59-60
−18.5
15
@
TEM
W 76-71
+8.5
18
vs
HAMP
W 63-52
−1.5
21
vs
DAV
L 49-59
−11.5
23
vs
TULN
L 90-93
−5.5
26
vs
HARV
W 73-60
+5.5
3
vs
LSU
L 69-78
−1.5
6
vs
NHVN
W 67-63
−13.5
10
vs
MASS
L 74-76
−3.5
22
vs
FDU
W 72-61
−5.5
28
vs
LEM
W 72-64
−4.5
3
@
GT
L 53-65
−5.5
6
vs
NCSU
L 71-79
+3.5
10
@
LOU
L 62-75
+8.5
13
@
CLEM
L 50-74
−8.5
17
vs
SYR
W 81-73
+13.5
21
vs
PITT
W 65-62
+5.5
24
@
ND
L 64-68
+3.5
31
vs
UVA
L 66-73
+6.5
3
@
DUKE
L 49-67
+8.5
7
vs
MIA
L 68-74
+2.5
11
vs
STAN
L 64-70
−2.5
14
vs
CAL
L 75-86
−7.5
17
@
FSU
L 72-80
+3.5
21
@
SMU
L 70-94
−8.5
25
vs
WAKE
W 68-67
+4.5
28
@
MIA
L 54-76
−6.5
3
@
VT
L 63-72
+2.5
7
vs
ND
W 77-69
+9.5
covered 15didn’t cover 16avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
FAU
L 78-83
+12.5
6
vs
CIT
W 76-47
−21.5
11
vs
CCSU
L 59-60
−17.5
15
@
TEM
W 76-71
+4.5
18
vs
HAMP
W 63-52
−20.5
21
vs
DAV
L 49-59
−32.5
23
vs
TULN
L 90-93
+42.5
26
vs
HARV
W 73-60
−5.5
3
vs
LSU
L 69-78
−2.5
6
vs
NHVN
W 67-63
+3.5
10
vs
MASS
L 74-76
+6.5
22
vs
FDU
W 72-61
−8.5
28
vs
LEM
W 72-64
−10.5
3
@
GT
L 53-65
−27.5
6
vs
NCSU
L 71-79
+8.5
10
@
LOU
L 62-75
−13.5
13
@
CLEM
L 50-74
−12.5
17
vs
SYR
W 81-73
+12.5
21
vs
PITT
W 65-62
−10.5
24
@
ND
L 64-68
−5.5
31
vs
UVA
L 66-73
−2.5
3
@
DUKE
L 49-67
−25.5
7
vs
MIA
L 68-74
+0.5
11
vs
STAN
L 64-70
−5.5
14
vs
CAL
L 75-86
+16.5
17
@
FSU
L 72-80
+3.5
21
@
SMU
L 70-94
+13.5
25
vs
WAKE
W 68-67
−10.5
28
@
MIA
L 54-76
−13.5
3
@
VT
L 63-72
−7.5
7
vs
ND
W 77-69
+4.5
over 12under 19avg −4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Boston College has the better starters
Position by position: New Hampshire 0, Boston College 5, even 0
New HampshireBetterBoston College
G T. Bike7.5 pts · 1.7 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 34
→BCSmall
G E. Shelton TR15.9 pts · 3.1 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 65
G E. Oliver-Bush TR3.2 pts · 2 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 7
→BCBig
G A. Zeigler TR12.3 pts · 4.9 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 60
F D. Poser6.9 pts · 2.9 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 11
→BCBig
G M. Williams TR21.6 pts · 4.3 reb · 4.5 ast
Score 96
F J. Squire5.8 pts · 5.8 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 34
→BCBig
F B. Benjamin TR14.2 pts · 10.4 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 89
F D. McKenna TR3.9 pts · 2.5 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 47
→BCBig
F A. Bukumirovic TR13.7 pts · 7.7 reb · 1 ast
Score 86
New HampshireBetterBoston College
UNH offense300th of 366 · -9.3
→BCBig
BC defense83rd of 366 · +0.1
UNH defense255th of 366 · -6.7
→BCBig
BC offense96th of 366 · -0.7
Backcourt-3.5 · 2 players
→BCBig
Backcourt+4.7 · 3 players
Frontcourt-4.5 · 3 players
→BCBig
Frontcourt+5.8 · 2 players
Bench-2.3 · 4 players
←UNHSmall
Bench-4.5 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestUNH betterBC betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
T. Bike24 minE. Oliver-Bush16 min · TRM. Blackley2 minA. SquireNewJ. ColemanNewJ. FaumuinaNew
Forwards
D. Poser29 minJ. Squire27 minD. McKenna11 min · TRR. Zan8 min · TRJ. O'Neill6 minK. MyersNew
Centers
G. Xanthopoulos6 min
Guards
E. Shelton37 min · TRA. Zeigler33 min · TRM. Williams32 min · TRJ. Frankel21 min · TRJ. O'Toole3 min · TRJ. Furphy3 min · TR
Forwards
B. Benjamin31 min · TRA. Bukumirovic30 min · TRC. Duggan28 min · TRL. Hunger19 min · TRA. Tounkara18 min · TRJ. BaileyNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 66.6 #339 | Points per game | 67.4 #326 |
| 0.96 #347 | Points per possession | 1.00 #323 |
| 68.9 #186 | Pace (possessions) | 67.5 #257 |
| Shooting | ||
| 46.7 #344 | Effective FG% | 47.0 #338 |
| 30.5 #333 | 3-point % | 29.4 #348 |
| 43.1 #110 | 3-point attempt rate | 42.4 #130 |
| 28.5 #338 | Free throw rate | 32.4 #251 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.5 #166 | Turnover rate | 15.4 #102 |
| 25.7 #329 | Offensive rebound rate | 28.3 #254 |
| 10.6 #348 | Assists per game | 11.3 #323 |
| Defense | ||
| 76.4 #227 | Points allowed | 70.7 #70 |
| 1.11 #247 | Points allowed per possession | 1.04 #81 |
| 53.5 #282 | Opponent effective FG% | 48.9 #62 |
| 34.3 #204 | Opponent 3-point % | 31.9 #59 |
| 15.8 #227 | Turnovers forced | 14.8 #303 |
| 73.1 #32 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.4 #87 |
| 6.1 #222 | Steals per game | 4.8 #341 |
| 2.0 #345 | Blocks per game | 4.1 #62 |
New Hampshire
7-21 in 2025-26 overall · 5-12 in conference · America East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ UMBC69–84
- Wvs Bryant88–83
- L@ UAlbany61–84
- L@ Binghamton63–65
- Lvs Maine58–61
A week or more of rest.
Boston College
11-20 in 2025-26 overall · 4-14 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Wvs Notre Dame77–69
- L@ Virginia Tech63–72
- L@ Miami54–76
- Wvs Wake Forest68–67
- L@ SMU70–94
A week or more of rest.