Buffalo Bulls at Pittsburgh Panthers: Model Line and Edge

Thu, Nov 5, 7:00 PM ETPetersen Events Center · at Pitt

#74PITTPitt

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Buffalo and Pitt
BUF	This season	PITT
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 PITT 83–66 · win probability PITT 93%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 149.0

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

BUF 4, PITT 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

PITTBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: BUF 27.1%, PITT 33.9%. Defensive: BUF 68.9%, PITT 71.9%

PITTBig

PITT offense vs BUF defense

Offense 87th of 366 against a defense 257th, on the model’s ratings

PITTBig

BUF offense vs PITT defense

Offense 215th of 366 against a defense 59th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

BUF has played the 198th-hardest schedule, PITT the 65th. A record against a soft schedule means less

BUFBig

Free throws

Free throw rate: BUF 39.6, PITT 30.4. Allowed: BUF 31.4, PITT 30.9

BUFSmall

Three-pointers

BUF hits 37.9% and allows 35.1%; PITT hits 33.4% and allows 35.2%. Threes are 45.5% and 42.6% of their shots

BUFSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: BUF 16.2%, PITT 17.2%. Forced: BUF 17.8%, PITT 16.3%

Context

Tempo

About 67 possessions: BUF plays 68.2 a game (219th fastest), PITT 65.0 (345th). Faster games mean more points

BUFSmall

Shooting

Effective FG%: BUF 55.4 and allows 55.1; PITT 51.0 and allows 53.4

PITTSmall

Home court

PITT at home. This season: PITT 0-0 at home, BUF 0-0 away

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: BUF 8%, PITT 3%. Transfers in: BUF 7, PITT 10. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Sorted by how lopsided each matchup is, from national ranks. Reasons to look, not picks: the market already knows most of this.

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	—	PITT -16.8	—
Total	—	149.0	—
Projected score	—	BUF 66.1 · PITT 82.9

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	PITT -9.9	—
1H total	69.7	—
1H projected score	BUF 29.9 · PITT 39.8	—

The 1st-half model is fitted from the full-game model and past halves. ESPN has no 1st-half lines for college games, so there is no market to compare it with.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

ATS

2025-26 season

	Season	Cover	Venue	Role
BUF WLLLW	17-13	57%	10-4	—
PITT WWWWL	16-17	48%	9-9	—

Venue/role: BUF away; PITT home. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
BUF OUUOU	16-14	53%	15-15
PITT UOUUO	19-14	58%	13-20

Squares: last 5 games (O over, U under), oldest first. Tap for the score and line.

Last 10 games

2025-26

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
BUF	3-7 30%	5-5 50%	4-6 40%
PITT	4-6 40%	7-3 70%	6-4 60%

Wins-losses (pushes last). Spread and over / under skip games without a line.

Next 3 games

With how the last meeting with each opponent went

Buffalo

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 15	vs CAN	W71–53WU
Nov 19	@ SBU	L69–77LO
Nov 28	vs TOW	No recent meeting

Pitt

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 8	vs PSU	W80–46WU
Nov 13	@ BTLR	No recent meeting
Nov 17	vs VILL	L61–79LO

Last meeting: result, against the spread, over / under. Hover a result for its date.

ATS History · 2025-26

WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total

Buffalo

30 games played

Straight up

15-15

50% wins

Against the spread

17-13

57% covers · avg +1.8 pts vs the line

Over / Under

16-14

53% overs · avg +2.7 pts vs the total

Straight up

15-1550%

W W W W W W W L W L W W W L L L L L W L L L W L W L L W L L

2 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

17-1357%

W W W W W L W L W L W W W L L W L L W L W L W L W W L L L W

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

16-1453%

O O U O U U U O O U O U O O O O U U O O U O U U O O U U O U

1 of last 4 overno streak

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	vsUSM	W 85-79	-3.5	W +2.5	153.5	O 164
Nov 7	vsGB	W 83-76	-3.5	W +3.5	147.5	O 159
Nov 11	@DEP	W 66-53	+18.5	W +31.5	153.5	U 119
Nov 18	vsUVM	W 94-90	+1.5	W +5.5	141.5	O 184
Nov 24	vsVMI	W 78-70	-5.5	W +2.5	150.5	U 148
Nov 26	vsBUCK	W 73-71	-4.5	L −2.5	146.5	U 144
Nov 29	@CAN	W 71-53	-9.5	W +8.5	139.5	U 124
Dec 6	vsSBU	L 69-77	+5.5	L −2.5	144.5	O 146
Dec 9	@UMBC	W 83-79	-3.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 162
Dec 14	@ECU	L 70-73	+1.5	L −1.5	146.5	U 143
Dec 20	@WMU	W 88-71	-2.5	W +14.5	150.5	O 159
Dec 31	@NIU	W 81-67	-6.5	W +7.5	152.5	U 148
Jan 3	vsBALL	W 85-72	-6.5	W +6.5	145.5	O 157
Jan 10	@OHIO	L 80-91	+4.5	L −6.5	156.5	O 171
Jan 13	vsKENT	L 81-87	+2.5	L −3.5	165.5	O 168
Jan 17	@M-OH	L 102-105	+10.5	W +7.5	162.5	O 207
Jan 20	vsAKR	L 63-82	+8.5	L −10.5	166.5	U 145
Jan 23	vsMASS	L 67-68	-1.5	L −2.5	159.5	U 135
Jan 27	@BGSU	W 89-78	+7.5	W +18.5	150.5	O 167
Jan 31	vsOHIO	L 83-95	-2.5	L −14.5	156.5	O 178
Feb 3	vsM-OH	L 71-73	+4.5	W +2.5	165.5	U 144
Feb 7	@USA	L 69-81	+3.5	L −8.5	145.5	O 150
Feb 11	@BALL	W 63-53	+1.5	W +11.5	141.5	U 116
Feb 17	vsNIU	L 70-72	-9.5	L −11.5	145.5	U 142
Feb 21	@MASS	W 86-82	+7.5	W +11.5	151.5	O 168
Feb 24	@AKR	L 85-99	+15.5	W +1.5	160.5	O 184
Feb 28	vsCMU	L 70-75	-5.5	L −10.5	151.5	U 145
Mar 3	vsEMU	W 72-67	-5.5	L −0.5	143.5	U 139
Mar 6	@TOL	L 78-99	+5.5	L −15.5	155.5	O 177
Mar 12	vsAKR	L 70-73	+12.5	W +9.5	158.5	U 143

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

USM

W 85-79

+2.5

W 83-76

+3.5

DEP

W 66-53

+31.5

UVM

W 94-90

+5.5

VMI

W 78-70

+2.5

BUCK

W 73-71

−2.5

CAN

W 71-53

+8.5

SBU

L 69-77

−2.5

UMBC

W 83-79

+0.5

ECU

L 70-73

−1.5

WMU

W 88-71

+14.5

NIU

W 81-67

+7.5

BALL

W 85-72

+6.5

OHIO

L 80-91

−6.5

KENT

L 81-87

−3.5

M-OH

L 102-105

+7.5

AKR

L 63-82

−10.5

MASS

L 67-68

−2.5

BGSU

W 89-78

+18.5

OHIO

L 83-95

−14.5

M-OH

L 71-73

+2.5

USA

L 69-81

−8.5

BALL

W 63-53

+11.5

NIU

L 70-72

−11.5

MASS

W 86-82

+11.5

AKR

L 85-99

+1.5

CMU

L 70-75

−10.5

EMU

W 72-67

−0.5

TOL

L 78-99

−15.5

AKR

L 70-73

+9.5

covered 17didn’t cover 13avg +1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

USM

W 85-79

+10.5

W 83-76

+11.5

DEP

W 66-53

−34.5

UVM

W 94-90

+42.5

VMI

W 78-70

−2.5

BUCK

W 73-71

−2.5

CAN

W 71-53

−15.5

SBU

L 69-77

+1.5

UMBC

W 83-79

+16.5

ECU

L 70-73

−3.5

WMU

W 88-71

+8.5

NIU

W 81-67

−4.5

BALL

W 85-72

+11.5

OHIO

L 80-91

+14.5

KENT

L 81-87

+2.5

M-OH

L 102-105

+44.5

AKR

L 63-82

−21.5

MASS

L 67-68

−24.5

BGSU

W 89-78

+16.5

OHIO

L 83-95

+21.5

M-OH

L 71-73

−21.5

USA

L 69-81

+4.5

BALL

W 63-53

−25.5

NIU

L 70-72

−3.5

MASS

W 86-82

+16.5

AKR

L 85-99

+23.5

CMU

L 70-75

−6.5

EMU

W 72-67

−4.5

TOL

L 78-99

+21.5

AKR

L 70-73

−15.5

over 16under 14avg +2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

Pitt

33 games played

Straight up

13-20

39% wins

Against the spread

16-17

48% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line

Over / Under

19-14

58% overs · avg −0.1 pts vs the total

Straight up

13-2039%

W W W L W L L W L L L W W L L L W L L L W L L L L L W L W L W W L

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

16-1748%

W W L L W L L W L L L W W W L L W L L L W L L L W L W W W W W W L

3 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

19-1458%

U U O U U U O U O O O O U O O O O O U O O U U O U O O O U O U U O

2 of last 4 overno streak

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	vsYSU	W 74-59	-14.5	W +0.5	145.5	U 133
Nov 7	vsLONG	W 78-60	-14.5	W +3.5	145.5	U 138
Nov 10	vsEMU	W 78-66	-15.5	L −3.5	141.5	O 144
Nov 13	@WVU	L 49-71	+5.5	L −16.5	134.5	U 120
Nov 17	vsBUCK	W 84-50	-16.5	W +17.5	141.5	U 134
Nov 20	vsUCF	L 67-77	-1.5	L −11.5	149.5	U 144
Nov 23	vsQUIN	L 75-83	-12.5	L −20.5	140.5	O 158
Nov 28	vsOSU	W 67-66	+5.5	W +6.5	148.5	U 133
Dec 2	vsTA&M	L 73-81	+3.5	L −4.5	152.5	O 154
Dec 7	vsHOF	L 73-80	-8.5	L −15.5	134.5	O 153
Dec 13	@VILL	L 61-79	+10.5	L −7.5	138.5	O 140
Dec 17	vsBING	W 103-63	-24.5	W +15.5	134.5	O 166
Dec 21	vsPSU	W 80-46	+1.5	W +35.5	146.5	U 126
Dec 30	@MIA	L 69-76	+9.5	W +2.5	144.5	O 145
Jan 3	vsCLEM	L 68-73	+3.5	L −1.5	135.5	O 141
Jan 10	vsSYR	L 72-83	-1.5	L −12.5	142.5	O 155
Jan 14	@GT	W 89-66	-1.5	W +21.5	145.5	O 155
Jan 17	vsLOU	L 59-100	+7.5	L −33.5	152.5	O 159
Jan 21	@BC	L 62-65	-2.5	L −5.5	137.5	U 127
Jan 24	vsNCSU	L 72-81	+6.5	L −2.5	144.5	O 153
Jan 27	vsWAKE	W 80-76	-1.5	W +2.5	150.5	O 156
Jan 31	@CLEM	L 52-63	+10.5	L −0.5	135.5	U 115
Feb 3	@UVA	L 47-67	+12.5	L −7.5	142.5	U 114
Feb 7	vsSMU	L 67-86	+4.5	L −14.5	147.5	O 153
Feb 10	vsDUKE	L 54-70	+17.5	W +1.5	136.5	U 124
Feb 14	@UNC	L 65-79	+11.5	L −2.5	142.5	O 144
Feb 21	vsND	W 73-68	-3.5	W +1.5	140.5	O 141
Feb 25	@STAN	L 67-75	+8.5	W +0.5	138.5	O 142
Feb 28	@CAL	W 72-56	+6.5	W +22.5	143.5	U 128
Mar 4	vsFSU	L 74-75	+1.5	W +0.5	144.5	O 149
Mar 7	@SYR	W 71-69	+5.5	W +7.5	141.5	U 140
Mar 10	vsSTAN	W 64-63	+4.5	W +5.5	136.5	U 127
Mar 11	vsNCSU	L 88-98	+8.5	L −1.5	144.5	O 186

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

YSU

W 74-59

+0.5

LONG

W 78-60

+3.5

EMU

W 78-66

−3.5

WVU

L 49-71

−16.5

BUCK

W 84-50

+17.5

UCF

L 67-77

−11.5

QUIN

L 75-83

−20.5

OSU

W 67-66

+6.5

TA&M

L 73-81

−4.5

HOF

L 73-80

−15.5

VILL

L 61-79

−7.5

BING

W 103-63

+15.5

PSU

W 80-46

+35.5

MIA

L 69-76

+2.5

CLEM

L 68-73

−1.5

SYR

L 72-83

−12.5

W 89-66

+21.5

LOU

L 59-100

−33.5

L 62-65

−5.5

NCSU

L 72-81

−2.5

WAKE

W 80-76

+2.5

CLEM

L 52-63

−0.5

UVA

L 47-67

−7.5

SMU

L 67-86

−14.5

DUKE

L 54-70

+1.5

UNC

L 65-79

−2.5

W 73-68

+1.5

STAN

L 67-75

+0.5

CAL

W 72-56

+22.5

FSU

L 74-75

+0.5

SYR

W 71-69

+7.5

STAN

W 64-63

+5.5

NCSU

L 88-98

−1.5

covered 16didn’t cover 17avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

YSU

W 74-59

−12.5

LONG

W 78-60

−7.5

EMU

W 78-66

+2.5

WVU

L 49-71

−14.5

BUCK

W 84-50

−7.5

UCF

L 67-77

−5.5

QUIN

L 75-83

+17.5

OSU

W 67-66

−15.5

TA&M

L 73-81

+1.5

HOF

L 73-80

+18.5

VILL

L 61-79

+1.5

BING

W 103-63

+31.5

PSU

W 80-46

−20.5

MIA

L 69-76

+0.5

CLEM

L 68-73

+5.5

SYR

L 72-83

+12.5

W 89-66

+9.5

LOU

L 59-100

+6.5

L 62-65

−10.5

NCSU

L 72-81

+8.5

WAKE

W 80-76

+5.5

CLEM

L 52-63

−20.5

UVA

L 47-67

−28.5

SMU

L 67-86

+5.5

DUKE

L 54-70

−12.5

UNC

L 65-79

+1.5

W 73-68

+0.5

STAN

L 67-75

+3.5

CAL

W 72-56

−15.5

FSU

L 74-75

+4.5

SYR

W 71-69

−1.5

STAN

W 64-63

−9.5

NCSU

L 88-98

+41.5

over 19under 14avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.

Pitt has the better starters

Position by position: Buffalo 0, Pitt 3, even 2

BuffaloBetterPitt

G D. Steffe TR9.9 pts · 3 reb · 2.5 ast Score 39

PITTBig

G N. George TR10.9 pts · 3 reb · 5.4 ast Score 75

G D. Ducommun TR10.8 pts · 2.8 reb · 3.3 ast Score 15

PITTBig

G A. Sumler TR19.3 pts · 4.6 reb · 3.9 ast Score 93

G J. Starling TR10.9 pts · 2.7 reb · 2.4 ast Score 55

Even

F T. Rudovskii TR13.1 pts · 4.8 reb · 1.8 ast Score 59

F J. Pitre TR5.9 pts · 6.4 reb · 0.9 ast Score 30

PITTBig

F B. Ndongo TR11.8 pts · 8.1 reb · 2.4 ast Score 90

F A. Lorick TR10.2 pts · 5.1 reb · 1.1 ast Score 75

Even

C A. Mighty TR13.3 pts · 10.9 reb · 1 ast Score 71

BuffaloBetterPitt

BUF offense215th of 366 · -6.6

PITTBig

PITT defense59th of 366 · +1.3

BUF defense257th of 366 · -6.7

PITTBig

PITT offense87th of 366 · +0.2

Backcourt-5.1 · 3 players

PITTBig

Backcourt+4.1 · 2 players

Frontcourt-0.2 · 2 players

PITTBig

Frontcourt+5.4 · 3 players

Bench-3.9 · 4 players

Even

Bench-4.0 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestBUF betterPITT betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers

Projected starters: college teams publish no depth chart, so these come from minutes played, and a freshman or a new starter can change them. The score is the share of ranked players at the position that player is ahead of. Numbers are this season's once a player has 30 minutes, 2025-26's before that. Bench is the next five by minutes. Tap a player for the full numbers.

Depth chart

Projected rotation by position, starters outlined

Buffalo

Guards

D. Steffe31 min · TRD. Ducommun31 min · TRJ. Starling29 min · TRM. Tyne19 min · TRK. Jones10 minH. Reede9 min · TR

Forwards

J. Pitre25 min · TRA. Lorick22 min · TRM. Buteliauskas6 minB. JohnNewT. KuskaNew

Pitt

Guards

N. George32 min · TRA. Sumler31 min · TRC. Hawkins27 min · TRJ. Powell16 min · TRJ. Bethea8 min · TRM. Moore6 min

Forwards

T. Rudovskii32 min · TRB. Ndongo27 min · TRA. Souare8 min · TRD. Diomande8 min · TRB. MayhewNewJ. NelsonNew

Centers

A. Mighty32 min · TR

In order of minutes, from rosters as of today. ESPN lists players only as guards, forwards or centers, and no injury report exists for college basketball, so a player who is out may still show here.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams

ChartTable

Scoring

Points per game

BUF77.5 #106

PITT70.5 #274

Points per possession

BUF1.14 #73

PITT1.08 #181

Pace (possessions)

BUF68.2 #219

PITT65.0 #345

Shooting

Effective FG%

BUF55.4 #30

PITT51.0 #193

3-point %

BUF37.9 #20

PITT33.4 #206

3-point attempt rate

BUF45.5 #57

PITT42.6 #124

Free throw rate

BUF39.6 #65

PITT30.4 #300

Possessions

Turnover rate

BUF16.2 #152

PITT17.2 #223

Offensive rebound rate

BUF27.1 #291

PITT33.9 #72

Assists per game

BUF14.1 #138

PITT13.2 #197

Defense

Points allowed

BUF77.0 #244

PITT71.8 #101

Points allowed per possession

BUF1.13 #279

PITT1.11 #237

Opponent effective FG%

BUF55.1 #333

PITT53.4 #279

Opponent 3-point %

BUF35.1 #252

PITT35.2 #263

Turnovers forced

BUF17.8 #105

PITT16.3 #202

Defensive rebound rate

BUF68.9 #209

PITT71.9 #68

Steals per game

BUF7.6 #72

PITT6.5 #172

Blocks per game

BUF2.8 #262

PITT3.1 #203

BUF		PITT
Scoring
77.5 #106	Points per game	70.5 #274
1.14 #73	Points per possession	1.08 #181
68.2 #219	Pace (possessions)	65.0 #345
Shooting
55.4 #30	Effective FG%	51.0 #193
37.9 #20	3-point %	33.4 #206
45.5 #57	3-point attempt rate	42.6 #124
39.6 #65	Free throw rate	30.4 #300
Possessions
16.2 #152	Turnover rate	17.2 #223
27.1 #291	Offensive rebound rate	33.9 #72
14.1 #138	Assists per game	13.2 #197
Defense
77.0 #244	Points allowed	71.8 #101
1.13 #279	Points allowed per possession	1.11 #237
55.1 #333	Opponent effective FG%	53.4 #279
35.1 #252	Opponent 3-point %	35.2 #263
17.8 #105	Turnovers forced	16.3 #202
68.9 #209	Defensive rebound rate	71.9 #68
7.6 #72	Steals per game	6.5 #172
2.8 #262	Blocks per game	3.1 #203

From the box scores. A longer bar is a better national rank, on every row; the better team's bar is solid. A green rank is near the top of Division I, a red one near the bottom. Pace and 3-point rate are styles, so they have no better side.

Buffalo

15-15 in 2025-26 overall · 7-12 in conference · Mid-American Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Akron70–73
L@ Toledo78–99
Wvs E Michigan72–67
Lvs C Michigan70–75
L@ Akron85–99

A week or more of rest.

Pitt

13-20 in 2025-26 overall · 6-14 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs NC State88–98
Wvs Stanford64–63
W@ Syracuse71–69
Lvs Florida St74–75
W@ California72–56

A week or more of rest.

Buffalo Bulls at Pittsburgh Panthers

What could decide it

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Buffalo

Pitt

Pitt has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Buffalo

Pitt