JMA Wireless Dome · at Syracuse
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SYR | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SYR 86–66 · win probability SYR 96%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 151.8
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: SYR has more of the edges
COLG 3, SYR 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
SYR offense vs COLG defense
Offense 60th of 366 against a defense 214th, on the model’s ratings
COLG offense vs SYR defense
Offense 205th of 366 against a defense 67th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
COLG has played the 178th-hardest schedule, SYR the 67th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Free throws
Free throw rate: COLG 29.7, SYR 35.1. Allowed: COLG 33.8, SYR 32.6
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: COLG 59%, SYR 19%. Transfers in: COLG 0, SYR 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Three-pointers
COLG hits 35.6% and allows 34.8%; SYR hits 32.9% and allows 34.1%. Threes are 35.0% and 37.1% of their shots
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: COLG 26.6%, SYR 29.2%. Defensive: COLG 70.7%, SYR 66.4%
Home court
SYR at home. This season: SYR 0-0 at home, COLG 0-0 away
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: COLG 53.3 and allows 52.2; SYR 52.6 and allows 50.3
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: COLG 14.7%, SYR 15.9%. Forced: COLG 15.2%, SYR 17.4%
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: COLG plays 68.6 a game (202nd fastest), SYR 69.1 (173rd). 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 | — | SYR -20.4 | — |
| Total | — | 151.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | COLG 65.7 · SYR 86.1 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SYR -12.0 | — |
| 1H total | 71.0 | — |
| 1H projected score | COLG 29.5 · SYR 41.5 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-5 50% | 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% | |
| 2-8 20% | 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
COLG 2–2 SYRSeries tied · 4 games since 2021-22 · SYR has won the last 2 meetings · COLG 4-0 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 12, 2024-25 | COLG 72 @ SYR 74 | SYR -11.5 | COLG W |
| Nov 14, 2023-24 | COLG 75 @ SYR 79 | SYR -7.5 | COLG W |
| Nov 15, 2022-23 | COLG 80 @ SYR 68 | SYR -7.5 | COLG W |
| Nov 20, 2021-22 | COLG 100 @ SYR 85 | SYR -11 | COLG W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Colgate
31 games played
Straight up
16-15
52% wins
Against the spread
12-19
39% covers · avg −1.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-14
55% overs · avg +4.9 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 69-80 | +22.5 | W +11.5 | 144.5 | O 149 |
| Nov 7 | vs | L 65-68 | -5.5 | L −8.5 | 147.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 90-83 | -3.5 | W +3.5 | 143.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 65-84 | +30.5 | W +11.5 | 164.5 | U 149 |
| Nov 17 | @ | W 72-69 | +6.5 | W +9.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 94-95 | +5.5 | W +4.5 | 161.5 | O 189 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 69-67 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 72-62 | -1.5 | W +8.5 | 142.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 77-85 | +9.5 | W +1.5 | 142.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 60-90 | +27.5 | L −2.5 | 156.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 28 | vs | L 69-78 | -3.5 | L −12.5 | 141.5 | O 147 |
| Dec 31 | @ | W 85-77 | -6.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 76-69 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 64-62 | -5.5 | L −3.5 | 148.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 77-78 | -11.5 | L −12.5 | 142.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 86-80 | -8.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 95-76 | -8.5 | W +10.5 | 139.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 66-70 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 146.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 80-79 | -7.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 79-74 | -10.5 | L −5.5 | 144.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 76-77 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 146.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 69-55 | -10.5 | W +3.5 | 150.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 78-59 | -5.5 | W +13.5 | 141.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 74-70 | -8.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 80-84 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 139.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 58-85 | -2.5 | L −29.5 | 145.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 101-98 | -8.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 199 |
| Feb 25 | vs | L 69-70 | -8.5 | L −9.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 69-85 | +6.5 | L −9.5 | 141.5 | O 154 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 90-77 | -6.5 | W +6.5 | 155.5 | O 167 |
| Mar 8 | @ | L 69-76 | -2.5 | L −9.5 | 146.5 | U 145 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
MSU
L 69-80
+11.5
7
vs
NE
L 65-68
−8.5
11
vs
DREX
W 90-83
+3.5
14
@
ILL
L 65-84
+11.5
17
@
SIE
W 72-69
+9.5
20
@
COR
L 94-95
+4.5
28
vs
UALB
W 69-67
−5.5
30
vs
FOR
W 72-62
+8.5
10
@
SBU
L 77-85
+1.5
21
@
FLA
L 60-90
−2.5
28
vs
HARV
L 69-78
−12.5
31
@
LAF
W 85-77
+1.5
3
@
ARMY
W 76-69
−0.5
7
vs
AMER
W 64-62
−3.5
10
vs
LEH
L 77-78
−12.5
14
@
L-MD
W 86-80
−2.5
17
vs
BUCK
W 95-76
+10.5
21
@
AMER
L 66-70
−2.5
24
vs
BU
W 80-79
−6.5
28
vs
HC
W 79-74
−5.5
31
@
LEH
L 76-77
−4.5
4
vs
ARMY
W 69-55
+3.5
7
@
BUCK
W 78-59
+13.5
11
@
HC
W 74-70
−4.5
14
vs
NAVY
L 80-84
−5.5
16
@
BU
L 58-85
−29.5
21
vs
L-MD
W 101-98
−5.5
25
vs
LAF
L 69-70
−9.5
28
@
NAVY
L 69-85
−9.5
5
vs
L-MD
W 90-77
+6.5
8
@
LEH
L 69-76
−9.5
covered 12didn’t cover 19avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
MSU
L 69-80
+4.5
7
vs
NE
L 65-68
−14.5
11
vs
DREX
W 90-83
+29.5
14
@
ILL
L 65-84
−15.5
17
@
SIE
W 72-69
−5.5
20
@
COR
L 94-95
+27.5
28
vs
UALB
W 69-67
−5.5
30
vs
FOR
W 72-62
−8.5
10
@
SBU
L 77-85
+19.5
21
@
FLA
L 60-90
−6.5
28
vs
HARV
L 69-78
+5.5
31
@
LAF
W 85-77
+15.5
3
@
ARMY
W 76-69
−2.5
7
vs
AMER
W 64-62
−22.5
10
vs
LEH
L 77-78
+12.5
14
@
L-MD
W 86-80
+15.5
17
vs
BUCK
W 95-76
+31.5
21
@
AMER
L 66-70
−10.5
24
vs
BU
W 80-79
+11.5
28
vs
HC
W 79-74
+8.5
31
@
LEH
L 76-77
+6.5
4
vs
ARMY
W 69-55
−26.5
7
@
BUCK
W 78-59
−4.5
11
@
HC
W 74-70
+1.5
14
vs
NAVY
L 80-84
+24.5
16
@
BU
L 58-85
−2.5
21
vs
L-MD
W 101-98
+48.5
25
vs
LAF
L 69-70
−9.5
28
@
NAVY
L 69-85
+12.5
5
vs
L-MD
W 90-77
+11.5
8
@
LEH
L 69-76
−1.5
over 17under 14avg +4.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Syracuse
32 games played
Straight up
15-17
47% wins
Against the spread
14-18
44% covers · avg −1.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-15
53% overs · avg +1.5 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 85-47 | -21.5 | W +16.5 | 153.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 83-43 | -26.5 | W +13.5 | 157.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 80-50 | -11.5 | W +18.5 | 143.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 78-73 | -21.5 | L −16.5 | 145.5 | O 151 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 74-78 | +14.5 | W +10.5 | 140.5 | O 152 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 60-71 | +4.5 | L −6.5 | 144.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 64-95 | +10.5 | L −20.5 | 145.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 62-60 | +7.5 | W +9.5 | 147.5 | U 122 |
| Dec 11 | vs | W 71-63 | -11.5 | L −3.5 | 146.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 69-70 | -9.5 | L −10.5 | 139.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 76-62 | -24.5 | L −10.5 | 131.5 | O 138 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 91-83 | -14.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | O 174 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 77-48 | -22.5 | W +6.5 | 140.5 | U 125 |
| Dec 31 | vs | L 61-64 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 140.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 6 | @ | W 82-72 | -2.5 | W +7.5 | 146.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 83-72 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 142.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 13 | vs | W 94-86 | -4.5 | W +3.5 | 160.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 73-81 | -5.5 | L −13.5 | 141.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 21 | vs | L 74-76 | -3.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 76-85 | +1.5 | L −7.5 | 149.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 27 | @ | L 68-88 | +10.5 | L −9.5 | 151.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 86-72 | -6.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 2 | @ | L 77-87 | +11.5 | W +1.5 | 158.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 59-72 | +13.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 107-100 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | O 207 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 79-78 | +1.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | U 157 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 64-101 | +20.5 | L −16.5 | 144.5 | O 165 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 64-77 | -2.5 | L −15.5 | 154.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 83-88 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 152.5 | O 171 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 62-77 | +14.5 | L −0.5 | 159.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 69-71 | -5.5 | L −7.5 | 141.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 69-86 | +3.5 | L −13.5 | 154.5 | O 155 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
BING
W 85-47
+16.5
8
vs
DSU
W 83-43
+13.5
15
vs
DREX
W 80-50
+18.5
18
vs
MONM
W 78-73
−16.5
24
vs
HOU
L 74-78
+10.5
25
vs
KU
L 60-71
−6.5
26
vs
ISU
L 64-95
−20.5
2
vs
TENN
W 62-60
+9.5
11
vs
JOES
W 71-63
−3.5
13
vs
HOF
L 69-70
−10.5
17
vs
MERC
W 76-62
−10.5
20
vs
NE
W 91-83
−6.5
22
vs
STO
W 77-48
+6.5
31
vs
CLEM
L 61-64
−1.5
6
@
GT
W 82-72
+7.5
10
@
PITT
W 83-72
+12.5
13
vs
FSU
W 94-86
+3.5
17
@
BC
L 73-81
−13.5
21
vs
VT
L 74-76
−5.5
24
vs
MIA
L 76-85
−7.5
27
@
NCSU
L 68-88
−9.5
31
vs
ND
W 86-72
+7.5
2
@
UNC
L 77-87
+1.5
7
@
UVA
L 59-72
+0.5
11
vs
CAL
W 107-100
+0.5
14
vs
SMU
W 79-78
+2.5
16
@
DUKE
L 64-101
−16.5
21
vs
UNC
L 64-77
−15.5
28
@
WAKE
L 83-88
−1.5
3
@
LOU
L 62-77
−0.5
7
vs
PITT
L 69-71
−7.5
10
vs
SMU
L 69-86
−13.5
covered 14didn’t cover 18avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
BING
W 85-47
−21.5
8
vs
DSU
W 83-43
−31.5
15
vs
DREX
W 80-50
−13.5
18
vs
MONM
W 78-73
+5.5
24
vs
HOU
L 74-78
+11.5
25
vs
KU
L 60-71
−13.5
26
vs
ISU
L 64-95
+13.5
2
vs
TENN
W 62-60
−25.5
11
vs
JOES
W 71-63
−12.5
13
vs
HOF
L 69-70
−0.5
17
vs
MERC
W 76-62
+6.5
20
vs
NE
W 91-83
+33.5
22
vs
STO
W 77-48
−15.5
31
vs
CLEM
L 61-64
−15.5
6
@
GT
W 82-72
+7.5
10
@
PITT
W 83-72
+12.5
13
vs
FSU
W 94-86
+19.5
17
@
BC
L 73-81
+12.5
21
vs
VT
L 74-76
−2.5
24
vs
MIA
L 76-85
+11.5
27
@
NCSU
L 68-88
+4.5
31
vs
ND
W 86-72
+10.5
2
@
UNC
L 77-87
+5.5
7
@
UVA
L 59-72
−16.5
11
vs
CAL
W 107-100
+58.5
14
vs
SMU
W 79-78
−0.5
16
@
DUKE
L 64-101
+20.5
21
vs
UNC
L 64-77
−13.5
28
@
WAKE
L 83-88
+18.5
3
@
LOU
L 62-77
−20.5
7
vs
PITT
L 69-71
−1.5
10
vs
SMU
L 69-86
+0.5
over 17under 15avg +1.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Syracuse has the better starters
Position by position: Colgate 0, Syracuse 3, even 2
ColgateBetterSyracuse
G J. Ahayere7.5 pts · 3.6 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 32
→SYRBig
G G. Doty TR18 pts · 6.9 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 94
F A. Alekseyenko14.9 pts · 6.6 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 75
=Even
G A. Tobiason TR15.3 pts · 3.7 reb · 2 ast
Score 82
F S. Wright12.5 pts · 4.6 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 60
=Even
G G. Dual TR8.3 pts · 2.8 reb · 4.1 ast
Score 66
F C. Wright1.5 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 8
→SYRBig
F F. Folefac TR11.3 pts · 5.3 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 73
F A. Odetoyinbo1.9 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 20
→SYRBig
C L. Wilson TR10.4 pts · 8.4 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 75
ColgateBetterSyracuse
COLG offense205th of 366 · -6.3
→SYRBig
SYR defense67th of 366 · +0.9
COLG defense214th of 366 · -5.5
→SYRBig
SYR offense60th of 366 · +2.7
Backcourt-1.6 · 1 player
→SYRBig
Backcourt+6.3 · 3 players
Frontcourt-0.5 · 4 players
→SYRBig
Frontcourt+3.6 · 2 players
Bench-1.1 · 4 players
→SYRBig
Bench+2.4 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestCOLG betterSYR betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Ahayere25 minC. Pugh1 minJ. Niv1 minP. JonesNewB. ForrestNewI. SkinnNew
Forwards
A. Alekseyenko30 minS. Wright26 minC. Wright12 minA. Odetoyinbo11 minE. Brown7 minC. Brennan4 min
Guards
G. Doty37 min · TRA. Tobiason36 min · TRG. Dual27 min · TRK. Anthony19 minC. Russell2 minN. Lobdell1 min
Forwards
F. Folefac28 min · TRT. Goodrick23 min · TRS. White15 minM. MoranoNew
Centers
L. Wilson29 min · TRI. MartinezNewA. SibyNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 75.6 #154 | Points per game | 75.0 #163 |
| 1.11 #121 | Points per possession | 1.08 #174 |
| 68.6 #202 | Pace (possessions) | 69.1 #173 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.3 #91 | Effective FG% | 52.6 #122 |
| 35.6 #81 | 3-point % | 32.9 #239 |
| 35.0 #275 | 3-point attempt rate | 37.1 #226 |
| 29.7 #316 | Free throw rate | 35.1 #171 |
| Possessions | ||
| 14.7 #50 | Turnover rate | 15.9 #134 |
| 26.6 #309 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.2 #228 |
| 14.2 #130 | Assists per game | 12.8 #225 |
| Defense | ||
| 76.2 #222 | Points allowed | 74.3 #163 |
| 1.11 #230 | Points allowed per possession | 1.07 #144 |
| 52.2 #224 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.3 #116 |
| 34.8 #238 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.1 #186 |
| 15.2 #268 | Turnovers forced | 17.4 #125 |
| 70.7 #125 | Defensive rebound rate | 66.4 #310 |
| 6.1 #230 | Steals per game | 6.2 #214 |
| 2.9 #249 | Blocks per game | 5.9 #4 |
Colgate
16-15 in 2025-26 overall · 12-8 in conference · Patriot League
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Lehigh69–76
- Wvs Loyola MD90–77
- L@ Navy69–85
- Lvs Lafayette69–70
- Wvs Loyola MD101–98
A week or more of rest.
Syracuse
15-17 in 2025-26 overall · 6-13 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs SMU69–86
- Lvs Pitt69–71
- L@ Louisville62–77
- L@ Wake Forest83–88
- Lvs North Carolina64–77
A week or more of rest.