LJVM Coliseum · at Wake Forest
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | WAKE | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 WAKE 84–69 · win probability WAKE 91%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.5
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: WAKE has more of the edges
WCU 1, WAKE 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: WCU 35.4%, WAKE 30.1%. Defensive: WCU 73.7%, WAKE 67.0%
WAKE offense vs WCU defense
Offense 80th of 366 against a defense 256th, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: WCU 16.7%, WAKE 15.5%. Forced: WCU 14.6%, WAKE 17.7%
Three-pointers
WCU hits 33.5% and allows 36.7%; WAKE hits 34.1% and allows 32.9%. Threes are 40.9% and 43.6% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: WCU 50.5 and allows 54.9; WAKE 52.7 and allows 51.8
Context
Schedule so far
WCU has played the 177th-hardest schedule, WAKE the 64th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Free throws
Free throw rate: WCU 31.3, WAKE 35.2. Allowed: WCU 37.8, WAKE 35.7
WCU offense vs WAKE defense
Offense 171st of 366 against a defense 96th, on the model’s ratings
Home court
WAKE at home. This season: WAKE 0-0 at home, WCU 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: WCU plays 69.3 a game (162nd fastest), WAKE 70.2 (112th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: WCU 16%, WAKE 9%. Transfers in: WCU 6, WAKE 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
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 | — | WAKE -15.3 | — |
| Total | — | 153.5 | — |
| Projected score | — | WCU 69.1 · WAKE 84.4 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | WAKE -9.0 | — |
| 1H total | 71.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | WCU 31.4 · WAKE 40.4 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 8-2 80% | 4-6 40% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
WCU 0–2 WAKEWAKE leads · 2 games since 2021-22 · WAKE has won the last 2 meetings · WCU 2-0 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2024-25 | WCU 69 @ WAKE 82 | WAKE -22.5 | WCU W |
| Nov 12, 2021-22 | WCU 75 @ WAKE 87 | WAKE -18.5 | WCU W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
W Carolina
29 games played
Straight up
13-16
45% wins
Against the spread
14-15
48% covers · avg +2.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-14
52% overs · avg +2.6 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 | @ | L 63-94 | +22.5 | L −8.5 | 143.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 54-95 | +36.5 | L −4.5 | 152.5 | U 149 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 76-65 | -12.5 | L −1.5 | 155.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 80-73 | +1.5 | W +8.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
| Nov 22 | @ | L 62-83 | +5.5 | L −15.5 | 151.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 73-93 | +16.5 | L −3.5 | 159.5 | O 166 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 67-78 | +2.5 | L −8.5 | 149.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 11 | @ | L 74-96 | +20.5 | L −1.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 18 | @ | L 82-112 | +32.5 | W +2.5 | 167.5 | O 194 |
| Dec 31 | vs | L 74-79 | +2.5 | L −2.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 80-77 | +8.5 | W +11.5 | 157.5 | U 157 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 77-82 | +4.5 | L −0.5 | 153.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 77-79 | -6.5 | L −8.5 | 148.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 72-68 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 82-90 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 150.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 76-88 | +8.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 88-58 | -8.5 | W +21.5 | 152.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 90-88 | +9.5 | W +11.5 | 145.5 | O 178 |
| Feb 1 | vs | L 74-88 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 78-81 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 66-77 | +3.5 | L −7.5 | 154.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 87-49 | -9.5 | W +28.5 | 145.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 81-76 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 151.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 91-77 | -5.5 | W +8.5 | 155.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 81-62 | -8.5 | W +10.5 | 154.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 78-74 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 156.5 | U 152 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 86-67 | +1.5 | W +20.5 | 147.5 | O 153 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 77-73 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 154.5 | U 150 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 67-69 | +2.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 136 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
CIN
L 63-94
−8.5
8
@
DUKE
L 54-95
−4.5
16
vs
STET
W 76-65
−1.5
19
vs
UNCA
W 80-73
+8.5
22
@
LIP
L 62-83
−15.5
29
@
HPU
L 73-93
−3.5
6
@
UPST
L 67-78
−8.5
11
@
VT
L 74-96
−1.5
18
@
UGA
L 82-112
+2.5
31
vs
WOF
L 74-79
−2.5
3
@
FUR
W 80-77
+11.5
7
@
SAM
L 77-82
−0.5
10
@
CIT
L 77-79
−8.5
14
vs
ETSU
W 72-68
+10.5
17
vs
UTC
L 82-90
−9.5
21
@
MER
L 76-88
−3.5
24
vs
VMI
W 88-58
+21.5
29
@
ETSU
W 90-88
+11.5
1
vs
SAM
L 74-88
−12.5
4
@
UNCG
L 78-81
−4.5
7
@
WOF
L 66-77
−7.5
11
vs
CIT
W 87-49
+28.5
14
@
UTC
W 81-76
+6.5
18
vs
UNCG
W 91-77
+8.5
21
@
VMI
W 81-62
+10.5
25
vs
MER
W 78-74
+5.5
28
vs
FUR
W 86-67
+20.5
7
vs
MER
W 77-73
+5.5
8
vs
ETSU
L 67-69
+0.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg +2.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
CIN
L 63-94
+13.5
8
@
DUKE
L 54-95
−3.5
16
vs
STET
W 76-65
−14.5
19
vs
UNCA
W 80-73
+0.5
22
@
LIP
L 62-83
−6.5
29
@
HPU
L 73-93
+6.5
6
@
UPST
L 67-78
−4.5
11
@
VT
L 74-96
+17.5
18
@
UGA
L 82-112
+26.5
31
vs
WOF
L 74-79
−1.5
3
@
FUR
W 80-77
−0.5
7
@
SAM
L 77-82
+5.5
10
@
CIT
L 77-79
+7.5
14
vs
ETSU
W 72-68
−7.5
17
vs
UTC
L 82-90
+21.5
21
@
MER
L 76-88
+5.5
24
vs
VMI
W 88-58
−6.5
29
@
ETSU
W 90-88
+32.5
1
vs
SAM
L 74-88
+7.5
4
@
UNCG
L 78-81
+3.5
7
@
WOF
L 66-77
−11.5
11
vs
CIT
W 87-49
−9.5
14
@
UTC
W 81-76
+5.5
18
vs
UNCG
W 91-77
+12.5
21
@
VMI
W 81-62
−11.5
25
vs
MER
W 78-74
−4.5
28
vs
FUR
W 86-67
+5.5
7
vs
MER
W 77-73
−4.5
8
vs
ETSU
L 67-69
−9.5
over 15under 14avg +2.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Wake Forest
35 games played
Straight up
18-17
51% wins
Against the spread
16-19
46% covers · avg −0.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-15
57% overs · avg +0.6 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 88-74 | -19.5 | L −5.5 | 139.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 81-65 | -22.5 | L −6.5 | 152.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 84-85 | +15.5 | W +14.5 | 168.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 109-75 | -30.5 | W +3.5 | 165.5 | O 184 |
| Nov 20 | vs | L 83-84 | +9.5 | W +8.5 | 160.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 69-68 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 160.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 99-51 | -17.5 | W +30.5 | 159.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 86-73 | -17.5 | L −4.5 | 154.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 2 | vs | L 68-86 | -4.5 | L −22.5 | 159.5 | U 154 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 75-66 | +2.5 | W +11.5 | 143.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 14 | vs | W 111-73 | -18.5 | W +19.5 | 165.5 | O 184 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 71-68 | -24.5 | L −21.5 | 163.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 21 | vs | L 67-98 | +5.5 | L −25.5 | 164.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 57-70 | +10.5 | L −2.5 | 159.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 81-78 | -5.5 | L −2.5 | 153.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 77-81 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 157.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 84-87 | +10.5 | W +7.5 | 154.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 69-68 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 168.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 20 | vs | L 79-91 | -1.5 | L −13.5 | 157.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 69-90 | +19.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 27 | @ | L 76-80 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 78-96 | +5.5 | L −12.5 | 156.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 80-88 | +9.5 | W +1.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 83-67 | -3.5 | W +12.5 | 158.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 68-63 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 150.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 85-77 | +4.5 | W +12.5 | 140.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 63-82 | +3.5 | L −15.5 | 150.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 67-68 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 145.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 88-83 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 152.5 | O 171 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 70-75 | +14.5 | W +9.5 | 150.5 | U 145 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 80-73 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 95-89 | -1.5 | W +4.5 | 150.5 | O 184 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 62-71 | +5.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 18 | vs | W 82-72 | -9.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | O 154 |
| Mar 22 | vs | L 75-78 | -8.5 | L −11.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
AMER
W 88-74
−5.5
7
vs
MORE
W 81-65
−6.5
11
vs
MICH
L 84-85
+14.5
16
vs
UML
W 109-75
+3.5
20
vs
TTU
L 83-84
+8.5
21
vs
MEM
W 69-68
−1.5
25
vs
CAM
W 99-51
+30.5
28
vs
NE
W 86-73
−4.5
2
vs
OU
L 68-86
−22.5
6
vs
WVU
W 75-66
+11.5
14
vs
QUC
W 111-73
+19.5
17
vs
LONG
W 71-68
−21.5
21
vs
VAN
L 67-98
−25.5
31
@
NCSU
L 57-70
−2.5
3
vs
VT
W 81-78
−2.5
7
vs
MIA
L 77-81
−5.5
10
@
UNC
L 84-87
+7.5
17
@
FSU
W 69-68
−0.5
20
vs
SMU
L 79-91
−13.5
24
@
DUKE
L 69-90
−1.5
27
@
PITT
L 76-80
−2.5
31
vs
NCSU
L 78-96
−12.5
7
vs
LOU
L 80-88
+1.5
11
@
GT
W 83-67
+12.5
14
vs
STAN
W 68-63
+0.5
18
vs
CLEM
W 85-77
+12.5
21
@
VT
L 63-82
−15.5
25
@
BC
L 67-68
−4.5
28
vs
SYR
W 88-83
+1.5
3
@
UVA
L 70-75
+9.5
7
vs
CAL
W 80-73
+1.5
10
vs
VT
W 95-89
+4.5
11
vs
CLEM
L 62-71
−3.5
18
vs
NAVY
W 82-72
+0.5
22
vs
ILST
L 75-78
−11.5
covered 16didn’t cover 19avg −0.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
AMER
W 88-74
+22.5
7
vs
MORE
W 81-65
−6.5
11
vs
MICH
L 84-85
+0.5
16
vs
UML
W 109-75
+18.5
20
vs
TTU
L 83-84
+6.5
21
vs
MEM
W 69-68
−23.5
25
vs
CAM
W 99-51
−9.5
28
vs
NE
W 86-73
+4.5
2
vs
OU
L 68-86
−5.5
6
vs
WVU
W 75-66
−2.5
14
vs
QUC
W 111-73
+18.5
17
vs
LONG
W 71-68
−24.5
21
vs
VAN
L 67-98
+0.5
31
@
NCSU
L 57-70
−32.5
3
vs
VT
W 81-78
+5.5
7
vs
MIA
L 77-81
+0.5
10
@
UNC
L 84-87
+16.5
17
@
FSU
W 69-68
−31.5
20
vs
SMU
L 79-91
+12.5
24
@
DUKE
L 69-90
+5.5
27
@
PITT
L 76-80
+5.5
31
vs
NCSU
L 78-96
+17.5
7
vs
LOU
L 80-88
+5.5
11
@
GT
W 83-67
−8.5
14
vs
STAN
W 68-63
−19.5
18
vs
CLEM
W 85-77
+21.5
21
@
VT
L 63-82
−5.5
25
@
BC
L 67-68
−10.5
28
vs
SYR
W 88-83
+18.5
3
@
UVA
L 70-75
−5.5
7
vs
CAL
W 80-73
−1.5
10
vs
VT
W 95-89
+33.5
11
vs
CLEM
L 62-71
−10.5
18
vs
NAVY
W 82-72
+5.5
22
vs
ILST
L 75-78
+0.5
over 20under 15avg +0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
W Carolina has the better starters
Position by position: W Carolina 2, Wake Forest 1, even 2
W CarolinaBetterWake Forest
G M. Brown TR11.9 pts · 3.7 reb · 2.9 ast
Score 48
→WAKEBig
G K. Kennedy TR18.4 pts · 4.6 reb · 4.2 ast
Score 91
G I. Manning TR9.6 pts · 3.3 reb · 1 ast
Score 64
=Even
G J. Ray TR11.2 pts · 2.2 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 56
G T. Bryson TR8.6 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 70
←WCUSmall
G J. McDowell TR3.3 pts · 1.6 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 40
G J. Prunty TR3.9 pts · 1.9 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 20
=Even
F R. Nyeri TR8.4 pts · 6.5 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 34
F S. Dada6.2 pts · 7.4 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 77
←WCUSmall
F X. Pintelon TR5.9 pts · 3.5 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 47
W CarolinaBetterWake Forest
WCU offense171st of 366 · -5.2
→WAKESmall
WAKE defense96th of 366 · -0.5
WCU defense256th of 366 · -6.7
→WAKEBig
WAKE offense80th of 366 · +0.5
Backcourt-1.7 · 4 players
→WAKEBig
Backcourt+2.2 · 3 players
Frontcourt+1.1 · 1 player
←WCUSmall
Frontcourt-1.6 · 2 players
Bench-1.5 · 4 players
=Even
Bench-1.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestWCU betterWAKE betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
M. Brown31 min · TRI. Manning20 min · TRT. Bryson18 min · TRJ. Prunty16 min · TRJ. Roberts8 min · TRD. Hollifield2 min
Forwards
S. Dada20 minT. Smith10 minD. Raymond6 min · TRF. SodipoNew
Guards
K. Kennedy37 min · TRJ. Ray29 min · TRJ. McDowell17 min · TRI. Carr13 minA. Beard2 minW. Underwood2 min
Forwards
R. Nyeri26 min · TRX. Pintelon18 min · TRV. Ricchiuti2 minJ. AbsonNewV. ChaudhriNewG. PlacideNew
Centers
A. Dorn9 min · TR
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 76.3 #134 | Points per game | 78.8 #83 |
| 1.10 #140 | Points per possession | 1.12 #94 |
| 69.3 #162 | Pace (possessions) | 70.2 #112 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.5 #218 | Effective FG% | 52.7 #117 |
| 33.5 #198 | 3-point % | 34.1 #166 |
| 40.9 #147 | 3-point attempt rate | 43.6 #99 |
| 31.3 #274 | Free throw rate | 35.2 #170 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.7 #179 | Turnover rate | 15.5 #107 |
| 35.4 #36 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.1 #196 |
| 12.0 #286 | Assists per game | 14.4 #123 |
| Defense | ||
| 79.0 #299 | Points allowed | 76.9 #239 |
| 1.14 #307 | Points allowed per possession | 1.10 #214 |
| 54.9 #327 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.8 #202 |
| 36.7 #337 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.9 #117 |
| 14.6 #318 | Turnovers forced | 17.7 #114 |
| 73.7 #22 | Defensive rebound rate | 67.0 #298 |
| 5.8 #266 | Steals per game | 7.7 #59 |
| 2.4 #315 | Blocks per game | 3.5 #136 |
W Carolina
13-16 in 2025-26 overall · 11-9 in conference · Southern Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs ETSU67–69
- Wvs Mercer77–73
- Wvs Furman86–67
- Wvs Mercer78–74
- W@ VMI81–62
A week or more of rest.
Wake Forest
18-17 in 2025-26 overall · 8-12 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Illinois St75–78
- Wvs Navy82–72
- Lvs Clemson62–71
- Wvs Virginia Tech95–89
- Wvs California80–73
A week or more of rest.