CU Events Center · at Colorado
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | COLO | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 COLO 85–70 · win probability COLO 90%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 155.2
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: COLO has more of the edges
USD 1, COLO 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Free throws
Free throw rate: USD 25.8, COLO 36.6. Allowed: USD 38.8, COLO 36.6
COLO offense vs USD defense
Offense 54th of 366 against a defense 189th, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: USD 28.1%, COLO 29.0%. Defensive: USD 65.5%, COLO 70.4%
Three-pointers
USD hits 34.6% and allows 32.7%; COLO hits 35.1% and allows 36.3%. Threes are 43.7% and 35.2% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: USD 51.2 and allows 54.7; COLO 52.9 and allows 52.6
Context
Schedule so far
USD has played the 130th-hardest schedule, COLO the 58th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: USD 7%, COLO 40%. Transfers in: USD 7, COLO 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
COLO at home. This season: COLO 0-0 at home, USD 0-0 away
USD offense vs COLO defense
Offense 127th of 366 against a defense 80th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: USD plays 69.6 a game (139th fastest), COLO 71.0 (76th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: USD 17.6%, COLO 14.7%. Forced: USD 18.8%, COLO 15.2%
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 | — | COLO -14.8 | — |
| Total | — | 155.2 | — |
| Projected score | — | USD 70.2 · COLO 85 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | COLO -8.7 | — |
| 1H total | 72.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | USD 31.9 · COLO 40.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-8 20% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | |
| 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
San Diego
31 games played
Straight up
10-21
32% wins
Against the spread
16-15
52% covers · avg −0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-18
42% overs · avg +0.5 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 7 | vs | L 68-71 | -4.5 | L −7.5 | 152.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 78-74 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 78-68 | -6.5 | W +3.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 71-85 | -7.5 | L −21.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 61-76 | +7.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 30 | @ | L 72-76 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 5 | @ | L 69-86 | +6.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 9 | vs | L 81-94 | +14.5 | W +1.5 | 158.5 | O 175 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 78-69 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 19 | @ | W 82-80 | +12.5 | W +14.5 | 156.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 56-86 | +18.5 | L −11.5 | 159.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 28 | vs | W 66-54 | +2.5 | W +14.5 | 150.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 30 | vs | L 93-99 | +29.5 | W +23.5 | 160.5 | O 192 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 64-74 | +12.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 70-98 | +17.5 | L −10.5 | 161.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 83-63 | -4.5 | W +15.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 70-77 | +8.5 | W +1.5 | 147.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 64-75 | +9.5 | L −1.5 | 147.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 96-92 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | O 188 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 73-85 | +13.5 | W +1.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 92-88 | -2.5 | W +1.5 | 151.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 76-78 | -3.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 60-87 | +20.5 | L −6.5 | 148.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 63-83 | +6.5 | L −13.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 71-58 | -1.5 | W +11.5 | 150.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 15 | vs | L 79-92 | +5.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 65-77 | +2.5 | L −9.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 82-92 | +6.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 74-87 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 66-62 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 145.5 | U 128 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 56-58 | +8.5 | W +6.5 | 139.5 | U 114 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
vs
IDST
L 68-71
−7.5
12
vs
IDHO
W 78-74
+5.5
18
vs
GRAM
W 78-68
+3.5
21
vs
UCR
L 71-85
−21.5
25
vs
CBU
L 61-76
−7.5
30
@
LBSU
L 72-76
−6.5
5
@
SJSU
L 69-86
−10.5
9
vs
USC
L 81-94
+1.5
13
vs
NAU
W 78-69
+4.5
19
@
UCSD
W 82-80
+14.5
22
@
WASH
L 56-86
−11.5
28
vs
PAC
W 66-54
+14.5
30
vs
GONZ
L 93-99
+23.5
2
@
SF
L 64-74
+2.5
4
@
SCU
L 70-98
−10.5
8
vs
PEPP
W 83-63
+15.5
10
@
PAC
L 70-77
+1.5
15
@
SEA
L 64-75
−1.5
21
vs
WSU
W 96-92
+5.5
24
vs
SCU
L 73-85
+1.5
28
@
PEPP
W 92-88
+1.5
31
vs
ORST
L 76-78
−5.5
4
@
SMC
L 60-87
−6.5
7
@
LMU
L 63-83
−13.5
11
vs
PORT
W 71-58
+11.5
15
vs
SF
L 79-92
−7.5
21
vs
LMU
L 65-77
−9.5
25
@
ORST
L 82-92
−3.5
28
@
PORT
L 74-87
−10.5
5
vs
LMU
W 66-62
+9.5
6
vs
SEA
L 56-58
+6.5
covered 16didn’t cover 15avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
vs
IDST
L 68-71
−13.5
12
vs
IDHO
W 78-74
−3.5
18
vs
GRAM
W 78-68
−3.5
21
vs
UCR
L 71-85
+3.5
25
vs
CBU
L 61-76
−9.5
30
@
LBSU
L 72-76
+0.5
5
@
SJSU
L 69-86
+10.5
9
vs
USC
L 81-94
+16.5
13
vs
NAU
W 78-69
−2.5
19
@
UCSD
W 82-80
+5.5
22
@
WASH
L 56-86
−17.5
28
vs
PAC
W 66-54
−30.5
30
vs
GONZ
L 93-99
+31.5
2
@
SF
L 64-74
−14.5
4
@
SCU
L 70-98
+6.5
8
vs
PEPP
W 83-63
−3.5
10
@
PAC
L 70-77
−0.5
15
@
SEA
L 64-75
−8.5
21
vs
WSU
W 96-92
+35.5
24
vs
SCU
L 73-85
−4.5
28
@
PEPP
W 92-88
+28.5
31
vs
ORST
L 76-78
+3.5
4
@
SMC
L 60-87
−1.5
7
@
LMU
L 63-83
−5.5
11
vs
PORT
W 71-58
−21.5
15
vs
SF
L 79-92
+22.5
21
vs
LMU
L 65-77
−7.5
25
@
ORST
L 82-92
+29.5
28
@
PORT
L 74-87
+12.5
5
vs
LMU
W 66-62
−17.5
6
vs
SEA
L 56-58
−25.5
over 13under 18avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Colorado
33 games played
Straight up
17-16
52% wins
Against the spread
17-16
52% covers · avg −0.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-16
52% overs · avg +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 84-78 | -11.5 | L −5.5 | 148.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 102-97 | -16.5 | L −11.5 | 152.5 | O 199 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 97-88 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 163.5 | O 185 |
| Nov 17 | vs | W 94-66 | -22.5 | W +5.5 | 156.5 | O 160 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 95-79 | -14.5 | W +1.5 | 152.5 | O 174 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 79-69 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 150.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 81-68 | +2.5 | W +15.5 | 151.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 1 | vs | W 78-70 | -13.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 86-91 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 149.5 | O 177 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 88-64 | -22.5 | W +1.5 | 154.5 | U 152 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 84-73 | -16.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 68-77 | -2.5 | L −11.5 | 154.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 28 | vs | L 81-86 | -15.5 | L −20.5 | 158.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 95-89 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 156.5 | O 184 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 85-73 | -9.5 | W +2.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 71-73 | +5.5 | W +3.5 | 161.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 68-77 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 61-72 | +6.5 | L −4.5 | 141.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 20 | vs | L 69-75 | +4.5 | L −1.5 | 155.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 86-95 | -3.5 | L −12.5 | 159.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 67-97 | +17.5 | L −12.5 | 152.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 1 | vs | W 87-61 | +1.5 | W +27.5 | 153.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 67-86 | +7.5 | L −11.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 78-70 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 158.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 44-78 | +13.5 | L −20.5 | 155.5 | U 122 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 86-90 | +15.5 | W +11.5 | 161.5 | O 176 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 83-69 | -3.5 | W +10.5 | 162.5 | U 152 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 79-70 | -5.5 | W +3.5 | 163.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 62-102 | +20.5 | L −19.5 | 139.5 | O 164 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 92-78 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 148.5 | O 170 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 79-89 | +13.5 | W +3.5 | 156.5 | O 168 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 83-92 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 164.5 | O 175 |
| Apr 1 | vs | L 86-90 | +9.5 | W +5.5 | 162.5 | O 176 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
MTST
W 84-78
−5.5
8
vs
EWU
W 102-97
−11.5
14
vs
PROV
W 97-88
+7.5
17
vs
ALST
W 94-66
+5.5
21
vs
UCD
W 95-79
+1.5
27
vs
SF
W 79-69
+11.5
28
vs
WASH
W 81-68
+15.5
1
vs
CBU
W 78-70
−5.5
6
@
CSU
L 86-91
−3.5
13
vs
UTSA
W 88-64
+1.5
17
vs
PRST
W 84-73
−5.5
20
vs
STAN
L 68-77
−11.5
28
vs
UNCO
L 81-86
−20.5
3
@
ASU
W 95-89
+7.5
7
vs
UTAH
W 85-73
+2.5
10
vs
TTU
L 71-73
+3.5
14
@
CIN
L 68-77
−0.5
17
@
WVU
L 61-72
−4.5
20
vs
KU
L 69-75
−1.5
24
vs
UCF
L 86-95
−12.5
29
@
ISU
L 67-97
−12.5
1
vs
TCU
W 87-61
+27.5
4
@
BAY
L 67-86
−11.5
7
vs
ASU
W 78-70
+4.5
11
@
TTU
L 44-78
−20.5
14
@
BYU
L 86-90
+11.5
21
vs
OKST
W 83-69
+10.5
25
vs
KSU
W 79-70
+3.5
28
@
HOU
L 62-102
−19.5
3
@
UTAH
W 92-78
+12.5
7
vs
ARIZ
L 79-89
+3.5
10
vs
OKST
L 83-92
−10.5
1
vs
OU
L 86-90
+5.5
covered 17didn’t cover 16avg −0.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
MTST
W 84-78
+13.5
8
vs
EWU
W 102-97
+46.5
14
vs
PROV
W 97-88
+21.5
17
vs
ALST
W 94-66
+3.5
21
vs
UCD
W 95-79
+21.5
27
vs
SF
W 79-69
−2.5
28
vs
WASH
W 81-68
−2.5
1
vs
CBU
W 78-70
−2.5
6
@
CSU
L 86-91
+27.5
13
vs
UTSA
W 88-64
−2.5
17
vs
PRST
W 84-73
+6.5
20
vs
STAN
L 68-77
−9.5
28
vs
UNCO
L 81-86
+8.5
3
@
ASU
W 95-89
+27.5
7
vs
UTAH
W 85-73
−4.5
10
vs
TTU
L 71-73
−17.5
14
@
CIN
L 68-77
−0.5
17
@
WVU
L 61-72
−8.5
20
vs
KU
L 69-75
−11.5
24
vs
UCF
L 86-95
+21.5
29
@
ISU
L 67-97
+11.5
1
vs
TCU
W 87-61
−5.5
4
@
BAY
L 67-86
−2.5
7
vs
ASU
W 78-70
−10.5
11
@
TTU
L 44-78
−33.5
14
@
BYU
L 86-90
+14.5
21
vs
OKST
W 83-69
−10.5
25
vs
KSU
W 79-70
−14.5
28
@
HOU
L 62-102
+24.5
3
@
UTAH
W 92-78
+21.5
7
vs
ARIZ
L 79-89
+11.5
10
vs
OKST
L 83-92
+10.5
1
vs
OU
L 86-90
+13.5
over 17under 16avg +5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Colorado has the better starters
Position by position: San Diego 0, Colorado 1, even 4
San DiegoBetterColorado
G M. Worthy TR16.6 pts · 4.7 reb · 3 ast
Score 72
→COLOSmall
G B. Hargress14.7 pts · 2.2 reb · 4.5 ast
Score 93
G D. Hill TR14.2 pts · 4.5 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 92
=Even
F J. Neely TR17.7 pts · 11.4 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 96
G D. Stromer TR6.4 pts · 2.7 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 29
=Even
F I. Niagu TR4.2 pts · 5.1 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 42
F T. McMorris TR7.5 pts · 5.6 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 47
=No call
F D. Gomez TR5 pts · 3.5 reb · 0.5 ast
Not ranked
F A. Munoz TR12.7 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 56
=Even
C N. Feddersen TR9 pts · 5 reb · 1 ast
Score 59
San DiegoBetterColorado
USD offense127th of 366 · -3.5
=Even
COLO defense80th of 366 · +0.3
USD defense189th of 366 · -4.4
→COLOBig
COLO offense54th of 366 · +3.2
Backcourt+2.0 · 3 players
→COLOSmall
Backcourt+3.6 · 1 player
Frontcourt-0.4 · 2 players
→COLOBig
Frontcourt+5.3 · 4 players
Bench+0.3 · 5 players
←USDBig
Bench-2.7 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestUSD betterCOLO betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
M. Worthy35 min · TRD. Hill27 min · TRD. Stromer23 min · TRC. Versher2 minN. Del Bosque1 minB. RomanNew
Forwards
T. McMorris26 min · TRA. Munoz25 min · TRJ. Roberto Tanchyn19 min · TRS. Konneh13 min · TRA. Aviles11 minJ. HillNew
Guards
B. Hargress33 minJ. Sanders18 minJ. Holland18 minI. Inman10 minA. JonesNewR. PortelaNew
Forwards
J. Neely33 min · TRI. Niagu21 min · TRD. Gomez20 min · TRN. Randall1 minG. MalualNewC. HillNew
Centers
N. Feddersen21 min · TRE. JacobsenNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 72.8 #228 | Points per game | 80.2 #63 |
| 1.05 #251 | Points per possession | 1.13 #80 |
| 69.6 #139 | Pace (possessions) | 71.0 #76 |
| Shooting | ||
| 51.2 #185 | Effective FG% | 52.9 #108 |
| 34.6 #141 | 3-point % | 35.1 #104 |
| 43.7 #96 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.2 #267 |
| 25.8 #358 | Free throw rate | 36.6 #139 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.6 #242 | Turnover rate | 14.7 #46 |
| 28.1 #262 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.0 #235 |
| 15.4 #68 | Assists per game | 15.4 #67 |
| Defense | ||
| 78.8 #290 | Points allowed | 79.8 #313 |
| 1.13 #286 | Points allowed per possession | 1.12 #272 |
| 54.7 #320 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.6 #243 |
| 32.7 #100 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.3 #319 |
| 18.8 #55 | Turnovers forced | 15.2 #267 |
| 65.5 #328 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.4 #144 |
| 7.7 #65 | Steals per game | 6.3 #196 |
| 2.6 #294 | Blocks per game | 3.3 #170 |
San Diego
10-21 in 2025-26 overall · 6-14 in conference · West Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Seattle U56–58
- Wvs LMU66–62
- L@ Portland74–87
- L@ Oregon St82–92
- Lvs LMU65–77
A week or more of rest.
Colorado
17-16 in 2025-26 overall · 7-12 in conference · Big 12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Oklahoma86–90
- Lvs Oklahoma St83–92
- Lvs Arizona79–89
- W@ Utah92–78
- L@ Houston62–102
A week or more of rest.