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 86–68 · win probability COLO 94%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.4
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
CARK 2, COLO 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
COLO offense vs CARK defense
Offense 54th of 366 against a defense 241st, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
CARK has played the 241st-hardest schedule, COLO the 58th. A record against a soft schedule means less
CARK offense vs COLO defense
Offense 231st of 366 against a defense 80th, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: CARK 15.4%, COLO 14.7%. Forced: CARK 19.1%, COLO 15.2%
Home court
COLO at home. This season: COLO 0-0 at home, CARK 0-0 away
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: CARK 28.8%, COLO 29.0%. Defensive: CARK 72.6%, COLO 70.4%
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: CARK 62%, COLO 40%. Transfers in: CARK 2, COLO 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Three-pointers
CARK hits 35.5% and allows 35.2%; COLO hits 35.1% and allows 36.3%. Threes are 48.7% and 35.2% of their shots
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: CARK 54.0 and allows 54.9; COLO 52.9 and allows 52.6
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: CARK 31.2, COLO 36.6. Allowed: CARK 30.1, COLO 36.6
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: CARK plays 70.2 a game (105th fastest), COLO 71.0 (76th). 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 | — | COLO -17.9 | — |
| Total | — | 153.4 | — |
| Projected score | — | CARK 67.7 · COLO 85.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | COLO -10.5 | — |
| 1H total | 71.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | CARK 30.6 · COLO 41.1 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% | |
| 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
C Arkansas
32 games played
Straight up
20-12
63% wins
Against the spread
20-12
63% covers · avg +5.6 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-16
50% overs · avg +3.9 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 54-94 | +31.5 | L −8.5 | 157.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 56-93 | +35.5 | L −1.5 | 158.5 | U 149 |
| Nov 16 | vs | L 77-84 | +6.5 | L −0.5 | 151.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 56-74 | +16.5 | L −1.5 | 134.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 92-65 | +4.5 | W +31.5 | 154.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 81-60 | -5.5 | W +15.5 | 139.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 57-80 | +12.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 85-47 | -3.5 | W +34.5 | 138.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 68-75 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 145.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 72-83 | +36.5 | W +25.5 | 158.5 | U 155 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 82-99 | +24.5 | W +7.5 | 156.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 85-83 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 156.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 93-73 | -11.5 | W +8.5 | 147.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 78-84 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 75-79 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 156.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 62-60 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 136.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 98-69 | -12.5 | W +16.5 | 164.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 86-65 | -3.5 | W +17.5 | 154.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 100-90 | +5.5 | W +15.5 | 158.5 | O 190 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 90-81 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 151.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 81-60 | -10.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 86-78 | +3.5 | W +11.5 | 155.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 9 | @ | W 72-65 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 84-76 | -8.5 | L −0.5 | 150.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 79-62 | -10.5 | W +6.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 88-76 | -9.5 | W +2.5 | 149.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 71-75 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 93-88 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 152.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 84-79 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 163.5 | U 163 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 86-73 | -6.5 | W +6.5 | 154.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 73-63 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | U 136 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 93-98 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 157.5 | O 191 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
UNC
L 54-94
−8.5
11
@
ARK
L 56-93
−1.5
16
vs
SAM
L 77-84
−0.5
20
@
UNT
L 56-74
−1.5
23
vs
EWU
W 92-65
+31.5
25
vs
EIU
W 81-60
+15.5
29
@
ETSU
L 57-80
−10.5
3
vs
LR
W 85-47
+34.5
7
@
ETAM
L 68-75
−4.5
13
@
VAN
L 72-83
+25.5
21
@
SMU
L 82-99
+7.5
1
vs
FGCU
W 85-83
+4.5
3
vs
STET
W 93-73
+8.5
8
@
BELL
L 78-84
−8.5
10
@
EKU
L 75-79
−5.5
15
vs
JAX
W 62-60
−5.5
17
vs
UNF
W 98-69
+16.5
22
@
WGA
W 86-65
+17.5
28
@
QUC
W 100-90
+15.5
31
vs
EKU
W 90-81
+4.5
4
vs
UNA
W 81-60
+10.5
7
@
LIP
W 86-78
+11.5
9
@
UNA
W 72-65
+0.5
11
vs
BELL
W 84-76
−0.5
14
vs
WGA
W 79-62
+6.5
19
@
STET
W 88-76
+2.5
21
@
FGCU
L 71-75
−5.5
25
@
APSU
W 93-88
+9.5
28
vs
QUC
W 84-79
+2.5
6
vs
BELL
W 86-73
+6.5
7
vs
FGCU
W 73-63
+5.5
8
vs
QUC
L 93-98
−6.5
covered 20didn’t cover 12avg +5.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
UNC
L 54-94
−9.5
11
@
ARK
L 56-93
−9.5
16
vs
SAM
L 77-84
+9.5
20
@
UNT
L 56-74
−4.5
23
vs
EWU
W 92-65
+2.5
25
vs
EIU
W 81-60
+1.5
29
@
ETSU
L 57-80
−7.5
3
vs
LR
W 85-47
−6.5
7
@
ETAM
L 68-75
−2.5
13
@
VAN
L 72-83
−3.5
21
@
SMU
L 82-99
+24.5
1
vs
FGCU
W 85-83
+11.5
3
vs
STET
W 93-73
+18.5
8
@
BELL
L 78-84
+7.5
10
@
EKU
L 75-79
−2.5
15
vs
JAX
W 62-60
−14.5
17
vs
UNF
W 98-69
+2.5
22
@
WGA
W 86-65
−3.5
28
@
QUC
W 100-90
+31.5
31
vs
EKU
W 90-81
+19.5
4
vs
UNA
W 81-60
−6.5
7
@
LIP
W 86-78
+8.5
9
@
UNA
W 72-65
−8.5
11
vs
BELL
W 84-76
+9.5
14
vs
WGA
W 79-62
−9.5
19
@
STET
W 88-76
+14.5
21
@
FGCU
L 71-75
−6.5
25
@
APSU
W 93-88
+28.5
28
vs
QUC
W 84-79
−0.5
6
vs
BELL
W 86-73
+4.5
7
vs
FGCU
W 73-63
−8.5
8
vs
QUC
L 93-98
+33.5
over 16under 16avg +3.9 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: C Arkansas 0, Colorado 2, even 3
C ArkansasBetterColorado
G L. Moore9.6 pts · 2.8 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 28
→COLOBig
G B. Hargress14.7 pts · 2.2 reb · 4.5 ast
Score 93
G T. Robinson14.2 pts · 5.6 reb · 2 ast
Score 89
=Even
F J. Neely TR17.7 pts · 11.4 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 96
G C. McCormick9.1 pts · 3.4 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 44
=Even
F I. Niagu TR4.2 pts · 5.1 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 42
G H. Beauchamp4.3 pts · 1.3 reb · 1 ast
Score 8
=No call
F D. Gomez TR5 pts · 3.5 reb · 0.5 ast
Not ranked
F M. Marable3.7 pts · 4.4 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 3
→COLOBig
C N. Feddersen TR9 pts · 5 reb · 1 ast
Score 59
C ArkansasBetterColorado
CARK offense231st of 366 · -7.1
→COLOBig
COLO defense80th of 366 · +0.3
CARK defense241st of 366 · -6.4
→COLOBig
COLO offense54th of 366 · +3.2
Backcourt-2.6 · 4 players
→COLOBig
Backcourt+3.6 · 1 player
Frontcourt-3.0 · 1 player
→COLOBig
Frontcourt+5.3 · 4 players
Bench-1.8 · 4 players
=Even
Bench-2.7 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestCARK betterCOLO betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
L. Moore30 minT. Robinson28 minC. McCormick23 minH. Beauchamp15 minO. Dehrmann3 minJ. Shulman3 min
Forwards
M. Marable21 minT. Anderson12 min · TRS. Saadi9 min · TRA. HoernerNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 79.3 #77 | Points per game | 80.2 #63 |
| 1.13 #90 | Points per possession | 1.13 #80 |
| 70.2 #105 | Pace (possessions) | 71.0 #76 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.0 #68 | Effective FG% | 52.9 #108 |
| 35.5 #89 | 3-point % | 35.1 #104 |
| 48.7 #21 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.2 #267 |
| 31.2 #278 | Free throw rate | 36.6 #139 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.4 #92 | Turnover rate | 14.7 #46 |
| 28.8 #240 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.0 #235 |
| 16.0 #46 | Assists per game | 15.4 #67 |
| Defense | ||
| 76.0 #216 | Points allowed | 79.8 #313 |
| 1.08 #180 | Points allowed per possession | 1.12 #272 |
| 54.9 #328 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.6 #243 |
| 35.2 #262 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.3 #319 |
| 19.1 #45 | Turnovers forced | 15.2 #267 |
| 72.6 #48 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.4 #144 |
| 8.5 #18 | Steals per game | 6.3 #196 |
| 1.9 #351 | Blocks per game | 3.3 #170 |
C Arkansas
20-12 in 2025-26 overall · 17-4 in conference · United Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Queens University Royals93–98
- Wvs FGCU73–63
- Wvs Bellarmine86–73
- Wvs Queens University Royals84–79
- W@ Austin Peay93–88
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.