Moody Coliseum (Dallas) · at SMU
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SMU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SMU 84–65 · win probability SMU 95%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 148.6
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: SMU has more of the edges
BALL 0, SMU 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Shooting
Effective FG%: BALL 47.0 and allows 52.7; SMU 55.6 and allows 51.6
Three-pointers
BALL hits 31.4% and allows 34.8%; SMU hits 37.1% and allows 34.1%. Threes are 39.4% and 35.9% of their shots
Context
Schedule so far
BALL has played the 236th-hardest schedule, SMU the 70th. A record against a soft schedule means less
BALL offense vs SMU defense
Offense 221st of 366 against a defense 69th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: BALL plays 65.9 a game (317th fastest), SMU 71.1 (68th). Faster games mean more points
SMU offense vs BALL defense
Offense 45th of 366 against a defense 159th, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: BALL 27.1%, SMU 35.4%. Defensive: BALL 69.0%, SMU 68.4%
Home court
SMU at home. This season: SMU 0-0 at home, BALL 0-0 away
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: BALL 16.2%, SMU 15.8%. Forced: BALL 18.7%, SMU 16.8%
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: BALL 31.6, SMU 30.4. Allowed: BALL 32.1, SMU 32.1
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: BALL 25%, SMU 20%. Transfers in: BALL 9, SMU 7. 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 | — | SMU -19.1 | — |
| Total | — | 148.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | BALL 64.7 · SMU 83.8 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SMU -11.2 | — |
| 1H total | 69.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | BALL 29.1 · SMU 40.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-5 50% | 7-3 70% | 3-7 30% | |
| 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Ball State
29 games played
Straight up
10-19
34% wins
Against the spread
14-15
48% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
9-20
31% overs · avg −5.9 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 | vs | W 75-64 | -4.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 55-86 | +26.5 | L −4.5 | 156.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 62-68 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 146.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 22 | @ | L 52-70 | +7.5 | L −10.5 | 154.5 | U 122 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 73-80 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 136.5 | O 153 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 37-55 | -1.5 | L −19.5 | 140.5 | U 92 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 96-85 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 140.5 | O 181 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 52-64 | +6.5 | L −5.5 | 136.5 | U 116 |
| Dec 9 | vs | L 64-68 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 142.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 14 | @ | L 64-69 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 77-86 | +7.5 | L −1.5 | 147.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 72-85 | +6.5 | L −6.5 | 145.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 6 | vs | L 52-74 | -1.5 | L −23.5 | 137.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 71-79 | +10.5 | W +2.5 | 147.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 13 | @ | L 77-87 | +20.5 | W +10.5 | 152.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 16 | vs | W 76-71 | +5.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 20 | @ | W 68-67 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 142.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 58-53 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 141.5 | U 111 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 55-73 | +8.5 | L −9.5 | 146.5 | U 128 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 52-77 | +11.5 | L −13.5 | 137.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 73-68 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 143.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 53-63 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 141.5 | U 116 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 68-75 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 143.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 57-69 | +9.5 | L −2.5 | 145.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 20 | vs | L 65-78 | +13.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 24 | vs | W 74-73 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 143.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 79-43 | +1.5 | W +37.5 | 133.5 | U 122 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 74-71 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 138.5 | O 145 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 85-69 | -2.5 | W +13.5 | 134.5 | O 154 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
UL
W 75-64
+6.5
11
@
WIS
L 55-86
−4.5
15
vs
LR
L 62-68
−8.5
22
@
INST
L 52-70
−10.5
28
vs
MONM
L 73-80
−4.5
29
@
LAF
L 37-55
−19.5
30
vs
LEM
W 96-85
+12.5
3
@
EVAN
L 52-64
−5.5
9
vs
SDST
L 64-68
+1.5
14
@
CAM
L 64-69
+3.5
20
vs
M-OH
L 77-86
−1.5
3
@
BUF
L 72-85
−6.5
6
vs
EMU
L 52-74
−23.5
10
@
MASS
L 71-79
+2.5
13
@
AKR
L 77-87
+10.5
16
vs
OHIO
W 76-71
+10.5
20
@
CMU
W 68-67
−0.5
24
vs
NIU
W 58-53
−0.5
31
@
TOL
L 55-73
−9.5
3
@
BGSU
L 52-77
−13.5
7
@
ULM
W 73-68
+0.5
11
vs
BUF
L 53-63
−11.5
14
vs
KENT
L 68-75
+0.5
17
@
OHIO
L 57-69
−2.5
20
vs
AKR
L 65-78
+0.5
24
vs
MASS
W 74-73
+4.5
28
@
NIU
W 79-43
+37.5
3
@
WMU
W 74-71
+4.5
6
vs
CMU
W 85-69
+13.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
UL
W 75-64
−2.5
11
@
WIS
L 55-86
−15.5
15
vs
LR
L 62-68
−16.5
22
@
INST
L 52-70
−32.5
28
vs
MONM
L 73-80
+16.5
29
@
LAF
L 37-55
−48.5
30
vs
LEM
W 96-85
+40.5
3
@
EVAN
L 52-64
−20.5
9
vs
SDST
L 64-68
−10.5
14
@
CAM
L 64-69
−12.5
20
vs
M-OH
L 77-86
+15.5
3
@
BUF
L 72-85
+11.5
6
vs
EMU
L 52-74
−11.5
10
@
MASS
L 71-79
+2.5
13
@
AKR
L 77-87
+11.5
16
vs
OHIO
W 76-71
−0.5
20
@
CMU
W 68-67
−7.5
24
vs
NIU
W 58-53
−30.5
31
@
TOL
L 55-73
−18.5
3
@
BGSU
L 52-77
−8.5
7
@
ULM
W 73-68
−2.5
11
vs
BUF
L 53-63
−25.5
14
vs
KENT
L 68-75
−0.5
17
@
OHIO
L 57-69
−19.5
20
vs
AKR
L 65-78
−4.5
24
vs
MASS
W 74-73
+3.5
28
@
NIU
W 79-43
−11.5
3
@
WMU
W 74-71
+6.5
6
vs
CMU
W 85-69
+19.5
over 9under 20avg −5.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
SMU
34 games played
Straight up
20-14
59% wins
Against the spread
15-19
44% covers · avg +0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-14
59% overs · avg +2.4 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 96-76 | -21.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 69-58 | -23.5 | L −12.5 | 160.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 102-91 | -10.5 | W +0.5 | 164.5 | O 193 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 87-85 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 163.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 106-60 | -35.5 | W +10.5 | 168.5 | U 166 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 100-69 | -14.5 | W +16.5 | 172.5 | U 169 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 89-72 | -23.5 | L −6.5 | 165.5 | U 161 |
| Nov 28 | @ | W 87-81 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 69-88 | +10.5 | L −8.5 | 165.5 | U 157 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 93-80 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 164.5 | O 173 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 77-89 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 158.5 | O 166 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 99-82 | -24.5 | L −7.5 | 156.5 | O 181 |
| Dec 28 | vs | W 110-63 | -21.5 | W +25.5 | 170.5 | O 173 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 97-83 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 155.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 70-74 | +3.5 | L −0.5 | 149.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 75-82 | +15.5 | W +8.5 | 155.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 77-76 | -8.5 | L −7.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 68-72 | +2.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 20 | @ | W 91-79 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 157.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 83-80 | -11.5 | L −8.5 | 163.5 | U 163 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 74-88 | +9.5 | L −4.5 | 163.5 | U 162 |
| Feb 3 | vs | L 83-84 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 159.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 86-67 | -4.5 | W +14.5 | 147.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 10 | vs | W 89-81 | -10.5 | L −2.5 | 154.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 78-79 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 157.5 | U 157 |
| Feb 17 | vs | W 95-85 | +4.5 | W +14.5 | 168.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 94-70 | -15.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 69-73 | -4.5 | L −8.5 | 163.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 75-95 | -1.5 | L −21.5 | 155.5 | O 170 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 69-77 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 156.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 78-91 | +1.5 | L −11.5 | 158.5 | O 169 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 86-69 | -3.5 | W +13.5 | 154.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 58-62 | +7.5 | W +3.5 | 164.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 18 | vs | L 79-89 | -6.5 | L −16.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
TAR
W 96-76
−1.5
6
vs
AMCC
W 69-58
−12.5
11
vs
MUR
W 102-91
+0.5
15
vs
BTLR
W 87-85
−5.5
18
vs
UAPB
W 106-60
+10.5
21
vs
ARST
W 100-69
+16.5
24
vs
RAD
W 89-72
−6.5
28
@
MSST
W 87-81
+7.5
3
@
VAN
L 69-88
−8.5
7
vs
TA&M
W 93-80
+14.5
13
vs
LSU
L 77-89
−10.5
21
vs
CARK
W 99-82
−7.5
28
vs
CSUF
W 110-63
+25.5
3
vs
UNC
W 97-83
+12.5
7
@
CLEM
L 70-74
−0.5
10
@
DUKE
L 75-82
+8.5
14
vs
VT
W 77-76
−7.5
17
vs
UVA
L 68-72
−1.5
20
@
WAKE
W 91-79
+13.5
24
vs
FSU
W 83-80
−8.5
31
@
LOU
L 74-88
−4.5
3
vs
NCSU
L 83-84
+0.5
7
@
PITT
W 86-67
+14.5
10
vs
ND
W 89-81
−2.5
14
@
SYR
L 78-79
−2.5
17
vs
LOU
W 95-85
+14.5
21
vs
BC
W 94-70
+8.5
25
@
CAL
L 69-73
−8.5
28
@
STAN
L 75-95
−21.5
4
vs
MIA
L 69-77
−9.5
7
@
FSU
L 78-91
−11.5
10
vs
SYR
W 86-69
+13.5
11
vs
LOU
L 58-62
+3.5
18
vs
M-OH
L 79-89
−16.5
covered 15didn’t cover 19avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
TAR
W 96-76
+27.5
6
vs
AMCC
W 69-58
−33.5
11
vs
MUR
W 102-91
+28.5
15
vs
BTLR
W 87-85
+8.5
18
vs
UAPB
W 106-60
−2.5
21
vs
ARST
W 100-69
−3.5
24
vs
RAD
W 89-72
−4.5
28
@
MSST
W 87-81
+5.5
3
@
VAN
L 69-88
−8.5
7
vs
TA&M
W 93-80
+8.5
13
vs
LSU
L 77-89
+7.5
21
vs
CARK
W 99-82
+24.5
28
vs
CSUF
W 110-63
+2.5
3
vs
UNC
W 97-83
+24.5
7
@
CLEM
L 70-74
−5.5
10
@
DUKE
L 75-82
+1.5
14
vs
VT
W 77-76
−2.5
17
vs
UVA
L 68-72
−13.5
20
@
WAKE
W 91-79
+12.5
24
vs
FSU
W 83-80
−0.5
31
@
LOU
L 74-88
−1.5
3
vs
NCSU
L 83-84
+7.5
7
@
PITT
W 86-67
+5.5
10
vs
ND
W 89-81
+15.5
14
@
SYR
L 78-79
−0.5
17
vs
LOU
W 95-85
+11.5
21
vs
BC
W 94-70
+13.5
25
@
CAL
L 69-73
−21.5
28
@
STAN
L 75-95
+14.5
4
vs
MIA
L 69-77
−10.5
7
@
FSU
L 78-91
+10.5
10
vs
SYR
W 86-69
+0.5
11
vs
LOU
L 58-62
−44.5
18
vs
M-OH
L 79-89
+5.5
over 20under 14avg +2.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
SMU has the better starters
Position by position: Ball State 1, SMU 4, even 0
Ball StateBetterSMU
G Z. Collins TR11.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 4.6 ast
Score 73
→SMUSmall
G R. Brumbaugh TR19.1 pts · 4.8 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 95
G S. Blake TR10.1 pts · 4.2 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 53
→SMUBig
G D. Terrell TR13.6 pts · 3.8 reb · 4.9 ast
Score 89
G J. Guy-King TR10 pts · 4.3 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 50
→SMUSmall
G O. Sellers TR10.3 pts · 2.7 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 78
G K. Parker TR10.9 pts · 2 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 78
←BALLSmall
G J. Patrick TR7.2 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 59
F M. Jones4.1 pts · 4.2 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 9
→SMUBig
F J. Munch TR7.9 pts · 5.1 reb · 1 ast
Score 69
Ball StateBetterSMU
BALL offense221st of 366 · -6.7
→SMUBig
SMU defense69th of 366 · +0.8
BALL defense159th of 366 · -3.5
→SMUSmall
SMU offense45th of 366 · +4.2
Backcourt+0.6 · 4 players
→SMUBig
Backcourt+8.2 · 4 players
Frontcourt-3.5 · 1 player
→SMUBig
Frontcourt+0.7 · 1 player
Bench-1.4 · 5 players
→SMUSmall
Bench+0.3 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestBALL betterSMU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
Z. Collins31 min · TRS. Blake29 min · TRJ. Guy-King23 min · TRK. Parker21 min · TRJ. Hart19 minT. Lewis18 min · TR
Forwards
M. Jones31 minB. Durodola19 min · TRK. WrightNewK. McGrewNew
Centers
J. Smith9 min · TR
Guards
R. Brumbaugh36 min · TRD. Terrell33 min · TRO. Sellers29 min · TRJ. Patrick20 min · TRN. Kalischer-Stork1 minG. NormandNew
Forwards
J. Munch21 min · TRJ. Toombs20 minJ. Stewart16 min · TRN. Codie16 min · TRJ. O'Neal15 minN. Walls3 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 66.1 #345 | Points per game | 84.1 #19 |
| 1.00 #325 | Points per possession | 1.19 #26 |
| 65.9 #317 | Pace (possessions) | 71.1 #68 |
| Shooting | ||
| 47.0 #336 | Effective FG% | 55.6 #27 |
| 31.4 #312 | 3-point % | 37.1 #27 |
| 39.4 #186 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.9 #252 |
| 31.6 #263 | Free throw rate | 30.4 #301 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.2 #151 | Turnover rate | 15.8 #119 |
| 27.1 #290 | Offensive rebound rate | 35.4 #37 |
| 12.4 #259 | Assists per game | 16.9 #27 |
| Defense | ||
| 71.4 #88 | Points allowed | 77.9 #265 |
| 1.09 #184 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #199 |
| 52.7 #253 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.6 #189 |
| 34.8 #239 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.1 #188 |
| 18.7 #60 | Turnovers forced | 16.8 #171 |
| 69.0 #204 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.4 #237 |
| 7.5 #88 | Steals per game | 7.0 #129 |
| 2.7 #286 | Blocks per game | 3.6 #132 |
Ball State
10-19 in 2025-26 overall · 7-11 in conference · Mid-American Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Wvs C Michigan85–69
- W@ W Michigan74–71
- W@ N Illinois79–43
- Wvs UMass74–73
- Lvs Akron65–78
A week or more of rest.
SMU
20-14 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Miami OH79–89
- Lvs Louisville58–62
- Wvs Syracuse86–69
- L@ Florida St78–91
- Lvs Miami69–77
A week or more of rest.