Kaplan Arena · at William & Mary
LineNo line yet
Total—
 BGSU | This season | W&M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W&M 78–76 · win probability W&M 57%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 154.6
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: W&M has more of the edges
BGSU 2, W&M 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
BGSUBigRebounding
Offensive rebound rate: BGSU 28.7%, W&M 26.0%. Defensive: BGSU 73.1%, W&M 68.5%
BGSUBigBGSU offense vs W&M defense
Offense 172nd of 366 against a defense 289th, on the model’s ratings
W&MSmallFree throws
Free throw rate: BGSU 37.0, W&M 44.0. Allowed: BGSU 37.2, W&M 35.5
W&MSmallW&M offense vs BGSU defense
Offense 160th of 366 against a defense 231st, on the model’s ratings
W&MSmallHome court
W&M at home. This season: W&M 0-0 at home, BGSU 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: BGSU 24%, W&M 1%. Transfers in: BGSU 4, W&M 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Tempo
About 72 possessions: BGSU plays 70.5 a game (96th fastest), W&M 73.6 (14th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: BGSU 51.8 and allows 51.0; W&M 54.3 and allows 51.9
Even
Three-pointers
BGSU hits 34.4% and allows 33.5%; W&M hits 33.0% and allows 33.0%. Threes are 34.2% and 42.8% of their shots
Context
Schedule so far
BGSU has played the 192nd-hardest schedule, W&M the 171st. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: BGSU 16.4%, W&M 16.6%. Forced: BGSU 18.5%, W&M 18.9%
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 | — | W&M -2.0 | — |
| Total | — | 154.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | BGSU 76.3 · W&M 78.3 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | W&M -1.1 | — |
| 1H total | 72.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | BGSU 35.6 · W&M 36.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| BGSU | 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% |
| W&M | 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
BGSU 0–1 W&MW&M leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · BGSU 0-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2025-26 | W&M 82 @ BGSU 74 | BGSU -8.5 | W&M W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Bowling Green
29 games played
Straight up
15-14
52% wins
Against the spread
14-15
48% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
11-18
38% overs · avg −1.2 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 TXST | W 83-48 | -5.5 | W +29.5 | 146.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 9 | vs LEM | W 83-60 | -11.5 | W +11.5 | 154.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 15 | @ DAV | L 87-91 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 144.5 | O 178 |
| Nov 19 | vsW&M | L 74-82 | -8.5 | L −16.5 | 167.5 | U 156 |
| Nov 24 | vs BUCK | W 71-66 | -10.5 | L −5.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 26 | vs VMI | W 81-48 | -11.5 | W +21.5 | 148.5 | U 129 |
| Dec 1 | @ KSU | W 82-66 | +12.5 | W +28.5 | 159.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 6 | vs UVU | L 71-82 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 144.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 16 | vs CHST | W 76-55 | -21.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | U 131 |
| Dec 20 | @ OHIO | W 68-58 | -1.5 | W +8.5 | 153.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 30 | vs M-OH | L 83-93 | -6.5 | L −16.5 | 150.5 | O 176 |
| Jan 3 | @ MASS | W 101-100 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 152.5 | O 201 |
| Jan 6 | @ KENT | L 93-96 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 155.5 | O 189 |
| Jan 9 | vs AKR | L 67-77 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 163.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 17 | vs EMU | W 85-79 | -11.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 20 | @ WMU | W 72-54 | -6.5 | W +11.5 | 152.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 24 | @ TOL | L 72-73 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 155.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 27 | vs BUF | L 78-89 | -7.5 | L −18.5 | 150.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 31 | @ CMU | L 59-62 | -8.5 | L −11.5 | 149.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 3 | vs BALL | W 77-52 | -11.5 | W +13.5 | 137.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 7 | @ ARST | L 54-91 | +2.5 | L −34.5 | 154.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 11 | @ NIU | W 68-52 | -7.5 | W +8.5 | 144.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 14 | vsTOL | W 80-70 | -3.5 | W +6.5 | 150.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 17 | vsKENT | L 71-78 | -1.5 | L −8.5 | 151.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 20 | @M-OH | L 77-91 | +8.5 | L −5.5 | 154.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 24 | vsWMU | L 79-88 | -11.5 | L −20.5 | 149.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 28 | vsMASS | W 81-62 | -3.5 | W +15.5 | 150.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 6 | @EMU | W 77-69 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 142.5 | O 146 |
| Mar 12 | vsTOL | L 76-77 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 150.5 | O 153 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vsTXST
TXSTW 83-48
+29.5
9
vsLEM
LEMW 83-60
+11.5
15
@DAV
DAVL 87-91
+0.5
19
vsW&M
W&ML 74-82
−16.5
24
vsBUCK
BUCKW 71-66
−5.5
26
vsVMI
VMIW 81-48
+21.5
1
@KSU
KSUW 82-66
+28.5
6
vsUVU
UVUL 71-82
−9.5
16
vsCHST
CHSTW 76-55
−0.5
20
@OHIO
OHIOW 68-58
+8.5
30
vsM-OH
M-OHL 83-93
−16.5
3
@MASS
MASSW 101-100
−0.5
6
@KENT
KENTL 93-96
+0.5
9
vsAKR
AKRL 67-77
−5.5
17
vsEMU
EMUW 85-79
−5.5
20
@WMU
WMUW 72-54
+11.5
24
@TOL
TOLL 72-73
−2.5
27
vsBUF
BUFL 78-89
−18.5
31
@CMU
CMUL 59-62
−11.5
3
vsBALL
BALLW 77-52
+13.5
7
@ARST
ARSTL 54-91
−34.5
11
@NIU
NIUW 68-52
+8.5
14
vsTOL
TOLW 80-70
+6.5
17
vsKENT
KENTL 71-78
−8.5
20
@M-OH
M-OHL 77-91
−5.5
24
vsWMU
WMUL 79-88
−20.5
28
vsMASS
MASSW 81-62
+15.5
6
@EMU
EMUW 77-69
+2.5
12
vsTOL
TOLL 76-77
+0.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vsTXST
TXSTW 83-48
−15.5
9
vsLEM
LEMW 83-60
−11.5
15
@DAV
DAVL 87-91
+33.5
19
vsW&M
W&ML 74-82
−11.5
24
vsBUCK
BUCKW 71-66
−7.5
26
vsVMI
VMIW 81-48
−19.5
1
@KSU
KSUW 82-66
−11.5
6
vsUVU
UVUL 71-82
+8.5
16
vsCHST
CHSTW 76-55
−17.5
20
@OHIO
OHIOW 68-58
−27.5
30
vsM-OH
M-OHL 83-93
+25.5
3
@MASS
MASSW 101-100
+48.5
6
@KENT
KENTL 93-96
+33.5
9
vsAKR
AKRL 67-77
−19.5
17
vsEMU
EMUW 85-79
+22.5
20
@WMU
WMUW 72-54
−26.5
24
@TOL
TOLL 72-73
−10.5
27
vsBUF
BUFL 78-89
+16.5
31
@CMU
CMUL 59-62
−28.5
3
vsBALL
BALLW 77-52
−8.5
7
@ARST
ARSTL 54-91
−9.5
11
@NIU
NIUW 68-52
−24.5
14
vsTOL
TOLW 80-70
−0.5
17
vsKENT
KENTL 71-78
−2.5
20
@M-OH
M-OHL 77-91
+13.5
24
vsWMU
WMUL 79-88
+17.5
28
vsMASS
MASSW 81-62
−7.5
6
@EMU
EMUW 77-69
+3.5
12
vsTOL
TOLL 76-77
+2.5
over 11under 18avg −1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
William & Mary
30 games played
Straight up
18-12
60% wins
Against the spread
16-14
53% covers · avg +0.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-17
43% overs · avg −2.3 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 8 | @ NORF | W 81-78 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 158.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 11 | @ RICH | L 86-90 | +9.5 | W +5.5 | 164.5 | O 176 |
| Nov 15 | @ SJU | L 60-93 | +28.5 | L −4.5 | 179.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 19 | @BGSU | W 82-74 | +8.5 | W +16.5 | 167.5 | U 156 |
| Nov 24 | vs UTEP | W 74-63 | -2.5 | W +8.5 | 159.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 25 | vs ACU | W 92-58 | +1.5 | W +35.5 | 147.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 30 | vs ODU | W 88-75 | -8.5 | W +4.5 | 163.5 | U 163 |
| Dec 2 | @ DUQ | W 83-79 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 170.5 | U 162 |
| Dec 6 | @ GW | L 86-99 | +13.5 | W +0.5 | 174.5 | O 185 |
| Dec 18 | vs RAD | W 96-83 | -8.5 | W +4.5 | 170.5 | O 179 |
| Dec 29 | vs TOW | W 84-70 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 157.5 | U 154 |
| Dec 31 | vs STBK | W 76-57 | -11.5 | W +7.5 | 159.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 5 | @ COFC | L 79-88 | +2.5 | L −6.5 | 165.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 8 | @ MONM | L 70-81 | -2.5 | L −13.5 | 156.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 10 | @ DREX | L 58-64 | -3.5 | L −9.5 | 150.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 15 | vs NCAT | W 97-89 | -13.5 | L −5.5 | 162.5 | O 186 |
| Jan 22 | vs UNCW | W 77-70 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 159.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 24 | vs HOF | W 89-82 | -3.5 | W +3.5 | 157.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 29 | @ ELON | L 76-79 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 169.5 | U 155 |
| Jan 31 | vs CAM | L 96-104 | -8.5 | L −16.5 | 168.5 | O 200 |
| Feb 5 | @UNCW | W 85-78 | +4.5 | W +11.5 | 159.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 7 | @ HAMP | L 74-77 | -5.5 | L −8.5 | 152.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 12 | @ NE | W 94-67 | -5.5 | W +21.5 | 167.5 | U 161 |
| Feb 14 | vsELON | L 78-81 | -8.5 | L −11.5 | 165.5 | U 159 |
| Feb 19 | @CAM | L 83-84 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 167.5 | U 167 |
| Feb 26 | vsNE | W 84-77 | -11.5 | L −4.5 | 164.5 | U 161 |
| Feb 28 | @NCAT | W 91-88 | -8.5 | L −5.5 | 163.5 | O 179 |
| Mar 3 | vsHAMP | W 94-85 | -11.5 | L −2.5 | 163.5 | O 179 |
| Mar 7 | vsELON | W 72-62 | -5.5 | W +4.5 | 163.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 8 | vsHOF | L 61-92 | +2.5 | L −28.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@NORF
NORFW 81-78
+0.5
11
@RICH
RICHL 86-90
+5.5
15
@SJU
SJUL 60-93
−4.5
19
@BGSU
BGSUW 82-74
+16.5
24
vsUTEP
UTEPW 74-63
+8.5
25
vsACU
ACUW 92-58
+35.5
30
vsODU
ODUW 88-75
+4.5
2
@DUQ
DUQW 83-79
+9.5
6
@GW
GWL 86-99
+0.5
18
vsRAD
RADW 96-83
+4.5
29
vsTOW
TOWW 84-70
+12.5
31
vsSTBK
STBKW 76-57
+7.5
5
@COFC
COFCL 79-88
−6.5
8
@MONM
MONML 70-81
−13.5
10
@DREX
DREXL 58-64
−9.5
15
vsNCAT
NCATW 97-89
−5.5
22
vsUNCW
UNCWW 77-70
+4.5
24
vsHOF
HOFW 89-82
+3.5
29
@ELON
ELONL 76-79
−4.5
31
vsCAM
CAML 96-104
−16.5
5
@UNCW
UNCWW 85-78
+11.5
7
@HAMP
HAMPL 74-77
−8.5
12
@NE
NEW 94-67
+21.5
14
vsELON
ELONL 78-81
−11.5
19
@CAM
CAML 83-84
−2.5
26
vsNE
NEW 84-77
−4.5
28
@NCAT
NCATW 91-88
−5.5
3
vsHAMP
HAMPW 94-85
−2.5
7
vsELON
ELONW 72-62
+4.5
8
vsHOF
HOFL 61-92
−28.5
covered 16didn’t cover 14avg +0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@NORF
NORFW 81-78
+0.5
11
@RICH
RICHL 86-90
+11.5
15
@SJU
SJUL 60-93
−26.5
19
@BGSU
BGSUW 82-74
−11.5
24
vsUTEP
UTEPW 74-63
−22.5
25
vsACU
ACUW 92-58
+2.5
30
vsODU
ODUW 88-75
−0.5
2
@DUQ
DUQW 83-79
−8.5
6
@GW
GWL 86-99
+10.5
18
vsRAD
RADW 96-83
+8.5
29
vsTOW
TOWW 84-70
−3.5
31
vsSTBK
STBKW 76-57
−26.5
5
@COFC
COFCL 79-88
+1.5
8
@MONM
MONML 70-81
−5.5
10
@DREX
DREXL 58-64
−28.5
15
vsNCAT
NCATW 97-89
+23.5
22
vsUNCW
UNCWW 77-70
−12.5
24
vsHOF
HOFW 89-82
+13.5
29
@ELON
ELONL 76-79
−14.5
31
vsCAM
CAML 96-104
+31.5
5
@UNCW
UNCWW 85-78
+3.5
7
@HAMP
HAMPL 74-77
−1.5
12
@NE
NEW 94-67
−6.5
14
vsELON
ELONL 78-81
−6.5
19
@CAM
CAML 83-84
−0.5
26
vsNE
NEW 84-77
−3.5
28
@NCAT
NCATW 91-88
+15.5
3
vsHAMP
HAMPW 94-85
+15.5
7
vsELON
ELONW 72-62
−29.5
8
vsHOF
HOFL 61-92
+0.5
over 13under 17avg −2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Bowling Green has the better starters
Position by position: Bowling Green 2, William & Mary 0, even 3
Bowling GreenBetterWilliam & Mary
G J. Johnson TR13.7 pts · 2.9 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 80
←BGSUSmall
G J. Baldwin TR7.7 pts · 4.2 reb · 3.2 ast
Score 63
G J. Cranford TR11.8 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 35
=Even
G J. McIntosh TR6.8 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 48
G J. Shackelford11.1 pts · 3.6 reb · 1 ast
Score 59
←BGSUBig
G T. Blassingame TR3.7 pts · 2.6 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 18
F A. Goins3.1 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G N. Daniels TR2 pts · 1.1 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
F C. Essandoko TR2 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F S. Sivka TR2 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 15
Bowling GreenBetterWilliam & Mary
BGSU offense172nd of 366 · -5.3
←BGSUSmall
W&M defense289th of 366 · -7.2
BGSU defense231st of 366 · -6.1
→W&MSmall
W&M offense160th of 366 · -4.8
Backcourt-0.2 · 3 players
←BGSUSmall
Backcourt-2.6 · 4 players
Frontcourt-1.3 · 2 players
=Even
Frontcourt-1.0 · 1 player
Bench-1.4 · 5 players
=Even
Bench-0.4 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestBGSU betterW&M betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Bowling GreenGuards
J. Johnson28 min · TRJ. Cranford26 min · TRJ. Shackelford24 minM. Leach8 minT. Beckford7 min · TRC. Dedivanaj2 min
Forwards
A. Goins8 minC. Essandoko8 min · TRC. Karel5 minP. Squire3 minL. AtenyNew
William & MaryGuards
J. Baldwin20 min · TRJ. McIntosh17 min · TRT. Blassingame17 min · TRN. Daniels10 min · TRZ. Clark9 min · TRJ. Forsythe4 min · TR
Forwards
S. Sivka11 min · TRB. CarterNewJ. RolandNew
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Matchup stats
2025-26 · rank among 365 teams
Scoring
Points per game
BGSU76.8 #124W&M81.5 #38Points per possession
BGSU1.08 #177W&M1.11 #116Pace (possessions)
BGSU70.5 #96W&M73.6 #14Shooting
Effective FG%
BGSU51.8 #153W&M54.3 #583-point %
BGSU34.4 #148W&M33.0 #2333-point attempt rate
BGSU34.2 #289W&M42.8 #120Free throw rate
BGSU37.0 #129W&M44.0 #9Possessions
Turnover rate
BGSU16.4 #164W&M16.6 #171Offensive rebound rate
BGSU28.7 #244W&M26.0 #324Assists per game
BGSU13.1 #203W&M17.4 #17Defense
Points allowed
BGSU72.7 #127W&M78.9 #294Points allowed per possession
BGSU1.04 #71W&M1.07 #126Opponent effective FG%
BGSU51.0 #163W&M51.9 #205Opponent 3-point %
BGSU33.5 #161W&M33.0 #126Turnovers forced
BGSU18.5 #73W&M18.9 #52Defensive rebound rate
BGSU73.1 #31W&M68.5 #229Steals per game
BGSU8.2 #30W&M7.9 #47Blocks per game
BGSU3.5 #138W&M3.8 #95| BGSU | W&M | |
|---|---|---|
| Scoring | ||
| 76.8 #124 | Points per game | 81.5 #38 |
| 1.08 #177 | Points per possession | 1.11 #116 |
| 70.5 #96 | Pace (possessions) | 73.6 #14 |
| Shooting | ||
| 51.8 #153 | Effective FG% | 54.3 #58 |
| 34.4 #148 | 3-point % | 33.0 #233 |
| 34.2 #289 | 3-point attempt rate | 42.8 #120 |
| 37.0 #129 | Free throw rate | 44.0 #9 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.4 #164 | Turnover rate | 16.6 #171 |
| 28.7 #244 | Offensive rebound rate | 26.0 #324 |
| 13.1 #203 | Assists per game | 17.4 #17 |
| Defense | ||
| 72.7 #127 | Points allowed | 78.9 #294 |
| 1.04 #71 | Points allowed per possession | 1.07 #126 |
| 51.0 #163 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.9 #205 |
| 33.5 #161 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.0 #126 |
| 18.5 #73 | Turnovers forced | 18.9 #52 |
| 73.1 #31 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.5 #229 |
| 8.2 #30 | Steals per game | 7.9 #47 |
| 3.5 #138 | Blocks per game | 3.8 #95 |
Bowling Green
15-14 in 2025-26 overall · 9-10 in conference · Mid-American Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Toledo76–77
- W@ E Michigan77–69
- Wvs UMass81–62
- Lvs W Michigan79–88
- L@ Miami OH77–91
A week or more of rest.
William & Mary
18-12 in 2025-26 overall · 11-9 in conference · Coastal Athletic Association
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Hofstra61–92
- Wvs Elon72–62
- Wvs Hampton94–85
- W@ NC A&T91–88
- Wvs Northeastern84–77
A week or more of rest.