Simon Skjodt Assembly Hall · at Indiana
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | IU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 IU 87–65 · win probability IU 97%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 152.1
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: IU has more of the edges
BGSU 2, IU 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
IU offense vs BGSU defense
Offense 41st of 366 against a defense 231st, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
BGSU has played the 192nd-hardest schedule, IU the 48th. A record against a soft schedule means less
BGSU offense vs IU defense
Offense 172nd of 366 against a defense 38th, on the model’s ratings
Shooting
Effective FG%: BGSU 51.8 and allows 51.0; IU 56.1 and allows 49.0
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: BGSU plays 70.5 a game (96th fastest), IU 67.4 (260th). Faster games mean more points
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: BGSU 28.7%, IU 26.9%. Defensive: BGSU 73.1%, IU 70.8%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: BGSU 16.4%, IU 15.1%. Forced: BGSU 18.5%, IU 15.1%
Home court
IU at home. This season: IU 0-0 at home, BGSU 0-0 away
Even
Three-pointers
BGSU hits 34.4% and allows 33.5%; IU hits 34.7% and allows 33.1%. Threes are 34.2% and 50.5% of their shots
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: BGSU 37.0, IU 35.0. Allowed: BGSU 37.2, IU 37.0
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: BGSU 24%, IU 19%. Transfers in: BGSU 4, IU 8. 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 | — | IU -21.7 | — |
| Total | — | 152.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | BGSU 65.2 · IU 86.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | IU -12.8 | — |
| 1H total | 71.1 | — |
| 1H projected score | BGSU 29.2 · IU 41.9 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% | |
| 3-7 30% | 2-8 20% | 4-6 40% |
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 | W 83-48 | -5.5 | W +29.5 | 146.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 9 | vs | W 83-60 | -11.5 | W +11.5 | 154.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 87-91 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 144.5 | O 178 |
| Nov 19 | vs | L 74-82 | -8.5 | L −16.5 | 167.5 | U 156 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 71-66 | -10.5 | L −5.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 81-48 | -11.5 | W +21.5 | 148.5 | U 129 |
| Dec 1 | @ | W 82-66 | +12.5 | W +28.5 | 159.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 71-82 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 144.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 76-55 | -21.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | U 131 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 68-58 | -1.5 | W +8.5 | 153.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 30 | vs | L 83-93 | -6.5 | L −16.5 | 150.5 | O 176 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 101-100 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 152.5 | O 201 |
| Jan 6 | @ | L 93-96 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 155.5 | O 189 |
| Jan 9 | vs | L 67-77 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 163.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 85-79 | -11.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 20 | @ | W 72-54 | -6.5 | W +11.5 | 152.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 72-73 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 155.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 27 | vs | L 78-89 | -7.5 | L −18.5 | 150.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 59-62 | -8.5 | L −11.5 | 149.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 3 | vs | W 77-52 | -11.5 | W +13.5 | 137.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 54-91 | +2.5 | L −34.5 | 154.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 68-52 | -7.5 | W +8.5 | 144.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 80-70 | -3.5 | W +6.5 | 150.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 17 | vs | L 71-78 | -1.5 | L −8.5 | 151.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 20 | @ | L 77-91 | +8.5 | L −5.5 | 154.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 24 | vs | L 79-88 | -11.5 | L −20.5 | 149.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 81-62 | -3.5 | W +15.5 | 150.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 6 | @ | W 77-69 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 142.5 | O 146 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 76-77 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 150.5 | O 153 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
TXST
W 83-48
+29.5
9
vs
LEM
W 83-60
+11.5
15
@
DAV
L 87-91
+0.5
19
vs
W&M
L 74-82
−16.5
24
vs
BUCK
W 71-66
−5.5
26
vs
VMI
W 81-48
+21.5
1
@
KSU
W 82-66
+28.5
6
vs
UVU
L 71-82
−9.5
16
vs
CHST
W 76-55
−0.5
20
@
OHIO
W 68-58
+8.5
30
vs
M-OH
L 83-93
−16.5
3
@
MASS
W 101-100
−0.5
6
@
KENT
L 93-96
+0.5
9
vs
AKR
L 67-77
−5.5
17
vs
EMU
W 85-79
−5.5
20
@
WMU
W 72-54
+11.5
24
@
TOL
L 72-73
−2.5
27
vs
BUF
L 78-89
−18.5
31
@
CMU
L 59-62
−11.5
3
vs
BALL
W 77-52
+13.5
7
@
ARST
L 54-91
−34.5
11
@
NIU
W 68-52
+8.5
14
vs
TOL
W 80-70
+6.5
17
vs
KENT
L 71-78
−8.5
20
@
M-OH
L 77-91
−5.5
24
vs
WMU
L 79-88
−20.5
28
vs
MASS
W 81-62
+15.5
6
@
EMU
W 77-69
+2.5
12
vs
TOL
L 76-77
+0.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
TXST
W 83-48
−15.5
9
vs
LEM
W 83-60
−11.5
15
@
DAV
L 87-91
+33.5
19
vs
W&M
L 74-82
−11.5
24
vs
BUCK
W 71-66
−7.5
26
vs
VMI
W 81-48
−19.5
1
@
KSU
W 82-66
−11.5
6
vs
UVU
L 71-82
+8.5
16
vs
CHST
W 76-55
−17.5
20
@
OHIO
W 68-58
−27.5
30
vs
M-OH
L 83-93
+25.5
3
@
MASS
W 101-100
+48.5
6
@
KENT
L 93-96
+33.5
9
vs
AKR
L 67-77
−19.5
17
vs
EMU
W 85-79
+22.5
20
@
WMU
W 72-54
−26.5
24
@
TOL
L 72-73
−10.5
27
vs
BUF
L 78-89
+16.5
31
@
CMU
L 59-62
−28.5
3
vs
BALL
W 77-52
−8.5
7
@
ARST
L 54-91
−9.5
11
@
NIU
W 68-52
−24.5
14
vs
TOL
W 80-70
−0.5
17
vs
KENT
L 71-78
−2.5
20
@
M-OH
L 77-91
+13.5
24
vs
WMU
L 79-88
+17.5
28
vs
MASS
W 81-62
−7.5
6
@
EMU
W 77-69
+3.5
12
vs
TOL
L 76-77
+2.5
over 11under 18avg −1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Indiana
32 games played
Straight up
18-14
56% wins
Against the spread
14-18
44% covers · avg −1.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-18
44% overs · avg −0.8 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 5 | vs | W 98-51 | -30.5 | W +16.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Nov 9 | vs | W 100-77 | -3.5 | W +19.5 | 156.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 101-70 | -24.5 | W +6.5 | 165.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 69-61 | -28.5 | L −20.5 | 157.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 73-53 | -32.5 | L −12.5 | 155.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 86-69 | -10.5 | W +6.5 | 164.5 | U 155 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 100-56 | -29.5 | W +14.5 | 148.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 64-73 | -7.5 | L −16.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 78-87 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 162.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 9 | vs | W 113-72 | -14.5 | W +26.5 | 152.5 | O 185 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 60-72 | +3.5 | L −8.5 | 156.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 78-58 | -38.5 | L −18.5 | 152.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 81-60 | -21.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 90-80 | -9.5 | W +0.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 84-66 | -7.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 77-83 | -4.5 | L −10.5 | 150.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 13 | @ | L 60-81 | +6.5 | L −14.5 | 145.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 57-74 | -3.5 | L −20.5 | 146.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 72-86 | +15.5 | W +1.5 | 163.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 23 | @ | W 82-59 | -7.5 | W +15.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 72-67 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 150.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 98-97 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | O 195 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 75-81 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 153.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 78-77 | -3.5 | L −2.5 | 157.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 9 | vs | W 92-74 | -10.5 | W +7.5 | 143.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 51-71 | +8.5 | L −11.5 | 153.5 | U 122 |
| Feb 20 | @ | L 64-93 | +11.5 | L −17.5 | 150.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 24 | vs | L 68-72 | -9.5 | L −13.5 | 145.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 1 | vs | L 64-77 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | U 141 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 77-47 | -7.5 | W +22.5 | 138.5 | U 124 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 78-91 | +3.5 | L −9.5 | 148.5 | O 169 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 61-74 | -6.5 | L −19.5 | 142.5 | U 135 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
AAMU
W 98-51
+16.5
9
vs
MARQ
W 100-77
+19.5
12
vs
MILW
W 101-70
+6.5
16
vs
UIW
W 69-61
−20.5
20
vs
LIN
W 73-53
−12.5
25
vs
KSU
W 86-69
+6.5
29
vs
BCU
W 100-56
+14.5
3
@
MINN
L 64-73
−16.5
6
vs
LOU
L 78-87
−5.5
9
vs
PSU
W 113-72
+26.5
13
@
UK
L 60-72
−8.5
20
vs
CHST
W 78-58
−18.5
22
vs
SIE
W 81-60
−0.5
4
vs
WASH
W 90-80
+0.5
7
@
MD
W 84-66
+10.5
10
vs
NEB
L 77-83
−10.5
13
@
MSU
L 60-81
−14.5
17
vs
IOWA
L 57-74
−20.5
20
@
MICH
L 72-86
+1.5
23
@
RUTG
W 82-59
+15.5
27
vs
PUR
W 72-67
+9.5
31
@
UCLA
W 98-97
+4.5
3
@
USC
L 75-81
−7.5
7
vs
WIS
W 78-77
−2.5
9
vs
ORE
W 92-74
+7.5
15
@
ILL
L 51-71
−11.5
20
@
PUR
L 64-93
−17.5
24
vs
NU
L 68-72
−13.5
1
vs
MSU
L 64-77
−10.5
4
vs
MINN
W 77-47
+22.5
7
@
OSU
L 78-91
−9.5
11
vs
NU
L 61-74
−19.5
covered 14didn’t cover 18avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
AAMU
W 98-51
+1.5
9
vs
MARQ
W 100-77
+20.5
12
vs
MILW
W 101-70
+5.5
16
vs
UIW
W 69-61
−27.5
20
vs
LIN
W 73-53
−29.5
25
vs
KSU
W 86-69
−9.5
29
vs
BCU
W 100-56
+7.5
3
@
MINN
L 64-73
−7.5
6
vs
LOU
L 78-87
+2.5
9
vs
PSU
W 113-72
+32.5
13
@
UK
L 60-72
−24.5
20
vs
CHST
W 78-58
−16.5
22
vs
SIE
W 81-60
−4.5
4
vs
WASH
W 90-80
+17.5
7
@
MD
W 84-66
+2.5
10
vs
NEB
L 77-83
+9.5
13
@
MSU
L 60-81
−4.5
17
vs
IOWA
L 57-74
−15.5
20
@
MICH
L 72-86
−5.5
23
@
RUTG
W 82-59
−6.5
27
vs
PUR
W 72-67
−11.5
31
@
UCLA
W 98-97
+50.5
3
@
USC
L 75-81
+2.5
7
vs
WIS
W 78-77
−2.5
9
vs
ORE
W 92-74
+22.5
15
@
ILL
L 51-71
−31.5
20
@
PUR
L 64-93
+6.5
24
vs
NU
L 68-72
−5.5
1
vs
MSU
L 64-77
−3.5
4
vs
MINN
W 77-47
−14.5
7
@
OSU
L 78-91
+20.5
11
vs
NU
L 61-74
−7.5
over 14under 18avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Indiana has the better starters
Position by position: Bowling Green 0, Indiana 2, even 3
Bowling GreenBetterIndiana
G J. Johnson TR13.7 pts · 2.9 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 80
→IUSmall
G M. Burton TR18.5 pts · 2.8 reb · 3.7 ast
Score 98
G J. Cranford TR11.8 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 35
→IUBig
G B. Lindsay TR12.3 pts · 2.1 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 75
G J. Shackelford11.1 pts · 3.6 reb · 1 ast
Score 59
=Even
G J. Mustaf TR10.4 pts · 4.3 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 65
F A. Goins3.1 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F A. Sherrell TR11.1 pts · 6.2 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 98
F C. Essandoko TR2 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
C S. Yigitoglu TR10.7 pts · 7.9 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 64
Bowling GreenBetterIndiana
BGSU offense172nd of 366 · -5.3
→IUBig
IU defense38th of 366 · +3.0
BGSU defense231st of 366 · -6.1
→IUBig
IU offense41st of 366 · +4.8
Backcourt-0.2 · 3 players
→IUBig
Backcourt+6.3 · 3 players
Frontcourt-1.3 · 2 players
→IUBig
Frontcourt+5.8 · 2 players
Bench-1.4 · 5 players
→IUSmall
Bench+0.1 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestBGSU betterIU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
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
Guards
M. Burton30 min · TRB. Lindsay29 min · TRJ. Mustaf28 min · TRJ. Monden21 min · TRD. Harris10 min · TRD. Snively2 min
Forwards
A. Sherrell24 min · TRS. Alexis21 minT. Sisley13 minB. Winker3 min · TRV. KarvalaNewT. ManhertzNew
Centers
S. Yigitoglu29 min · TRC. SokolovNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 76.8 #124 | Points per game | 78.2 #93 |
| 1.08 #177 | Points per possession | 1.16 #46 |
| 70.5 #96 | Pace (possessions) | 67.4 #260 |
| Shooting | ||
| 51.8 #153 | Effective FG% | 56.1 #22 |
| 34.4 #148 | 3-point % | 34.7 #138 |
| 34.2 #289 | 3-point attempt rate | 50.5 #14 |
| 37.0 #129 | Free throw rate | 35.0 #179 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.4 #164 | Turnover rate | 15.1 #71 |
| 28.7 #244 | Offensive rebound rate | 26.9 #300 |
| 13.1 #203 | Assists per game | 16.6 #34 |
| Defense | ||
| 72.7 #127 | Points allowed | 72.2 #109 |
| 1.04 #71 | Points allowed per possession | 1.07 #131 |
| 51.0 #163 | Opponent effective FG% | 49.0 #68 |
| 33.5 #161 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.1 #128 |
| 18.5 #73 | Turnovers forced | 15.1 #284 |
| 73.1 #31 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.8 #122 |
| 8.2 #30 | Steals per game | 4.7 #348 |
| 3.5 #138 | Blocks per game | 2.7 #278 |
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.
Indiana
18-14 in 2025-26 overall · 9-12 in conference · Big Ten Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Northwestern61–74
- L@ Ohio State78–91
- Wvs Minnesota77–47
- Lvs Michigan St64–77
- Lvs Northwestern68–72
A week or more of rest.