The Palestra · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | TOW | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 TOW 72–70 · win probability TOW 57%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 142.5
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: BUF has more of the edges
BUF 3, TOW 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: BUF 27.1%, TOW 36.0%. Defensive: BUF 68.9%, TOW 70.9%
BUF offense vs TOW defense
Offense 215th of 366 against a defense 113th, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: BUF 39.6, TOW 30.4. Allowed: BUF 31.4, TOW 29.3
Turnovers
Turnover rate: BUF 16.2%, TOW 15.8%. Forced: BUF 17.8%, TOW 15.1%
Context
Tempo
About 66 possessions: BUF plays 68.2 a game (219th fastest), TOW 64.0 (360th). Faster games mean more points
Context
Schedule so far
BUF has played the 198th-hardest schedule, TOW the 140th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Three-pointers
BUF hits 37.9% and allows 35.1%; TOW hits 29.4% and allows 30.9%. Threes are 45.5% and 34.9% of their shots
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: BUF 8%, TOW 27%. Transfers in: BUF 7, TOW 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: BUF 55.4 and allows 55.1; TOW 46.5 and allows 48.5
Even
TOW offense vs BUF defense
Offense 266th of 366 against a defense 257th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Neutral floor
No home court: the model takes it out of the line
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 | — | TOW -1.9 | — |
| Total | — | 142.5 | — |
| Projected score | — | BUF 70.3 · TOW 72.2 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | TOW -1.0 | — |
| 1H total | 66.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | BUF 32.8 · TOW 33.9 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% | |
| 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% | 3-7 30% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Buffalo
30 games played
Straight up
15-15
50% wins
Against the spread
17-13
57% covers · avg +1.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-14
53% overs · avg +2.7 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 85-79 | -3.5 | W +2.5 | 153.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 83-76 | -3.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 11 | @ | W 66-53 | +18.5 | W +31.5 | 153.5 | U 119 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 94-90 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | O 184 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 78-70 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 73-71 | -4.5 | L −2.5 | 146.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 29 | @ | W 71-53 | -9.5 | W +8.5 | 139.5 | U 124 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 69-77 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | O 146 |
| Dec 9 | @ | W 83-79 | -3.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 14 | @ | L 70-73 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 88-71 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 150.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 31 | @ | W 81-67 | -6.5 | W +7.5 | 152.5 | U 148 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 85-72 | -6.5 | W +6.5 | 145.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 80-91 | +4.5 | L −6.5 | 156.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 13 | vs | L 81-87 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 165.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 102-105 | +10.5 | W +7.5 | 162.5 | O 207 |
| Jan 20 | vs | L 63-82 | +8.5 | L −10.5 | 166.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 23 | vs | L 67-68 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 159.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 27 | @ | W 89-78 | +7.5 | W +18.5 | 150.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 83-95 | -2.5 | L −14.5 | 156.5 | O 178 |
| Feb 3 | vs | L 71-73 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 165.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 69-81 | +3.5 | L −8.5 | 145.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 63-53 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 141.5 | U 116 |
| Feb 17 | vs | L 70-72 | -9.5 | L −11.5 | 145.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 86-82 | +7.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 24 | @ | L 85-99 | +15.5 | W +1.5 | 160.5 | O 184 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 70-75 | -5.5 | L −10.5 | 151.5 | U 145 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 72-67 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 6 | @ | L 78-99 | +5.5 | L −15.5 | 155.5 | O 177 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 70-73 | +12.5 | W +9.5 | 158.5 | U 143 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
USM
W 85-79
+2.5
7
vs
GB
W 83-76
+3.5
11
@
DEP
W 66-53
+31.5
18
vs
UVM
W 94-90
+5.5
24
vs
VMI
W 78-70
+2.5
26
vs
BUCK
W 73-71
−2.5
29
@
CAN
W 71-53
+8.5
6
vs
SBU
L 69-77
−2.5
9
@
UMBC
W 83-79
+0.5
14
@
ECU
L 70-73
−1.5
20
@
WMU
W 88-71
+14.5
31
@
NIU
W 81-67
+7.5
3
vs
BALL
W 85-72
+6.5
10
@
OHIO
L 80-91
−6.5
13
vs
KENT
L 81-87
−3.5
17
@
M-OH
L 102-105
+7.5
20
vs
AKR
L 63-82
−10.5
23
vs
MASS
L 67-68
−2.5
27
@
BGSU
W 89-78
+18.5
31
vs
OHIO
L 83-95
−14.5
3
vs
M-OH
L 71-73
+2.5
7
@
USA
L 69-81
−8.5
11
@
BALL
W 63-53
+11.5
17
vs
NIU
L 70-72
−11.5
21
@
MASS
W 86-82
+11.5
24
@
AKR
L 85-99
+1.5
28
vs
CMU
L 70-75
−10.5
3
vs
EMU
W 72-67
−0.5
6
@
TOL
L 78-99
−15.5
12
vs
AKR
L 70-73
+9.5
covered 17didn’t cover 13avg +1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
USM
W 85-79
+10.5
7
vs
GB
W 83-76
+11.5
11
@
DEP
W 66-53
−34.5
18
vs
UVM
W 94-90
+42.5
24
vs
VMI
W 78-70
−2.5
26
vs
BUCK
W 73-71
−2.5
29
@
CAN
W 71-53
−15.5
6
vs
SBU
L 69-77
+1.5
9
@
UMBC
W 83-79
+16.5
14
@
ECU
L 70-73
−3.5
20
@
WMU
W 88-71
+8.5
31
@
NIU
W 81-67
−4.5
3
vs
BALL
W 85-72
+11.5
10
@
OHIO
L 80-91
+14.5
13
vs
KENT
L 81-87
+2.5
17
@
M-OH
L 102-105
+44.5
20
vs
AKR
L 63-82
−21.5
23
vs
MASS
L 67-68
−24.5
27
@
BGSU
W 89-78
+16.5
31
vs
OHIO
L 83-95
+21.5
3
vs
M-OH
L 71-73
−21.5
7
@
USA
L 69-81
+4.5
11
@
BALL
W 63-53
−25.5
17
vs
NIU
L 70-72
−3.5
21
@
MASS
W 86-82
+16.5
24
@
AKR
L 85-99
+23.5
28
vs
CMU
L 70-75
−6.5
3
vs
EMU
W 72-67
−4.5
6
@
TOL
L 78-99
+21.5
12
vs
AKR
L 70-73
−15.5
over 16under 14avg +2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Towson
32 games played
Straight up
17-15
53% wins
Against the spread
15-17
47% covers · avg −0.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-20
38% overs · avg −5.6 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 67-56 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 141.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 48-65 | +26.5 | W +9.5 | 130.5 | U 113 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 51-41 | -13.5 | L −3.5 | 138.5 | U 92 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 75-81 | -3.5 | L −9.5 | 140.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 62-55 | +2.5 | W +9.5 | 140.5 | U 117 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 72-69 | +6.5 | W +9.5 | 137.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 73-87 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 138.5 | O 160 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 93-80 | -6.5 | W +6.5 | 154.5 | O 173 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 61-86 | +9.5 | L −15.5 | 148.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 49-73 | +14.5 | L −9.5 | 137.5 | U 122 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 72-47 | -13.5 | W +11.5 | 145.5 | U 119 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 70-84 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 157.5 | U 154 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 62-63 | -6.5 | L −7.5 | 136.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 48-62 | -8.5 | L −22.5 | 136.5 | U 110 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 67-78 | -1.5 | L −12.5 | 134.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 87-78 | -2.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 61-52 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 143.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 19 | vs | W 59-58 | -7.5 | L −6.5 | 124.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 72-59 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 145.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 73-80 | -7.5 | L −14.5 | 139.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 73-82 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 135.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 82-50 | -8.5 | W +23.5 | 131.5 | O 132 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 49-71 | +4.5 | L −17.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 69-57 | -7.5 | W +4.5 | 135.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 71-72 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 138.5 | O 143 |
| Feb 22 | @ | L 62-68 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 130.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 58-56 | -5.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | U 114 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 71-67 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 69-57 | -1.5 | W +10.5 | 137.5 | U 126 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 74-68 | -7.5 | L −1.5 | 132.5 | O 142 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 81-56 | +3.5 | W +28.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 9 | vs | L 65-68 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 132.5 | O 133 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
L-MD
W 67-56
+2.5
8
@
HOU
L 48-65
+9.5
14
vs
NORF
W 51-41
−3.5
18
@
JMU
L 75-81
−9.5
24
vs
URI
W 62-55
+9.5
25
vs
LIB
W 72-69
+9.5
26
vs
UCSD
L 73-87
−12.5
3
vs
COR
W 93-80
+6.5
7
@
UCF
L 61-86
−15.5
16
@
KU
L 49-73
−9.5
22
vs
SHU
W 72-47
+11.5
29
@
W&M
L 70-84
−12.5
31
@
HAMP
L 62-63
−7.5
3
vs
MONM
L 48-62
−22.5
8
vs
HOF
L 67-78
−12.5
10
@
NE
W 87-78
+6.5
15
vs
COFC
W 61-52
+5.5
19
vs
DREX
W 59-58
−6.5
22
@
ELON
W 72-59
+14.5
24
@
NCAT
L 73-80
−14.5
29
vs
UNCW
L 73-82
−10.5
31
vs
HAMP
W 82-50
+23.5
7
@
HOF
L 49-71
−17.5
12
vs
STBK
W 69-57
+4.5
15
@
MONM
L 71-72
+0.5
22
@
DREX
L 62-68
−8.5
26
vs
ELON
W 58-56
−3.5
28
vs
CAM
W 71-67
−0.5
3
@
STBK
W 69-57
+10.5
7
vs
HAMP
W 74-68
−1.5
8
vs
COFC
W 81-56
+28.5
9
vs
HOF
L 65-68
+1.5
covered 15didn’t cover 17avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
L-MD
W 67-56
−18.5
8
@
HOU
L 48-65
−17.5
14
vs
NORF
W 51-41
−46.5
18
@
JMU
L 75-81
+15.5
24
vs
URI
W 62-55
−23.5
25
vs
LIB
W 72-69
+3.5
26
vs
UCSD
L 73-87
+21.5
3
vs
COR
W 93-80
+18.5
7
@
UCF
L 61-86
−1.5
16
@
KU
L 49-73
−15.5
22
vs
SHU
W 72-47
−26.5
29
@
W&M
L 70-84
−3.5
31
@
HAMP
L 62-63
−11.5
3
vs
MONM
L 48-62
−26.5
8
vs
HOF
L 67-78
+10.5
10
@
NE
W 87-78
+21.5
15
vs
COFC
W 61-52
−30.5
19
vs
DREX
W 59-58
−7.5
22
@
ELON
W 72-59
−14.5
24
@
NCAT
L 73-80
+13.5
29
vs
UNCW
L 73-82
+19.5
31
vs
HAMP
W 82-50
+0.5
7
@
HOF
L 49-71
−17.5
12
vs
STBK
W 69-57
−9.5
15
@
MONM
L 71-72
+4.5
22
@
DREX
L 62-68
−0.5
26
vs
ELON
W 58-56
−30.5
28
vs
CAM
W 71-67
−4.5
3
@
STBK
W 69-57
−11.5
7
vs
HAMP
W 74-68
+9.5
8
vs
COFC
W 81-56
−1.5
9
vs
HOF
L 65-68
+0.5
over 12under 20avg −5.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Buffalo has the better starters
Position by position: Buffalo 2, Towson 1, even 2
BuffaloBetterTowson
G D. Steffe TR9.9 pts · 3 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 39
=Even
G B. Roseborough TR11.7 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 50
G D. Ducommun TR10.8 pts · 2.8 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 15
→TOWBig
G J. Womack6.8 pts · 3.9 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 61
G J. Starling TR10.9 pts · 2.7 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 55
←BUFSmall
G C. Ndefo2.5 pts · 2.7 reb · 0.1 ast
Score 32
F J. Pitre TR5.9 pts · 6.4 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 30
=Even
F C. Embeya3.5 pts · 5.9 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 37
F A. Lorick TR10.2 pts · 5.1 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 75
←BUFBig
F D. Badalau TR3.1 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 32
BuffaloBetterTowson
BUF offense215th of 366 · -6.6
→TOWSmall
TOW defense113th of 366 · -1.4
BUF defense257th of 366 · -6.7
=Even
TOW offense266th of 366 · -8.1
Backcourt-5.1 · 3 players
→TOWBig
Backcourt-1.4 · 3 players
Frontcourt-0.2 · 2 players
←BUFSmall
Frontcourt-1.5 · 2 players
Bench-3.9 · 4 players
→TOWBig
Bench-0.1 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestBUF betterTOW betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
D. Steffe31 min · TRD. Ducommun31 min · TRJ. Starling29 min · TRM. Tyne19 min · TRK. Jones10 minH. Reede9 min · TR
Forwards
J. Pitre25 min · TRA. Lorick22 min · TRM. Buteliauskas6 minB. JohnNewT. KuskaNew
Guards
B. Roseborough28 min · TRJ. Womack19 minC. Ndefo12 minZ. Stanford5 min · TRR. Skerry2 minC. DoerrNew
Forwards
C. Embeya21 minD. Badalau13 min · TRA. AtkinsonNewB. HolmesNewD. KirkNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 77.5 #106 | Points per game | 67.1 #332 |
| 1.14 #73 | Points per possession | 1.05 #256 |
| 68.2 #219 | Pace (possessions) | 64.0 #360 |
| Shooting | ||
| 55.4 #30 | Effective FG% | 46.5 #345 |
| 37.9 #20 | 3-point % | 29.4 #349 |
| 45.5 #57 | 3-point attempt rate | 34.9 #277 |
| 39.6 #65 | Free throw rate | 30.4 #299 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.2 #152 | Turnover rate | 15.8 #128 |
| 27.1 #291 | Offensive rebound rate | 36.0 #24 |
| 14.1 #138 | Assists per game | 9.5 #364 |
| Defense | ||
| 77.0 #244 | Points allowed | 66.4 #18 |
| 1.13 #279 | Points allowed per possession | 1.04 #73 |
| 55.1 #333 | Opponent effective FG% | 48.5 #49 |
| 35.1 #252 | Opponent 3-point % | 30.9 #33 |
| 17.8 #105 | Turnovers forced | 15.1 #271 |
| 68.9 #209 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.9 #117 |
| 7.6 #72 | Steals per game | 5.8 #253 |
| 2.8 #262 | Blocks per game | 3.3 #175 |
Buffalo
15-15 in 2025-26 overall · 7-12 in conference · Mid-American Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Akron70–73
- L@ Toledo78–99
- Wvs E Michigan72–67
- Lvs C Michigan70–75
- L@ Akron85–99
A week or more of rest.
Towson
17-15 in 2025-26 overall · 11-10 in conference · Coastal Athletic Association
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Hofstra65–68
- Wvs Charleston81–56
- Wvs Hampton74–68
- W@ Stony Brook69–57
- Wvs Campbell71–67
A week or more of rest.