Loyola Chicago Ramblers at Air Force Falcons: Model Line and Edge

Wed, Nov 11, 3:00 PM ETClune Arena · at Air Force

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Loyola Chicago and Air Force
LUC	This season	AF
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 LUC 72–67 · win probability LUC 66%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 139.6

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: LUC has more of the edges

LUC 3, AF 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

LUCBig

AF offense vs LUC defense

Offense 290th of 366 against a defense 90th, on the model’s ratings

AFBig

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: LUC 22%, AF 100%. Transfers in: LUC 9, AF 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

LUCBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: LUC 30.5%, AF 21.4%. Defensive: LUC 70.3%, AF 68.7%

LUCSmall

Shooting

Effective FG%: LUC 49.8 and allows 52.0; AF 48.9 and allows 56.4

AFSmall

Home court

AF at home. This season: AF 0-0 at home, LUC 0-0 away

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: LUC 34.8, AF 35.1. Allowed: LUC 33.6, AF 36.6

Even

Turnovers

Turnover rate: LUC 19.8%, AF 21.9%. Forced: LUC 12.9%, AF 15.1%

Context

Tempo

About 67 possessions: LUC plays 66.1 a game (309th fastest), AF 67.4 (259th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Three-pointers

LUC hits 31.7% and allows 36.8%; AF hits 30.6% and allows 37.6%. Threes are 47.7% and 41.8% of their shots

Even

LUC offense vs AF defense

Offense 132nd of 366 against a defense 149th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

LUC has played the 112th-hardest schedule, AF the 119th. A record against a soft schedule means less

Sorted by how lopsided each matchup is, from national ranks. Reasons to look, not picks: the market already knows most of this.

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	—	LUC -4.7	—
Total	—	139.6	—
Projected score	—	LUC 72.1 · AF 67.4

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	LUC -2.9	—
1H total	65.3	—
1H projected score	LUC 34.1 · AF 31.2	—

The 1st-half model is fitted from the full-game model and past halves. ESPN has no 1st-half lines for college games, so there is no market to compare it with.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

ATS

2025-26 season

	Season	Cover	Venue	Role
LUC WWWWW	13-20	39%	4-7	—
AF WWLWL	10-22	31%	5-13	—

Venue/role: LUC away; AF home. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
LUC UUUOU	15-18	45%	9-24
AF OUOUU	18-14	56%	3-29

Squares: last 5 games (O over, U under), oldest first. Tap for the score and line.

Last 10 games

2025-26

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
LUC	4-6 40%	7-3 70%	2-8 20%
AF	0-10 0%	3-7 30%	7-3 70%

Wins-losses (pushes last). Spread and over / under skip games without a line.

Next 3 games

With how the last meeting with each opponent went

Loyola Chicago

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 14	@ CSU	L67–80LU
Nov 18	vs WICH	L74–95LO
Nov 22	vs SJSU	L51–63LU

Air Force

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 14	@ PAC	L65–80LO
Nov 21	@ UTSA	No recent meeting
Nov 24	vs ARMY	W76–58WO

Last meeting: result, against the spread, over / under. Hover a result for its date.

ATS History · 2025-26

WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total

Loyola Chicago

33 games played

Straight up

9-24

27% wins

Against the spread

13-20

39% covers · avg −4.5 pts vs the line

Over / Under

15-18

45% overs · avg −1.8 pts vs the total

Straight up

9-2427%

W L L L L L L L W W L L W W L L L L L L L L L W L L L L W L W W L

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

13-2039%

L L L L L L L L W L L L W W W L L W L L L L W W L L W L W W W W W

5 straight covers4 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

15-1845%

O U U O U U U U O O O O O U U O O O U O U O O U O U U U U U U O U

1 of last 4 overno streak

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	vsCLE	W 91-88	-17.5	L −14.5	151.5	O 179
Nov 6	vsMERC	L 65-73	-21.5	L −29.5	144.5	U 138
Nov 9	vsUNT	L 62-64	-1.5	L −3.5	138.5	U 126
Nov 13	@WICH	L 74-95	+5.5	L −15.5	153.5	O 169
Nov 16	vsCSU	L 67-80	+3.5	L −9.5	151.5	U 147
Nov 21	vsNIU	L 59-76	-13.5	L −30.5	148.5	U 135
Nov 25	vsUNI	L 51-72	+8.5	L −12.5	134.5	U 123
Nov 26	vsSJSU	L 51-63	+1.5	L −10.5	136.5	U 114
Dec 2	vsCMU	W 83-72	-6.5	W +4.5	140.5	O 155
Dec 6	vsPRIN	W 73-68	-6.5	L −1.5	136.5	O 141
Dec 14	vsCHST	L 75-84	-15.5	L −24.5	140.5	O 159
Dec 17	@SF	L 71-85	+11.5	L −2.5	143.5	O 156
Dec 20	vsSCU	W 80-78	+15.5	W +17.5	151.5	O 158
Dec 31	@URI	W 61-57	+9.5	W +13.5	145.5	U 118
Jan 3	vsDAY	L 68-70	+7.5	W +5.5	140.5	U 138
Jan 7	vsDAV	L 64-79	+1.5	L −13.5	136.5	O 143
Jan 10	@GW	L 66-101	+14.5	L −20.5	154.5	O 167
Jan 13	vsGMU	L 74-82	+11.5	W +3.5	140.5	O 156
Jan 16	@DAY	L 51-78	+16.5	L −10.5	141.5	U 129
Jan 20	@SBU	L 70-84	+10.5	L −3.5	147.5	O 154
Jan 24	vsDUQ	L 59-71	+5.5	L −6.5	152.5	U 130
Jan 27	vsJOES	L 64-85	+1.5	L −19.5	143.5	O 149
Jan 30	@VCU	L 75-89	+18.5	W +4.5	150.5	O 164
Feb 3	vsLAS	W 71-61	-2.5	W +7.5	140.5	U 132
Feb 6	@DAV	L 64-84	+9.5	L −10.5	140.5	O 148
Feb 13	vsSLU	L 59-86	+17.5	L −9.5	155.5	U 145
Feb 18	@FOR	L 59-62	+8.5	W +5.5	135.5	U 121
Feb 21	@JOES	L 61-75	+9.5	L −4.5	142.5	U 136
Feb 28	vsRICH	W 69-66	+2.5	W +5.5	146.5	U 135
Mar 4	@SLU	L 65-79	+21.5	W +7.5	155.5	U 144
Mar 7	vsGW	W 68-62	+9.5	W +15.5	148.5	U 130
Mar 11	vsRICH	W 75-67	+4.5	W +12.5	141.5	O 142
Mar 12	vsDAV	L 59-64	+5.5	W +0.5	132.5	U 123

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

CLE

W 91-88

−14.5

MERC

L 65-73

−29.5

UNT

L 62-64

−3.5

WICH

L 74-95

−15.5

CSU

L 67-80

−9.5

NIU

L 59-76

−30.5

UNI

L 51-72

−12.5

SJSU

L 51-63

−10.5

CMU

W 83-72

+4.5

PRIN

W 73-68

−1.5

CHST

L 75-84

−24.5

L 71-85

−2.5

SCU

W 80-78

+17.5

URI

W 61-57

+13.5

DAY

L 68-70

+5.5

DAV

L 64-79

−13.5

L 66-101

−20.5

GMU

L 74-82

+3.5

DAY

L 51-78

−10.5

SBU

L 70-84

−3.5

DUQ

L 59-71

−6.5

JOES

L 64-85

−19.5

VCU

L 75-89

+4.5

LAS

W 71-61

+7.5

DAV

L 64-84

−10.5

SLU

L 59-86

−9.5

FOR

L 59-62

+5.5

JOES

L 61-75

−4.5

RICH

W 69-66

+5.5

SLU

L 65-79

+7.5

W 68-62

+15.5

RICH

W 75-67

+12.5

DAV

L 59-64

+0.5

covered 13didn’t cover 20avg −4.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

CLE

W 91-88

+27.5

MERC

L 65-73

−6.5

UNT

L 62-64

−12.5

WICH

L 74-95

+15.5

CSU

L 67-80

−4.5

NIU

L 59-76

−13.5

UNI

L 51-72

−11.5

SJSU

L 51-63

−22.5

CMU

W 83-72

+14.5

PRIN

W 73-68

+4.5

CHST

L 75-84

+18.5

L 71-85

+12.5

SCU

W 80-78

+6.5

URI

W 61-57

−27.5

DAY

L 68-70

−2.5

DAV

L 64-79

+6.5

L 66-101

+12.5

GMU

L 74-82

+15.5

DAY

L 51-78

−12.5

SBU

L 70-84

+6.5

DUQ

L 59-71

−22.5

JOES

L 64-85

+5.5

VCU

L 75-89

+13.5

LAS

W 71-61

−8.5

DAV

L 64-84

+7.5

SLU

L 59-86

−10.5

FOR

L 59-62

−14.5

JOES

L 61-75

−6.5

RICH

W 69-66

−11.5

SLU

L 65-79

−11.5

W 68-62

−18.5

RICH

W 75-67

+0.5

DAV

L 59-64

−9.5

over 15under 18avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

Air Force

32 games played

Straight up

3-29

9% wins

Against the spread

10-22

31% covers · avg −4.8 pts vs the line

Over / Under

18-14

56% overs · avg 0 pts vs the total

Straight up

3-299%

L L L L W W W L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L

25 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

10-2231%

L L W L L W W L L L W W W L L L L L L L L W L L L L L W W L W L

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

18-1456%

U U O U U O O U U O U O U U O O O O U O U O O O O O O O U O U U

2 straight unders1 of last 4 over

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	@BEL	L 63-79	+15.5	L −0.5	144.5	U 142
Nov 8	vsAPSU	L 54-74	+1.5	L −18.5	136.5	U 128
Nov 11	vsLIU	L 72-76	+5.5	W +1.5	137.5	O 148
Nov 15	vsM-OH	L 61-76	+10.5	L −4.5	143.5	U 137
Nov 19	vsALST	W 66-64	-2.5	L −0.5	138.5	U 130
Nov 21	vsSIUE	W 77-63	+2.5	W +16.5	130.5	O 140
Nov 23	vsIUIN	W 98-85	-3.5	W +9.5	175.5	O 183
Nov 26	vsUNCO	L 53-71	+4.5	L −13.5	146.5	U 124
Nov 29	vsSDAK	L 63-80	+3.5	L −13.5	147.5	U 143
Dec 3	vsPAC	L 65-80	+5.5	L −9.5	134.5	O 145
Dec 7	@NAVY	L 56-61	+9.5	W +4.5	133.5	U 117
Dec 17	@SDSU	L 58-81	+24.5	W +1.5	135.5	O 139
Dec 30	vsWYO	L 56-68	+14.5	W +2.5	146.5	U 124
Jan 3	@UNLV	L 39-67	+14.5	L −13.5	142.5	U 106
Jan 6	vsUSU	L 62-99	+22.5	L −14.5	139.5	O 161
Jan 10	vsUNM	L 49-91	+16.5	L −25.5	138.5	O 140
Jan 13	@SJSU	L 62-70	+5.5	L −2.5	128.5	O 132
Jan 17	vsNEV	L 66-81	+14.5	L −0.5	134.5	O 147
Jan 20	@CSU	L 52-81	+19.5	L −9.5	133.5	U 133
Jan 24	@BOIS	L 54-96	+23.5	L −18.5	137.5	O 150
Jan 31	vsFRES	L 62-79	+9.5	L −7.5	141.5	U 141
Feb 3	@GCU	L 57-81	+26.5	W +2.5	137.5	O 138
Feb 7	vsSDSU	L 54-88	+22.5	L −11.5	139.5	O 142
Feb 10	vsCSU	L 74-91	+16.5	L −0.5	137.5	O 165
Feb 14	@FRES	L 63-93	+14.5	L −15.5	142.5	O 156
Feb 17	@UNM	L 61-98	+28.5	L −8.5	148.5	O 159
Feb 21	vsUNLV	L 66-91	+16.5	L −8.5	153.5	O 157
Feb 24	vsSJSU	L 80-86	+6.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 166
Feb 28	@WYO	L 62-66	+20.5	W +16.5	145.5	U 128
Mar 3	vsGCU	L 60-86	+19.5	L −6.5	143.5	O 146
Mar 7	@NEV	L 59-74	+24.5	W +9.5	144.5	U 133
Mar 11	vsNEV	L 45-80	+19.5	L −15.5	140.5	U 125

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

BEL

L 63-79

−0.5

APSU

L 54-74

−18.5

LIU

L 72-76

+1.5

M-OH

L 61-76

−4.5

ALST

W 66-64

−0.5

SIUE

W 77-63

+16.5

IUIN

W 98-85

+9.5

UNCO

L 53-71

−13.5

SDAK

L 63-80

−13.5

PAC

L 65-80

−9.5

NAVY

L 56-61

+4.5

SDSU

L 58-81

+1.5

WYO

L 56-68

+2.5

UNLV

L 39-67

−13.5

USU

L 62-99

−14.5

UNM

L 49-91

−25.5

SJSU

L 62-70

−2.5

NEV

L 66-81

−0.5

CSU

L 52-81

−9.5

BOIS

L 54-96

−18.5

FRES

L 62-79

−7.5

GCU

L 57-81

+2.5

SDSU

L 54-88

−11.5

CSU

L 74-91

−0.5

FRES

L 63-93

−15.5

UNM

L 61-98

−8.5

UNLV

L 66-91

−8.5

SJSU

L 80-86

+0.5

WYO

L 62-66

+16.5

GCU

L 60-86

−6.5

NEV

L 59-74

+9.5

NEV

L 45-80

−15.5

covered 10didn’t cover 22avg −4.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

BEL

L 63-79

−2.5

APSU

L 54-74

−8.5

LIU

L 72-76

+10.5

M-OH

L 61-76

−6.5

ALST

W 66-64

−8.5

SIUE

W 77-63

+9.5

IUIN

W 98-85

+7.5

UNCO

L 53-71

−22.5

SDAK

L 63-80

−4.5

PAC

L 65-80

+10.5

NAVY

L 56-61

−16.5

SDSU

L 58-81

+3.5

WYO

L 56-68

−22.5

UNLV

L 39-67

−36.5

USU

L 62-99

+21.5

UNM

L 49-91

+1.5

SJSU

L 62-70

+3.5

NEV

L 66-81

+12.5

CSU

L 52-81

−0.5

BOIS

L 54-96

+12.5

FRES

L 62-79

−0.5

GCU

L 57-81

+0.5

SDSU

L 54-88

+2.5

CSU

L 74-91

+27.5

FRES

L 63-93

+13.5

UNM

L 61-98

+10.5

UNLV

L 66-91

+3.5

SJSU

L 80-86

+20.5

WYO

L 62-66

−17.5

GCU

L 60-86

+2.5

NEV

L 59-74

−11.5

NEV

L 45-80

−15.5

over 18under 14avg 0 ptslonger = bigger margin

Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.

Air Force has the better starters

Position by position: Loyola Chicago 1, Air Force 2, even 2

Loyola ChicagoBetterAir Force

G D. Hand TR12.4 pts · 4.4 reb · 1.3 ast Score 58

AFSmall

G K. Sanders12.5 pts · 4.2 reb · 3.8 ast Score 77

G D. Nessah TR15.8 pts · 6.3 reb · 2.4 ast Score 91

LUCBig

G E. Greenberg6.6 pts · 2.3 reb · 1 ast Score 18

G R. Agarwal TR5.9 pts · 4.1 reb · 0.8 ast Score 26

Even

F L. Hobin11.4 pts · 2 reb · 0.6 ast Score 26

F E. Ricks TR7.3 pts · 5.6 reb · 1.6 ast Score 53

Even

F E. Robinson7.8 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.6 ast Score 39

F X. Amos11.1 pts · 4.3 reb · 0.7 ast Score 65

AFSmall

F C. Walker10.4 pts · 5 reb · 0.8 ast Score 82

Loyola ChicagoBetterAir Force

LUC offense132nd of 366 · -3.9

Even

AF defense149th of 366 · -3.3

LUC defense90th of 366 · -0.2

LUCBig

AF offense290th of 366 · -8.9

Backcourt+0.8 · 3 players

LUCSmall

Backcourt-1.6 · 2 players

Frontcourt+0.4 · 2 players

LUCSmall

Frontcourt-1.3 · 3 players

Bench+0.6 · 5 players

LUCBig

Bench-7.9 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestLUC betterAF betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers

Projected starters: college teams publish no depth chart, so these come from minutes played, and a freshman or a new starter can change them. The score is the share of ranked players at the position that player is ahead of. Numbers are this season's once a player has 30 minutes, 2025-26's before that. Bench is the next five by minutes. Tap a player for the full numbers.

Depth chart

Projected rotation by position, starters outlined

Loyola Chicago

Guards

D. Hand31 min · TRD. Nessah28 min · TRR. Agarwal22 min · TRN. Anderson17 minJ. Dawson10 min · TRC. Jeffrey8 min · TR

Forwards

E. Ricks27 min · TRX. Amos26 minE. Rapieque15 min · TRA. WingNew

Centers

J. Schofield17 min · TRM. Diallo7 min · TRR. KreagerNew

Air Force

Guards

K. Sanders30 minE. Greenberg27 minA. Patterson14 minJ. Hinds12 minE. Taite2 minT. KeeneNew

Forwards

L. Hobin29 minE. Robinson28 minC. Walker22 minR. Dering14 minK. Gilles13 minB. Martin5 min

Centers

W. Celichowski21 minM. CaslaruNew

In order of minutes, from rosters as of today. ESPN lists players only as guards, forwards or centers, and no injury report exists for college basketball, so a player who is out may still show here.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams

ChartTable

Scoring

Points per game

LUC66.8 #337

AF61.5 #362

Points per possession

LUC1.01 #313

AF0.91 #363

Pace (possessions)

LUC66.1 #309

AF67.4 #259

Shooting

Effective FG%

LUC49.8 #246

AF48.9 #292

3-point %

LUC31.7 #296

AF30.6 #332

3-point attempt rate

LUC47.7 #27

AF41.8 #139

Free throw rate

LUC34.8 #188

AF35.1 #174

Possessions

Turnover rate

LUC19.8 #343

AF21.9 #362

Offensive rebound rate

LUC30.5 #179

AF21.4 #360

Assists per game

LUC13.9 #151

AF12.2 #273

Defense

Points allowed

LUC75.8 #212

AF79.9 #316

Points allowed per possession

LUC1.14 #315

AF1.19 #352

Opponent effective FG%

LUC52.0 #214

AF56.4 #350

Opponent 3-point %

LUC36.8 #342

AF37.6 #352

Turnovers forced

LUC12.9 #357

AF15.1 #280

Defensive rebound rate

LUC70.3 #146

AF68.7 #215

Steals per game

LUC4.1 #363

AF5.6 #281

Blocks per game

LUC3.8 #101

AF2.4 #316

LUC		AF
Scoring
66.8 #337	Points per game	61.5 #362
1.01 #313	Points per possession	0.91 #363
66.1 #309	Pace (possessions)	67.4 #259
Shooting
49.8 #246	Effective FG%	48.9 #292
31.7 #296	3-point %	30.6 #332
47.7 #27	3-point attempt rate	41.8 #139
34.8 #188	Free throw rate	35.1 #174
Possessions
19.8 #343	Turnover rate	21.9 #362
30.5 #179	Offensive rebound rate	21.4 #360
13.9 #151	Assists per game	12.2 #273
Defense
75.8 #212	Points allowed	79.9 #316
1.14 #315	Points allowed per possession	1.19 #352
52.0 #214	Opponent effective FG%	56.4 #350
36.8 #342	Opponent 3-point %	37.6 #352
12.9 #357	Turnovers forced	15.1 #280
70.3 #146	Defensive rebound rate	68.7 #215
4.1 #363	Steals per game	5.6 #281
3.8 #101	Blocks per game	2.4 #316

From the box scores. A longer bar is a better national rank, on every row; the better team's bar is solid. A green rank is near the top of Division I, a red one near the bottom. Pace and 3-point rate are styles, so they have no better side.

Loyola Chicago

9-24 in 2025-26 overall · 5-15 in conference · Atlantic 10 Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Davidson59–64
Wvs Richmond75–67
Wvs G Washington68–62
L@ Saint Louis65–79
Wvs Richmond69–66

A week or more of rest.

Air Force

3-29 in 2025-26 overall · 0-21 in conference · Mountain West Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Nevada45–80
L@ Nevada59–74
Lvs Grand Canyon60–86
L@ Wyoming62–66
Lvs San José St80–86

A week or more of rest.

Loyola Chicago Ramblers at Air Force Falcons

What could decide it: LUC has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Loyola Chicago

Air Force

Air Force has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Loyola Chicago

Air Force