Richmond Spiders vs Temple Owls: Model Line and Edge

Sun, Nov 8, 5:00 PM ETThe Palestra · Neutral site

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Richmond and Temple
RICH	This season	TEM
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 RICH 74–74 · win probability RICH 52%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 147.5

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: RICH has more of the edges

RICH 2, TEM 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

RICHSmall

Three-pointers

RICH hits 37.1% and allows 32.7%; TEM hits 33.6% and allows 32.8%. Threes are 42.6% and 35.7% of their shots

TEMSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: RICH 25.0%, TEM 29.8%. Defensive: RICH 69.0%, TEM 69.7%

Context

Tempo

About 67 possessions: RICH plays 68.8 a game (194th fastest), TEM 65.6 (325th). Faster games mean more points

RICHSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: RICH 14.3%, TEM 13.7%. Forced: RICH 17.8%, TEM 15.5%

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: RICH 36.9, TEM 40.6. Allowed: RICH 35.1, TEM 35.5

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: RICH 52.7 and allows 52.0; TEM 50.2 and allows 50.7

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: RICH 29%, TEM 38%. Transfers in: RICH 6, TEM 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Context

Schedule so far

RICH has played the 125th-hardest schedule, TEM the 110th. A record against a soft schedule means less

Even

TEM offense vs RICH defense

Offense 116th of 366 against a defense 105th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Neutral floor

No home court: the model takes it out of the line

Even

RICH offense vs TEM defense

Offense 113th of 366 against a defense 108th, on the model’s ratings

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	—	RICH -0.5	—
Total	—	147.5	—
Projected score	—	RICH 74 · TEM 73.5

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	RICH -0.4	—
1H total	69.0	—
1H projected score	RICH 34.7 · TEM 34.3	—

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	Neutral	Role
RICH WLWWL	16-15	52%	0-3	—
TEM WLWWL	14-17	45%	0-5	—

Venue/role: RICH neutral site; TEM neutral site. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
RICH OUUOO	14-17	45%	14-17
TEM OOOOU	17-14	55%	15-16

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
RICH	2-8 20%	6-4 60%	5-5 50%
TEM	2-8 20%	4-6 40%	6-4 60%

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

Richmond

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 12	@ SIU	W93–84WO
Nov 16	@ VT	L58–74LU
Nov 20	vs WKU	No recent meeting

Temple

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 11	vs COFC	No recent meeting
Nov 15	@ LAS	W90–63WO
Nov 20	vs MTSU	No recent meeting

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

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

RICH 1–0 TEMRICH leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · RICH 1-0 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Nov 22, 2022-23	TEM 49 vs RICH 61	RICH +1	RICH W

ATS History · 2025-26

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

Richmond

31 games played

Straight up

14-17

45% wins

Against the spread

16-15

52% covers · avg +0.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-17

45% overs · avg +0.7 pts vs the total

Straight up

14-1745%

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

4 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

16-1552%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

14-1745%

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

2 straight overs2 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 8	vsECU	W 87-72	-5.5	W +9.5	143.5	O 159
Nov 11	vsW&M	W 90-86	-9.5	L −5.5	164.5	O 176
Nov 19	vsVMI	W 87-54	-14.5	W +18.5	152.5	U 141
Nov 22	vsGWEB	W 102-67	-19.5	W +15.5	154.5	O 169
Nov 27	vsFUR	L 72-73	-3.5	L −4.5	147.5	U 145
Nov 28	vsCLT	W 71-66	-6.5	L −1.5	141.5	U 137
Dec 3	@BEL	W 84-76	+6.5	W +14.5	156.5	O 160
Dec 6	vsODU	W 86-77	-12.5	L −3.5	153.5	O 163
Dec 13	vsSIU	W 93-84	-3.5	W +5.5	153.5	O 177
Dec 17	@ELON	L 70-73	-3.5	L −6.5	161.5	U 143
Dec 20	vsCIT	W 80-56	-18.5	W +5.5	146.5	U 136
Dec 28	vsCHSO	L 72-77	-11.5	L −16.5	159.5	U 149
Dec 31	vsGW	L 85-99	+2.5	L −11.5	162.5	O 184
Jan 4	@FOR	W 83-75	-2.5	W +5.5	142.5	O 158
Jan 7	@SBU	W 89-80	+6.5	W +15.5	153.5	O 169
Jan 11	vsJOES	L 65-67	-7.5	L −9.5	150.5	U 132
Jan 14	vsLAS	W 74-53	-8.5	W +12.5	147.5	U 127
Jan 17	@SLU	L 63-88	+14.5	L −10.5	162.5	U 151
Jan 21	vsURI	L 68-69	-3.5	L −4.5	144.5	U 137
Jan 24	@GW	L 69-85	+10.5	L −5.5	159.5	U 154
Jan 27	@VCU	L 69-77	+12.5	W +4.5	155.5	U 146
Jan 31	vsDAV	L 54-79	-1.5	L −26.5	140.5	U 133
Feb 7	@URI	L 77-82	+5.5	W +0.5	142.5	O 159
Feb 10	vsGMU	W 82-70	+3.5	W +15.5	139.5	O 152
Feb 14	vsVCU	L 67-78	+7.5	L −3.5	154.5	U 145
Feb 18	@DAV	L 63-65	+5.5	W +3.5	141.5	U 128
Feb 21	vsSBU	W 99-94	-1.5	W +3.5	147.5	O 193
Feb 28	@LUC	L 66-69	-2.5	L −5.5	146.5	U 135
Mar 3	vsDAY	L 60-65	+5.5	W +0.5	144.5	U 125
Mar 7	@DUQ	L 77-79	+4.5	W +2.5	147.5	O 156
Mar 11	vsLUC	L 67-75	-4.5	L −12.5	141.5	O 142

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

ECU

W 87-72

+9.5

W&M

W 90-86

−5.5

VMI

W 87-54

+18.5

GWEB

W 102-67

+15.5

FUR

L 72-73

−4.5

CLT

W 71-66

−1.5

BEL

W 84-76

+14.5

ODU

W 86-77

−3.5

SIU

W 93-84

+5.5

ELON

L 70-73

−6.5

CIT

W 80-56

+5.5

CHSO

L 72-77

−16.5

L 85-99

−11.5

FOR

W 83-75

+5.5

SBU

W 89-80

+15.5

JOES

L 65-67

−9.5

LAS

W 74-53

+12.5

SLU

L 63-88

−10.5

URI

L 68-69

−4.5

L 69-85

−5.5

VCU

L 69-77

+4.5

DAV

L 54-79

−26.5

URI

L 77-82

+0.5

GMU

W 82-70

+15.5

VCU

L 67-78

−3.5

DAV

L 63-65

+3.5

SBU

W 99-94

+3.5

LUC

L 66-69

−5.5

DAY

L 60-65

+0.5

DUQ

L 77-79

+2.5

LUC

L 67-75

−12.5

covered 16didn’t cover 15avg +0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

ECU

W 87-72

+15.5

W&M

W 90-86

+11.5

VMI

W 87-54

−11.5

GWEB

W 102-67

+14.5

FUR

L 72-73

−2.5

CLT

W 71-66

−4.5

BEL

W 84-76

+3.5

ODU

W 86-77

+9.5

SIU

W 93-84

+23.5

ELON

L 70-73

−18.5

CIT

W 80-56

−10.5

CHSO

L 72-77

−10.5

L 85-99

+21.5

FOR

W 83-75

+15.5

SBU

W 89-80

+15.5

JOES

L 65-67

−18.5

LAS

W 74-53

−20.5

SLU

L 63-88

−11.5

URI

L 68-69

−7.5

L 69-85

−5.5

VCU

L 69-77

−9.5

DAV

L 54-79

−7.5

URI

L 77-82

+16.5

GMU

W 82-70

+12.5

VCU

L 67-78

−9.5

DAV

L 63-65

−13.5

SBU

W 99-94

+45.5

LUC

L 66-69

−11.5

DAY

L 60-65

−19.5

DUQ

L 77-79

+8.5

LUC

L 67-75

+0.5

over 14under 17avg +0.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

Temple

31 games played

Straight up

15-16

48% wins

Against the spread

14-17

45% covers · avg +0.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

17-14

55% overs · avg −1 pts vs the total

Straight up

15-1648%

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

2 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

14-1745%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

17-1455%

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

3 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 5	vsDSU	W 83-65	-16.5	W +1.5	154.5	U 148
Nov 11	vsLAS	W 90-63	-6.5	W +20.5	148.5	O 153
Nov 15	vsBC	L 71-76	-3.5	L −8.5	142.5	O 147
Nov 19	vsHOF	W 81-76	-5.5	L −0.5	145.5	O 157
Nov 24	vsUCSD	L 76-91	-1.5	L −16.5	148.5	O 167
Nov 25	vsPRIN	W 79-75	-8.5	L −4.5	145.5	O 154
Nov 26	vsURI	L 75-90	+3.5	L −11.5	149.5	O 165
Dec 1	@VILL	L 56-74	+14.5	L −3.5	146.5	U 130
Dec 6	vsJOES	L 69-70	-1.5	L −2.5	147.5	U 139
Dec 14	vsSFPA	W 95-67	-20.5	W +7.5	150.5	O 162
Dec 18	@DAV	W 68-63	+5.5	W +10.5	141.5	U 131
Dec 22	vsPRIN	W 65-61	-8.5	L −4.5	139.5	U 126
Dec 30	@CLT	W 76-73	+1.5	W +4.5	138.5	O 149
Jan 3	vsUTSA	W 76-57	-10.5	W +8.5	149.5	U 133
Jan 7	vsECU	W 75-67	-7.5	W +0.5	143.5	U 142
Jan 14	@MEM	L 53-55	+7.5	W +5.5	143.5	U 108
Jan 18	vsFAU	L 73-79	+2.5	L −3.5	148.5	O 152
Jan 21	@RICE	W 69-65	+1.5	W +5.5	142.5	U 134
Jan 24	@UTSA	W 70-64	-10.5	L −4.5	145.5	U 134
Jan 28	vsCLT	L 76-80	-4.5	L −8.5	139.5	O 156
Jan 31	vsUSF	W 79-78	+9.5	W +10.5	154.5	O 157
Feb 7	@ECU	W 81-73	-2.5	W +5.5	140.5	O 154
Feb 11	@TULN	L 66-77	+1.5	L −9.5	144.5	U 143
Feb 15	vsUNT	L 62-65	-2.5	L −5.5	135.5	U 127
Feb 18	vsUAB	L 71-76	-1.5	L −6.5	143.5	O 147
Feb 21	@WICH	L 57-69	+8.5	L −3.5	144.5	U 126
Feb 26	@FAU	L 73-77	+4.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 150
Mar 1	vsRICE	L 74-80	-6.5	L −12.5	142.5	O 154
Mar 5	vsTULN	W 89-60	-4.5	W +24.5	144.5	O 149
Mar 8	@TLSA	L 76-78	+11.5	W +9.5	149.5	O 154
Mar 11	vsFAU	L 59-63	-1.5	L −5.5	144.5	U 122

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

DSU

W 83-65

+1.5

LAS

W 90-63

+20.5

L 71-76

−8.5

HOF

W 81-76

−0.5

UCSD

L 76-91

−16.5

PRIN

W 79-75

−4.5

URI

L 75-90

−11.5

VILL

L 56-74

−3.5

JOES

L 69-70

−2.5

SFPA

W 95-67

+7.5

DAV

W 68-63

+10.5

PRIN

W 65-61

−4.5

CLT

W 76-73

+4.5

UTSA

W 76-57

+8.5

ECU

W 75-67

+0.5

MEM

L 53-55

+5.5

FAU

L 73-79

−3.5

RICE

W 69-65

+5.5

UTSA

W 70-64

−4.5

CLT

L 76-80

−8.5

USF

W 79-78

+10.5

ECU

W 81-73

+5.5

TULN

L 66-77

−9.5

UNT

L 62-65

−5.5

UAB

L 71-76

−6.5

WICH

L 57-69

−3.5

FAU

L 73-77

+0.5

RICE

L 74-80

−12.5

TULN

W 89-60

+24.5

TLSA

L 76-78

+9.5

FAU

L 59-63

−5.5

covered 14didn’t cover 17avg +0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

DSU

W 83-65

−6.5

LAS

W 90-63

+4.5

L 71-76

+4.5

HOF

W 81-76

+11.5

UCSD

L 76-91

+18.5

PRIN

W 79-75

+8.5

URI

L 75-90

+15.5

VILL

L 56-74

−16.5

JOES

L 69-70

−8.5

SFPA

W 95-67

+11.5

DAV

W 68-63

−10.5

PRIN

W 65-61

−13.5

CLT

W 76-73

+10.5

UTSA

W 76-57

−16.5

ECU

W 75-67

−1.5

MEM

L 53-55

−35.5

FAU

L 73-79

+3.5

RICE

W 69-65

−8.5

UTSA

W 70-64

−11.5

CLT

L 76-80

+16.5

USF

W 79-78

+2.5

ECU

W 81-73

+13.5

TULN

L 66-77

−1.5

UNT

L 62-65

−8.5

UAB

L 71-76

+3.5

WICH

L 57-69

−18.5

FAU

L 73-77

+4.5

RICE

L 74-80

+11.5

TULN

W 89-60

+4.5

TLSA

L 76-78

+4.5

FAU

L 59-63

−22.5

over 17under 14avg −1 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

The starting fives are even

Position by position: Richmond 2, Temple 2, even 1

RichmondBetterTemple

G D. Saran TR11.3 pts · 5 reb · 3.1 ast Score 52

TEMSmall

G D. Ford18.1 pts · 4.3 reb · 1.9 ast Score 86

G A. Argabright10.8 pts · 2 reb · 2 ast Score 87

RICHBig

G D. White TR9.7 pts · 2.7 reb · 2.1 ast Score 44

G D. Stewart TR6.6 pts · 2.2 reb · 1.6 ast Score 44

TEMSmall

G G. Griffiths10 pts · 4.9 reb · 1.3 ast Score 68

F J. Kaiser TR9.5 pts · 4.3 reb · 1 ast Score 60

RICHSmall

F B. Njie TR9.6 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.3 ast Score 45

C A. Dorries TR16.2 pts · 4.4 reb · 1.4 ast Score 62

Even

F E. Suarez TR9.3 pts · 6.1 reb · 1.1 ast Score 54

RichmondBetterTemple

RICH offense113th of 366 · -2.0

Even

TEM defense108th of 366 · -1.1

RICH defense105th of 366 · -1.0

Even

TEM offense116th of 366 · -2.5

Backcourt+0.4 · 3 players

TEMSmall

Backcourt+1.9 · 3 players

Frontcourt+1.5 · 2 players

RICHSmall

Frontcourt-0.6 · 2 players

Bench-1.0 · 5 players

Even

Bench-1.1 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestRICH betterTEM 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

Richmond

Guards

D. Saran30 min · TRA. Argabright24 minD. Stewart23 min · TRC. Tanner18 minW. Harper11 minK. Mooney5 min

Forwards

J. Kaiser29 min · TRA. Ball21 min · TRJ. McCaffery10 min · TRC. CookNewD. CaldwellNew

Centers

A. Dorries33 min · TRD. HomenickNew

Temple

Guards

D. Ford36 minD. White30 min · TRG. Griffiths29 minJ. Marsh18 min · TRC. Wallace6 minD. DrakeNew

Forwards

B. Njie26 min · TRE. Suarez22 min · TRS. Issac Herron13 min · TR

Centers

C. Beam16 min · TRM. Keita5 min

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

RICH76.5 #132

TEM73.0 #224

Points per possession

RICH1.11 #119

TEM1.11 #115

Pace (possessions)

RICH68.8 #194

TEM65.6 #325

Shooting

Effective FG%

RICH52.7 #115

TEM50.2 #229

3-point %

RICH37.1 #28

TEM33.6 #194

3-point attempt rate

RICH42.6 #126

TEM35.7 #255

Free throw rate

RICH36.9 #133

TEM40.6 #52

Possessions

Turnover rate

RICH14.3 #32

TEM13.7 #18

Offensive rebound rate

RICH25.0 #340

TEM29.8 #209

Assists per game

RICH14.0 #145

TEM11.9 #290

Defense

Points allowed

RICH74.5 #175

TEM71.2 #77

Points allowed per possession

RICH1.09 #183

TEM1.08 #177

Opponent effective FG%

RICH52.0 #216

TEM50.7 #137

Opponent 3-point %

RICH32.7 #103

TEM32.8 #107

Turnovers forced

RICH17.8 #111

TEM15.5 #245

Defensive rebound rate

RICH69.0 #200

TEM69.7 #177

Steals per game

RICH6.8 #139

TEM5.7 #279

Blocks per game

RICH2.3 #323

TEM4.0 #71

RICH		TEM
Scoring
76.5 #132	Points per game	73.0 #224
1.11 #119	Points per possession	1.11 #115
68.8 #194	Pace (possessions)	65.6 #325
Shooting
52.7 #115	Effective FG%	50.2 #229
37.1 #28	3-point %	33.6 #194
42.6 #126	3-point attempt rate	35.7 #255
36.9 #133	Free throw rate	40.6 #52
Possessions
14.3 #32	Turnover rate	13.7 #18
25.0 #340	Offensive rebound rate	29.8 #209
14.0 #145	Assists per game	11.9 #290
Defense
74.5 #175	Points allowed	71.2 #77
1.09 #183	Points allowed per possession	1.08 #177
52.0 #216	Opponent effective FG%	50.7 #137
32.7 #103	Opponent 3-point %	32.8 #107
17.8 #111	Turnovers forced	15.5 #245
69.0 #200	Defensive rebound rate	69.7 #177
6.8 #139	Steals per game	5.7 #279
2.3 #323	Blocks per game	4.0 #71

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.

Richmond

14-17 in 2025-26 overall · 5-14 in conference · Atlantic 10 Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Loyola Chicago67–75
L@ Duquesne77–79
Lvs Dayton60–65
L@ Loyola Chicago66–69
Wvs St Bonaventure99–94

A week or more of rest.

Temple

15-16 in 2025-26 overall · 8-11 in conference · American Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs FAU59–63
L@ Tulsa76–78
Wvs Tulane89–60
Lvs Rice74–80
L@ FAU73–77

A week or more of rest.

Richmond Spiders vs Temple Owls

What could decide it: RICH has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

Richmond

Temple

The starting fives are even

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Richmond

Temple