Nationwide Arena · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SLU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SLU 81–79 · win probability SLU 57%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 159.6
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: SLU has more of the edges
USF 2, SLU 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Three-pointers
USF hits 32.5% and allows 34.5%; SLU hits 39.9% and allows 30.3%. Threes are 43.8% and 45.1% of their shots
Turnovers
Turnover rate: USF 15.1%, SLU 17.2%. Forced: USF 19.1%, SLU 15.9%
Shooting
Effective FG%: USF 50.6 and allows 48.8; SLU 59.7 and allows 45.2
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: USF 14%, SLU 63%. Transfers in: USF 10, SLU 2. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Free throws
Free throw rate: USF 40.4, SLU 33.7. Allowed: USF 39.0, SLU 37.1
SLU offense vs USF defense
Offense 61st of 366 against a defense 121st, on the model’s ratings
Even
USF offense vs SLU defense
Offense 59th of 366 against a defense 87th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: USF 38.1%, SLU 30.7%. Defensive: USF 68.1%, SLU 72.8%
Context
Tempo
About 73 possessions: USF plays 74.4 a game (9th fastest), SLU 72.1 (32nd). Faster games mean more points
Context
Schedule so far
USF has played the 89th-hardest schedule, SLU the 99th. A record against a soft schedule means less
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 | — | SLU -2.1 | — |
| Total | — | 159.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | USF 78.8 · SLU 80.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SLU -1.1 | — |
| 1H total | 74.6 | — |
| 1H projected score | USF 36.7 · SLU 37.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 9-1 90% | 7-3 70% | 2-8 20% | |
| 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
South Florida
33 games played
Straight up
24-9
73% wins
Against the spread
18-15
55% covers · avg +1.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-18
45% overs · avg +1 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 102-67 | -25.5 | W +9.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 8 | vs | L 95-99 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 159.5 | O 194 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 100-50 | -34.5 | W +15.5 | 167.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 16 | @ | W 108-89 | -7.5 | W +11.5 | 177.5 | O 197 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 95-103 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 177.5 | O 198 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 66-78 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 172.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 97-91 | -7.5 | L −1.5 | 167.5 | O 188 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 68-83 | -2.5 | L −17.5 | 155.5 | U 151 |
| Dec 4 | vs | W 74-61 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 162.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 81-75 | -13.5 | L −7.5 | 160.5 | U 156 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 93-104 | +14.5 | W +3.5 | 178.5 | O 197 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 94-69 | -22.5 | W +2.5 | 160.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 4 | vs | L 106-109 | -8.5 | L −11.5 | 163.5 | O 215 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 74-70 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 93-78 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 163.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 82-71 | -18.5 | L −7.5 | 158.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 18 | vs | L 85-86 | -7.5 | L −8.5 | 158.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 82-69 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 168.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 25 | vs | W 89-75 | -5.5 | W +8.5 | 166.5 | U 164 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 97-83 | -8.5 | W +5.5 | 158.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 78-79 | -9.5 | L −10.5 | 154.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 109-88 | -23.5 | L −2.5 | 164.5 | O 197 |
| Feb 8 | vs | W 80-74 | -4.5 | W +1.5 | 170.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 66-58 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 160.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 15 | @ | W 83-81 | -4.5 | L −2.5 | 165.5 | U 164 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 87-66 | -9.5 | W +11.5 | 163.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 75-56 | -11.5 | W +7.5 | 157.5 | U 131 |
| Mar 1 | vs | W 90-62 | -15.5 | W +12.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Mar 5 | @ | W 96-89 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 163.5 | O 185 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 83-60 | -17.5 | W +5.5 | 156.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 86-64 | -15.5 | W +6.5 | 153.5 | U 150 |
| Mar 15 | vs | W 70-55 | -6.5 | W +8.5 | 151.5 | U 125 |
| Mar 19 | vs | L 79-83 | +3.5 | L −0.5 | 160.5 | O 162 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
FAMU
W 102-67
+9.5
8
vs
GW
L 95-99
−5.5
12
vs
COPP
W 100-50
+15.5
16
@
KENN
W 108-89
+11.5
19
@
OKST
L 95-103
−4.5
26
vs
VCU
L 66-78
−10.5
27
vs
WKU
W 97-91
−1.5
28
vs
CSU
L 68-83
−17.5
4
vs
USU
W 74-61
+10.5
10
vs
COFC
W 81-75
−7.5
17
@
ALA
L 93-104
+3.5
21
vs
UMBC
W 94-69
+2.5
4
vs
UAB
L 106-109
−11.5
7
@
UNT
W 74-70
−0.5
10
@
TLSA
W 93-78
+16.5
14
vs
ECU
W 82-71
−7.5
18
vs
WICH
L 85-86
−8.5
22
@
UAB
W 82-69
+10.5
25
vs
FAU
W 89-75
+8.5
28
@
TULN
W 97-83
+5.5
31
@
TEM
L 78-79
−10.5
4
vs
UTSA
W 109-88
−2.5
8
vs
TLSA
W 80-74
+1.5
11
@
WICH
W 66-58
+5.5
15
@
FAU
W 83-81
−2.5
19
vs
MEM
W 87-66
+11.5
25
@
RICE
W 75-56
+7.5
1
vs
TULN
W 90-62
+12.5
5
@
MEM
W 96-89
−0.5
8
vs
CLT
W 83-60
+5.5
14
vs
CLT
W 86-64
+6.5
15
vs
WICH
W 70-55
+8.5
19
vs
LOU
L 79-83
−0.5
covered 18didn’t cover 15avg +1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
FAMU
W 102-67
+15.5
8
vs
GW
L 95-99
+34.5
12
vs
COPP
W 100-50
−17.5
16
@
KENN
W 108-89
+19.5
19
@
OKST
L 95-103
+20.5
26
vs
VCU
L 66-78
−28.5
27
vs
WKU
W 97-91
+20.5
28
vs
CSU
L 68-83
−4.5
4
vs
USU
W 74-61
−27.5
10
vs
COFC
W 81-75
−4.5
17
@
ALA
L 93-104
+18.5
21
vs
UMBC
W 94-69
+2.5
4
vs
UAB
L 106-109
+51.5
7
@
UNT
W 74-70
−3.5
10
@
TLSA
W 93-78
+7.5
14
vs
ECU
W 82-71
−5.5
18
vs
WICH
L 85-86
+12.5
22
@
UAB
W 82-69
−17.5
25
vs
FAU
W 89-75
−2.5
28
@
TULN
W 97-83
+21.5
31
@
TEM
L 78-79
+2.5
4
vs
UTSA
W 109-88
+32.5
8
vs
TLSA
W 80-74
−16.5
11
@
WICH
W 66-58
−36.5
15
@
FAU
W 83-81
−1.5
19
vs
MEM
W 87-66
−10.5
25
@
RICE
W 75-56
−26.5
1
vs
TULN
W 90-62
−3.5
5
@
MEM
W 96-89
+21.5
8
vs
CLT
W 83-60
−13.5
14
vs
CLT
W 86-64
−3.5
15
vs
WICH
W 70-55
−26.5
19
vs
LOU
L 79-83
+1.5
over 15under 18avg +1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Saint Louis
34 games played
Straight up
28-6
82% wins
Against the spread
20-14
59% covers · avg +2.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-17
50% overs · avg −0.4 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 92-67 | -19.5 | W +5.5 | 153.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 108-86 | -30.5 | L −8.5 | 155.5 | O 194 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 109-66 | -24.5 | W +18.5 | 165.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 78-64 | -8.5 | W +5.5 | 167.5 | U 142 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 91-60 | -19.5 | W +11.5 | 166.5 | U 151 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 71-70 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 158.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 77-78 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 160.5 | U 155 |
| Dec 2 | @ | W 91-70 | -7.5 | W +13.5 | 150.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 107-65 | -24.5 | W +17.5 | 160.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 85-75 | -12.5 | L −2.5 | 155.5 | O 160 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 112-53 | -26.5 | W +32.5 | 157.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 93-79 | -34.5 | L −20.5 | 157.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 102-79 | -19.5 | W +3.5 | 161.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 71-62 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 171.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 84-72 | -17.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 78-56 | -17.5 | W +4.5 | 154.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 88-63 | -14.5 | W +10.5 | 162.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 20 | @ | W 81-77 | -8.5 | L −4.5 | 165.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 23 | @ | W 97-62 | -8.5 | W +26.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 79-76 | -10.5 | L −7.5 | 167.5 | U 155 |
| Jan 30 | vs | W 102-71 | -9.5 | W +21.5 | 151.5 | O 173 |
| Feb 3 | @ | W 91-82 | -8.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | O 173 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 82-58 | -22.5 | W +1.5 | 153.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 13 | @ | W 86-59 | -17.5 | W +9.5 | 155.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 76-81 | -9.5 | L −14.5 | 151.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 20 | vs | W 88-75 | -7.5 | W +5.5 | 164.5 | U 163 |
| Feb 24 | @ | L 62-77 | -3.5 | L −18.5 | 157.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 91-76 | -13.5 | W +1.5 | 160.5 | O 167 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 79-65 | -21.5 | L −7.5 | 155.5 | U 144 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 57-86 | -7.5 | L −36.5 | 146.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 88-81 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 158.5 | O 169 |
| Mar 14 | vs | L 69-70 | -4.5 | L −5.5 | 145.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 19 | vs | W 102-77 | +1.5 | W +26.5 | 167.5 | O 179 |
| Mar 21 | vs | L 72-95 | +12.5 | L −10.5 | 161.5 | O 167 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
SEMO
W 92-67
+5.5
6
vs
CHST
W 108-86
−8.5
10
vs
LIN
W 109-66
+18.5
15
vs
GCU
W 78-64
+5.5
21
vs
PFW
W 91-60
+11.5
27
vs
SCU
W 71-70
−0.5
28
vs
STAN
L 77-78
−2.5
2
@
LMU
W 91-70
+13.5
7
vs
CMU
W 107-65
+17.5
13
vs
SF
W 85-75
−2.5
17
vs
BCU
W 112-53
+32.5
21
vs
UNH
W 93-79
−20.5
31
vs
JOES
W 102-79
+3.5
7
@
VCU
W 71-62
+10.5
10
@
LAS
W 84-72
−5.5
14
vs
FOR
W 78-56
+4.5
17
vs
RICH
W 88-63
+10.5
20
@
DUQ
W 81-77
−4.5
23
@
SBU
W 97-62
+26.5
27
vs
GW
W 79-76
−7.5
30
vs
DAY
W 102-71
+21.5
3
@
DAV
W 91-82
+0.5
7
vs
LAS
W 82-58
+1.5
13
@
LUC
W 86-59
+9.5
17
@
URI
L 76-81
−14.5
20
vs
VCU
W 88-75
+5.5
24
@
DAY
L 62-77
−18.5
28
vs
DUQ
W 91-76
+1.5
4
vs
LUC
W 79-65
−7.5
7
@
GMU
L 57-86
−36.5
13
vs
GW
W 88-81
+0.5
14
vs
DAY
L 69-70
−5.5
19
vs
UGA
W 102-77
+26.5
21
vs
MICH
L 72-95
−10.5
covered 20didn’t cover 14avg +2.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
SEMO
W 92-67
+5.5
6
vs
CHST
W 108-86
+38.5
10
vs
LIN
W 109-66
+9.5
15
vs
GCU
W 78-64
−25.5
21
vs
PFW
W 91-60
−15.5
27
vs
SCU
W 71-70
−17.5
28
vs
STAN
L 77-78
−5.5
2
@
LMU
W 91-70
+10.5
7
vs
CMU
W 107-65
+11.5
13
vs
SF
W 85-75
+4.5
17
vs
BCU
W 112-53
+7.5
21
vs
UNH
W 93-79
+14.5
31
vs
JOES
W 102-79
+19.5
7
@
VCU
W 71-62
−38.5
10
@
LAS
W 84-72
+3.5
14
vs
FOR
W 78-56
−20.5
17
vs
RICH
W 88-63
−11.5
20
@
DUQ
W 81-77
−7.5
23
@
SBU
W 97-62
−0.5
27
vs
GW
W 79-76
−12.5
30
vs
DAY
W 102-71
+21.5
3
@
DAV
W 91-82
+21.5
7
vs
LAS
W 82-58
−13.5
13
@
LUC
W 86-59
−10.5
17
@
URI
L 76-81
+5.5
20
vs
VCU
W 88-75
−1.5
24
@
DAY
L 62-77
−18.5
28
vs
DUQ
W 91-76
+6.5
4
vs
LUC
W 79-65
−11.5
7
@
GMU
L 57-86
−3.5
13
vs
GW
W 88-81
+10.5
14
vs
DAY
L 69-70
−6.5
19
vs
UGA
W 102-77
+11.5
21
vs
MICH
L 72-95
+5.5
over 17under 17avg −0.4 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: South Florida 1, Saint Louis 1, even 3
South FloridaBetterSaint Louis
G S. Wilson TR17.2 pts · 3.8 reb · 4.5 ast
Score 79
←USFSmall
G Q. Jones9 pts · 3.8 reb · 2.9 ast
Score 51
G A. Dancler TR15.6 pts · 5.3 reb · 2 ast
Score 72
=Even
G T. Green11.1 pts · 2.9 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 86
G J. Omojafo11 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 80
=Even
G A. McCottry10.5 pts · 5.3 reb · 2.9 ast
Score 84
G A. Shoshkikj TR10.4 pts · 2.6 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 73
=Even
F I. Sharma9.2 pts · 2.7 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 67
F R. Goods TR7.8 pts · 5.9 reb · 2 ast
Score 41
→SLUSmall
F A. Michaeli TR7.1 pts · 3.9 reb · 1 ast
Score 58
South FloridaBetterSaint Louis
USF offense59th of 366 · +2.7
=Even
SLU defense87th of 366 · -0.1
USF defense121st of 366 · -2.1
→SLUSmall
SLU offense61st of 366 · +2.6
Backcourt+4.4 · 4 players
←USFSmall
Backcourt+2.6 · 3 players
Frontcourt-0.8 · 1 player
→SLUSmall
Frontcourt+0.6 · 2 players
Bench-0.3 · 5 players
→SLUBig
Bench+3.7 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestUSF betterSLU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
S. Wilson37 min · TRA. Dancler34 min · TRJ. Omojafo28 minA. Shoshkikj26 min · TRC. Davis18 min · TRM. James11 min · TR
Forwards
R. Goods25 min · TRG. Johnson23 min · TRJ. Lewis23 min · TRZ. High9 min · TRR. StevensonNewJ. FeldhausNew
Centers
T. Diawara3 min · TR
Guards
Q. Jones27 minT. Green24 minA. McCottry23 minK. Thames17 minC. Hutson4 minI. Holmes2 min
Forwards
I. Sharma22 minA. Michaeli18 min · TRE. Strong17 min · TRJ. Kerr6 minS. PearsonNewB. DiakiteNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 86.8 #6 | Points per game | 86.4 #7 |
| 1.17 #42 | Points per possession | 1.20 #14 |
| 74.4 #9 | Pace (possessions) | 72.1 #32 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.6 #209 | Effective FG% | 59.7 #2 |
| 32.5 #255 | 3-point % | 39.9 #2 |
| 43.8 #93 | 3-point attempt rate | 45.1 #64 |
| 40.4 #55 | Free throw rate | 33.7 #221 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.1 #73 | Turnover rate | 17.2 #218 |
| 38.1 #7 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.7 #173 |
| 16.8 #28 | Assists per game | 18.3 #8 |
| Defense | ||
| 76.5 #230 | Points allowed | 71.6 #94 |
| 1.03 #54 | Points allowed per possession | 0.99 #21 |
| 48.8 #58 | Opponent effective FG% | 45.2 #3 |
| 34.5 #218 | Opponent 3-point % | 30.3 #14 |
| 19.1 #42 | Turnovers forced | 15.9 #224 |
| 68.1 #252 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.8 #43 |
| 9.0 #8 | Steals per game | 7.1 #117 |
| 4.0 #72 | Blocks per game | 3.4 #168 |
South Florida
24-9 in 2025-26 overall · 17-3 in conference · American Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Louisville79–83
- Wvs Wichita St70–55
- Wvs Charlotte86–64
- Wvs Charlotte83–60
- W@ Memphis96–89
A week or more of rest.
Saint Louis
28-6 in 2025-26 overall · 16-4 in conference · Atlantic 10 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Michigan72–95
- Wvs Georgia102–77
- Lvs Dayton69–70
- Wvs G Washington88–81
- L@ George Mason57–86
A week or more of rest.