Reilly Center · at St Bonaventure
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SBU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 FAU 77–76 · win probability FAU 54%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 152.9
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
FAU 2, SBU 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Shooting
Effective FG%: FAU 52.2 and allows 49.5; SBU 52.4 and allows 53.3
Turnovers
Turnover rate: FAU 17.6%, SBU 16.8%. Forced: FAU 15.5%, SBU 17.1%
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: FAU plays 71.1 a game (71st fastest), SBU 68.0 (228th). Faster games mean more points
Home court
SBU at home. This season: SBU 0-0 at home, FAU 0-0 away
FAU offense vs SBU defense
Offense 85th of 366 against a defense 131st, on the model’s ratings
Even
Three-pointers
FAU hits 33.3% and allows 33.8%; SBU hits 37.4% and allows 36.0%. Threes are 38.2% and 31.3% of their shots
Context
Schedule so far
FAU has played the 101st-hardest schedule, SBU the 109th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: FAU 33.3, SBU 30.0. Allowed: FAU 36.2, SBU 33.9
Even
SBU offense vs FAU defense
Offense 169th of 366 against a defense 174th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: FAU 31.6%, SBU 34.5%. Defensive: FAU 71.7%, SBU 70.2%
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: FAU 17%, SBU 18%. Transfers in: FAU 5, SBU 3. 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 | — | FAU -1.1 | — |
| Total | — | 152.9 | — |
| Projected score | — | FAU 77 · SBU 75.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | FAU -0.8 | — |
| 1H total | 71.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | FAU 36.1 · SBU 35.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | |
| 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
FAU 1–1 SBUSeries tied · 2 games since 2021-22 · FAU 1-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 30, 2025-26 | SBU 70 @ FAU 65 | FAU -1.5 | SBU W |
| Dec 16, 2023-24 | FAU 64 vs SBU 54 | SBU +9.5 | FAU W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
FAU
31 games played
Straight up
16-15
52% wins
Against the spread
17-14
55% covers · avg +0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-14
55% overs · avg +0.3 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 83-78 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 94-77 | -5.5 | W +11.5 | 156.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 68-88 | +7.5 | L −12.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 82-59 | -7.5 | W +15.5 | 154.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 76-65 | -3.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 65-74 | +4.5 | L −4.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 30 | vs | L 65-70 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 146.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 7 | @ | W 81-76 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 105-79 | -18.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | O 184 |
| Dec 19 | @ | L 75-88 | +13.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 23 | @ | L 80-85 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 162.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 110-70 | -16.5 | W +23.5 | 158.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 66-69 | -3.5 | L −6.5 | 158.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 76-71 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 162.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 89-78 | -1.5 | W +9.5 | 152.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 85-67 | -3.5 | W +14.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 18 | @ | W 79-73 | -2.5 | W +3.5 | 148.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 79-74 | -10.5 | L −5.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 25 | @ | L 75-89 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 166.5 | U 164 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 65-92 | +3.5 | L −23.5 | 152.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 1 | vs | L 75-76 | -10.5 | L −11.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 76-78 | +3.5 | W +1.5 | 162.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 73-81 | -3.5 | L −11.5 | 151.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 15 | vs | L 81-83 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 165.5 | U 164 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 60-52 | -11.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | U 112 |
| Feb 22 | @ | L 72-73 | +2.5 | W +1.5 | 140.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 77-73 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 150 |
| Mar 1 | vs | W 77-76 | -6.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | O 153 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 70-88 | +8.5 | L −9.5 | 150.5 | O 158 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 63-59 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | U 122 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 70-74 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 136.5 | O 144 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
BC
W 83-78
+3.5
8
vs
COFC
W 94-77
+11.5
9
@
LIB
L 68-88
−12.5
20
vs
PAC
W 82-59
+15.5
24
vs
LMU
W 76-65
+7.5
25
vs
GMU
L 65-74
−4.5
30
vs
SBU
L 65-70
−6.5
7
@
FGCU
W 81-76
+2.5
13
vs
UALB
W 105-79
+7.5
19
@
SMC
L 75-88
+0.5
23
@
UCF
L 80-85
+3.5
31
vs
UTSA
W 110-70
+23.5
4
@
TULN
L 66-69
−6.5
7
@
UAB
W 76-71
+8.5
11
vs
MEM
W 89-78
+9.5
15
vs
WICH
W 85-67
+14.5
18
@
TEM
W 79-73
+3.5
21
vs
TULN
W 79-74
−5.5
25
@
USF
L 75-89
−8.5
29
@
MEM
L 65-92
−23.5
1
vs
ECU
L 75-76
−11.5
4
vs
TLSA
L 76-78
+1.5
11
@
RICE
L 73-81
−11.5
15
vs
USF
L 81-83
+2.5
18
@
UTSA
W 60-52
−3.5
22
@
UNT
L 72-73
+1.5
26
vs
TEM
W 77-73
−0.5
1
vs
CLT
W 77-76
−5.5
7
@
WICH
L 70-88
−9.5
11
vs
TEM
W 63-59
+5.5
12
vs
UNT
L 70-74
−2.5
covered 17didn’t cover 14avg +0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
BC
W 83-78
+12.5
8
vs
COFC
W 94-77
+14.5
9
@
LIB
L 68-88
+3.5
20
vs
PAC
W 82-59
−13.5
24
vs
LMU
W 76-65
−3.5
25
vs
GMU
L 65-74
−4.5
30
vs
SBU
L 65-70
−11.5
7
@
FGCU
W 81-76
+6.5
13
vs
UALB
W 105-79
+36.5
19
@
SMC
L 75-88
+17.5
23
@
UCF
L 80-85
+2.5
31
vs
UTSA
W 110-70
+21.5
4
@
TULN
L 66-69
−23.5
7
@
UAB
W 76-71
−15.5
11
vs
MEM
W 89-78
+14.5
15
vs
WICH
W 85-67
−3.5
18
@
TEM
W 79-73
+3.5
21
vs
TULN
W 79-74
−2.5
25
@
USF
L 75-89
−2.5
29
@
MEM
L 65-92
+4.5
1
vs
ECU
L 75-76
−2.5
4
vs
TLSA
L 76-78
−8.5
11
@
RICE
L 73-81
+2.5
15
vs
USF
L 81-83
−1.5
18
@
UTSA
W 60-52
−45.5
22
@
UNT
L 72-73
+4.5
26
vs
TEM
W 77-73
+4.5
1
vs
CLT
W 77-76
+5.5
7
@
WICH
L 70-88
+7.5
11
vs
TEM
W 63-59
−22.5
12
vs
UNT
L 70-74
+7.5
over 17under 14avg +0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
St Bonaventure
33 games played
Straight up
16-17
48% wins
Against the spread
13-20
39% covers · avg −2.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
19-14
58% overs · avg +4.9 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 69-63 | -1.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 89-70 | -21.5 | L −2.5 | 136.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 75-66 | -9.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 84-80 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 146.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 75-61 | -11.5 | W +2.5 | 146.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 70-85 | +10.5 | L −4.5 | 152.5 | O 155 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 67-58 | -10.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | U 125 |
| Nov 30 | @ | W 70-65 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 146.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 77-69 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 144.5 | O 146 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 85-77 | -9.5 | L −1.5 | 142.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 83-88 | -6.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | O 171 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 92-81 | -21.5 | L −10.5 | 151.5 | O 173 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 82-89 | +9.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 80-89 | -6.5 | L −15.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 77-81 | -8.5 | L −12.5 | 142.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 64-68 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 74-78 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 141.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 20 | vs | W 84-70 | -10.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 23 | vs | L 62-97 | +8.5 | L −26.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 87-79 | +3.5 | W +11.5 | 150.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 73-77 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 70-72 | +7.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 70-67 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 73-78 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 152.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 65-71 | -5.5 | L −11.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 94-99 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | O 193 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 94-76 | -2.5 | W +15.5 | 144.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 58-71 | +3.5 | L −9.5 | 146.5 | U 129 |
| Mar 4 | @ | L 82-91 | +7.5 | L −1.5 | 157.5 | O 173 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 63-68 | -4.5 | L −9.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 99-80 | -7.5 | W +11.5 | 146.5 | O 179 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 63-57 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 143.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 63-68 | +5.5 | W +0.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
BRAD
W 69-63
+4.5
8
vs
CAN
W 89-70
−2.5
12
vs
SIE
W 75-66
−0.5
15
vs
YSU
W 84-80
−5.5
20
vs
RMU
W 75-61
+2.5
25
vs
UNC
L 70-85
−4.5
27
vs
ECU
W 67-58
−1.5
30
@
FAU
W 70-65
+6.5
6
@
BUF
W 77-69
+2.5
10
vs
COLG
W 85-77
−1.5
13
vs
OHIO
L 83-88
−11.5
20
vs
LEM
W 92-81
−10.5
31
@
VCU
L 82-89
+2.5
7
vs
RICH
L 80-89
−15.5
10
vs
FOR
L 77-81
−12.5
14
@
JOES
L 64-68
−5.5
17
@
LAS
L 74-78
−9.5
20
vs
LUC
W 84-70
+3.5
23
vs
SLU
L 62-97
−26.5
28
@
DUQ
W 87-79
+11.5
31
vs
GMU
L 73-77
−2.5
3
@
DAY
L 70-72
+5.5
7
@
FOR
W 70-67
+1.5
14
vs
DUQ
L 73-78
−6.5
18
vs
JOES
L 65-71
−11.5
21
@
RICH
L 94-99
−3.5
26
vs
URI
W 94-76
+15.5
28
@
GMU
L 58-71
−9.5
4
@
GW
L 82-91
−1.5
7
vs
DAV
L 63-68
−9.5
11
vs
LAS
W 99-80
+11.5
12
vs
GMU
W 63-57
+8.5
13
vs
DAY
L 63-68
+0.5
covered 13didn’t cover 20avg −2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
BRAD
W 69-63
−7.5
8
vs
CAN
W 89-70
+22.5
12
vs
SIE
W 75-66
+0.5
15
vs
YSU
W 84-80
+17.5
20
vs
RMU
W 75-61
−10.5
25
vs
UNC
L 70-85
+2.5
27
vs
ECU
W 67-58
−19.5
30
@
FAU
W 70-65
−11.5
6
@
BUF
W 77-69
+1.5
10
vs
COLG
W 85-77
+19.5
13
vs
OHIO
L 83-88
+20.5
20
vs
LEM
W 92-81
+21.5
31
@
VCU
L 82-89
+13.5
7
vs
RICH
L 80-89
+15.5
10
vs
FOR
L 77-81
+15.5
14
@
JOES
L 64-68
−15.5
17
@
LAS
L 74-78
+10.5
20
vs
LUC
W 84-70
+6.5
23
vs
SLU
L 62-97
−0.5
28
@
DUQ
W 87-79
+15.5
31
vs
GMU
L 73-77
+7.5
3
@
DAY
L 70-72
−2.5
7
@
FOR
W 70-67
−4.5
14
vs
DUQ
L 73-78
−1.5
18
vs
JOES
L 65-71
−11.5
21
@
RICH
L 94-99
+45.5
26
vs
URI
W 94-76
+25.5
28
@
GMU
L 58-71
−17.5
4
@
GW
L 82-91
+15.5
7
vs
DAV
L 63-68
−10.5
11
vs
LAS
W 99-80
+32.5
12
vs
GMU
W 63-57
−23.5
13
vs
DAY
L 63-68
−10.5
over 19under 14avg +4.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
FAU has the better starters
Position by position: FAU 3, St Bonaventure 0, even 2
FAUBetterSt Bonaventure
G B. Speed TR15.8 pts · 4.4 reb · 3.7 ast
Score 82
←FAUSmall
G A. Fulton TR10.7 pts · 6.3 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 62
G J. Hamilton TR17.8 pts · 4.5 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 93
=No call
G I. Ermakov2.6 pts · 1.1 reb · 0.9 ast
Not ranked
G K. Carlyle14.5 pts · 3.7 reb · 2.8 ast
Score 73
←FAUSmall
F R. Kalambay TR4.4 pts · 5.6 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 40
G M. Charles TR10.5 pts · 4 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 32
=Even
F J. Grahovac4.2 pts · 2.8 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 33
F M. Porter-Brown TR7.8 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 42
←FAUSmall
F M. Blackwood TR2.6 pts · 1.8 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 22
FAUBetterSt Bonaventure
FAU offense85th of 366 · +0.4
=Even
SBU defense131st of 366 · -2.4
FAU defense174th of 366 · -3.9
=Even
SBU offense169th of 366 · -5.2
Backcourt+4.0 · 4 players
←FAUBig
Backcourt-0.4 · 2 players
Frontcourt-0.6 · 1 player
←FAUSmall
Frontcourt-2.4 · 3 players
Bench-0.2 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-0.6 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestFAU betterSBU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
B. Speed34 min · TRJ. Hamilton32 min · TRK. Carlyle31 minM. Charles30 min · TRL. Dayco-Green2 minL. Smith1 min
Forwards
M. Porter-Brown20 min · TRJ. HarrisNewM. PuodziukaitisNewD. MusisNew
Centers
K. Mullen6 min · TRT. IfaolaNew
Guards
A. Fulton29 min · TRI. Ermakov10 minA. Lonati8 minJ. DeRose1 minR. HeathNewZ. PhilipkoskiNew
Forwards
R. Kalambay21 min · TRJ. Grahovac18 minM. Blackwood12 min · TRJ. IkpotokinNewC. BlankenbergNew
Centers
B. BillNewC. DialloNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 77.2 #111 | Points per game | 76.2 #138 |
| 1.09 #170 | Points per possession | 1.12 #104 |
| 71.1 #71 | Pace (possessions) | 68.0 #228 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.2 #135 | Effective FG% | 52.4 #129 |
| 33.3 #210 | 3-point % | 37.4 #22 |
| 38.2 #208 | 3-point attempt rate | 31.3 #335 |
| 33.3 #231 | Free throw rate | 30.0 #310 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.6 #246 | Turnover rate | 16.8 #189 |
| 31.6 #140 | Offensive rebound rate | 34.5 #60 |
| 13.0 #210 | Assists per game | 15.4 #73 |
| Defense | ||
| 75.3 #198 | Points allowed | 75.4 #201 |
| 1.06 #108 | Points allowed per possession | 1.11 #245 |
| 49.5 #81 | Opponent effective FG% | 53.3 #278 |
| 33.8 #169 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.0 #299 |
| 15.5 #252 | Turnovers forced | 17.1 #144 |
| 71.7 #78 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.2 #150 |
| 5.7 #272 | Steals per game | 7.5 #80 |
| 5.3 #11 | Blocks per game | 4.4 #41 |
FAU
16-15 in 2025-26 overall · 10-10 in conference · American Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs North Texas70–74
- Wvs Temple63–59
- L@ Wichita St70–88
- Wvs Charlotte77–76
- Wvs Temple77–73
A week or more of rest.
St Bonaventure
16-17 in 2025-26 overall · 6-15 in conference · Atlantic 10 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Dayton63–68
- Wvs George Mason63–57
- Wvs La Salle99–80
- Lvs Davidson63–68
- L@ G Washington82–91
A week or more of rest.