Air Force Falcons vs Army Black Knights: Model Line and Edge

Tue, Nov 24, 12:00 AM ETUTSA Convocation Center · Neutral site

#288ARMYArmy

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Air Force and Army
AF	This season	ARMY
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 AF 74–70 · win probability AF 66%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 143.9

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

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

Context

Schedule so far

AF has played the 119th-hardest schedule, ARMY the 302nd. A record against a soft schedule means less

ARMYBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: AF 21.4%, ARMY 29.6%. Defensive: AF 68.7%, ARMY 72.3%

AFBig

Free throws

Free throw rate: AF 35.1, ARMY 26.8. Allowed: AF 36.6, ARMY 39.6

AFBig

ARMY offense vs AF defense

Offense 271st of 366 against a defense 149th, on the model’s ratings

ARMYSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: AF 21.9%, ARMY 17.2%. Forced: AF 15.1%, ARMY 15.4%

AFSmall

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: AF 100%, ARMY 65%. Transfers in: AF 0, ARMY 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

ARMYSmall

Three-pointers

AF hits 30.6% and allows 37.6%; ARMY hits 32.0% and allows 35.5%. Threes are 41.8% and 53.3% of their shots

Context

Tempo

About 68 possessions: AF plays 67.4 a game (259th fastest), ARMY 68.6 (200th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: AF 48.9 and allows 56.4; ARMY 49.3 and allows 55.1

Even

AF offense vs ARMY defense

Offense 290th of 366 against a defense 304th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Neutral floor

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

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	—	AF -4.7	—
Total	—	143.9	—
Projected score	—	AF 74.3 · ARMY 69.6

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	AF -2.9	—
1H total	67.3	—
1H projected score	AF 35.1 · ARMY 32.2	—

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	Neutral	Role
AF WWLWL	10-22	31%	0-2	—
ARMY WLLLL	12-18	40%	0-1	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
AF OUOUU	18-14	56%	3-29
ARMY OOOOU	17-13	57%	9-21

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
AF	0-10 0%	3-7 30%	7-3 70%
ARMY	2-8 20%	1-9 10%	5-5 50%

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

Air Force

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 28	vs BRWN	No recent meeting
Dec 1	vs DEN	W66–65LO
Dec 6	vs NAVY	L56–61WU

Army

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 26	@ UTSA	W78–75WU
Nov 28	vs RID	No recent meeting
Dec 2	vs UMBC	W63–60WU

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

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

AF 1–0 ARMYAF leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · AF 1-0 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Dec 4, 2021-22	ARMY 58 @ AF 76	AF -3	AF W

ATS History · 2025-26

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

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

Army

30 games played

Straight up

9-21

30% wins

Against the spread

12-18

40% covers · avg −1.8 pts vs the line

Over / Under

17-13

57% overs · avg +3.5 pts vs the total

Straight up

9-2130%

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

4 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

12-1840%

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

4 straight misses ATS0 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

17-1357%

O O U U O O O O U U O O U O O O U O U U U 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 8	@STMN	L 76-83	+18.5	W +11.5	151.5	O 159
Nov 11	vsDUKE	L 59-114	+33.5	L −21.5	152.5	O 173
Nov 15	vsHARV	L 52-75	+6.5	L −16.5	146.5	U 127
Nov 18	@COR	L 73-86	+17.5	W +4.5	164.5	U 159
Nov 21	@MRST	L 65-76	+12.5	W +1.5	132.5	O 141
Nov 25	vsETAM	L 67-84	+2.5	L −14.5	143.5	O 151
Nov 26	@FDU	W 81-73	+4.5	W +12.5	152.5	O 154
Nov 29	vsMAN	W 81-78	+1.5	W +4.5	152.5	O 159
Dec 2	vsGW	L 70-84	+19.5	W +5.5	156.5	U 154
Dec 12	@UMBC	W 63-60	+7.5	W +10.5	146.5	U 123
Dec 23	vsBING	W 95-85	-12.5	L −2.5	140.5	O 180
Dec 31	@LEH	W 85-78	+5.5	W +12.5	146.5	O 163
Jan 3	vsCOLG	L 69-76	+7.5	W +0.5	147.5	U 145
Jan 7	vsL-MD	L 76-84	-4.5	L −12.5	146.5	O 160
Jan 10	@BU	L 91-100	+7.5	L −1.5	140.5	O 191
Jan 14	@HC	L 75-82	+4.5	L −2.5	142.5	O 157
Jan 18	vsAMER	L 67-78	+4.5	L −6.5	147.5	U 145
Jan 21	@BUCK	W 87-84	+4.5	W +7.5	144.5	O 171
Jan 24	@NAVY	L 56-84	+10.5	L −17.5	143.5	U 140
Jan 28	vsLEH	W 67-64	+1.5	W +4.5	147.5	U 131
Jan 31	vsHC	W 69-68	-2.5	L −1.5	144.5	U 137
Feb 4	@COLG	L 55-69	+10.5	L −3.5	150.5	U 124
Feb 7	vsLAF	L 60-63	+1.5	L −1.5	142.5	U 123
Feb 11	vsBU	L 68-85	+2.5	L −14.5	140.5	O 153
Feb 14	@AMER	L 63-75	+9.5	L −2.5	144.5	U 138
Feb 18	@L-MD	W 87-77	+4.5	W +14.5	149.5	O 164
Feb 21	vsNAVY	L 63-81	+8.5	L −9.5	139.5	O 144
Feb 25	vsBUCK	L 73-75	-2.5	L −4.5	142.5	O 148
Feb 28	@LAF	L 77-83	+3.5	L −2.5	144.5	O 160
Mar 3	@BUCK	L 55-65	+1.5	L −8.5	144.5	U 120

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

STMN

L 76-83

+11.5

DUKE

L 59-114

−21.5

HARV

L 52-75

−16.5

COR

L 73-86

+4.5

MRST

L 65-76

+1.5

ETAM

L 67-84

−14.5

FDU

W 81-73

+12.5

MAN

W 81-78

+4.5

L 70-84

+5.5

UMBC

W 63-60

+10.5

BING

W 95-85

−2.5

LEH

W 85-78

+12.5

COLG

L 69-76

+0.5

L-MD

L 76-84

−12.5

L 91-100

−1.5

L 75-82

−2.5

AMER

L 67-78

−6.5

BUCK

W 87-84

+7.5

NAVY

L 56-84

−17.5

LEH

W 67-64

+4.5

W 69-68

−1.5

COLG

L 55-69

−3.5

LAF

L 60-63

−1.5

L 68-85

−14.5

AMER

L 63-75

−2.5

L-MD

W 87-77

+14.5

NAVY

L 63-81

−9.5

BUCK

L 73-75

−4.5

LAF

L 77-83

−2.5

BUCK

L 55-65

−8.5

covered 12didn’t cover 18avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

STMN

L 76-83

+7.5

DUKE

L 59-114

+20.5

HARV

L 52-75

−19.5

COR

L 73-86

−5.5

MRST

L 65-76

+8.5

ETAM

L 67-84

+7.5

FDU

W 81-73

+1.5

MAN

W 81-78

+6.5

L 70-84

−2.5

UMBC

W 63-60

−23.5

BING

W 95-85

+39.5

LEH

W 85-78

+16.5

COLG

L 69-76

−2.5

L-MD

L 76-84

+13.5

L 91-100

+50.5

L 75-82

+14.5

AMER

L 67-78

−2.5

BUCK

W 87-84

+26.5

NAVY

L 56-84

−3.5

LEH

W 67-64

−16.5

W 69-68

−7.5

COLG

L 55-69

−26.5

LAF

L 60-63

−19.5

L 68-85

+12.5

AMER

L 63-75

−6.5

L-MD

W 87-77

+14.5

NAVY

L 63-81

+4.5

BUCK

L 73-75

+5.5

LAF

L 77-83

+15.5

BUCK

L 55-65

−24.5

over 17under 13avg +3.5 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: Air Force 1, Army 0, even 4

Air ForceBetterArmy

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

AFSmall

G R. Curry13.4 pts · 4.1 reb · 4.4 ast Score 57

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

Even

G K. McCarthy7.2 pts · 2.6 reb · 1.2 ast Score 13

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

Even

F J. Holloway10.7 pts · 3.6 reb · 2.1 ast Score 37

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

Even

F T. Laczkowski5.3 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.9 ast Score 38

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

No call

F D. Benner1.4 pts · 0.6 reb · 0.4 ast Not ranked

Air ForceBetterArmy

AF offense290th of 366 · -8.9

Even

ARMY defense304th of 366 · -7.8

AF defense149th of 366 · -3.3

AFSmall

ARMY offense271st of 366 · -8.2

Backcourt-1.6 · 2 players

AFSmall

Backcourt-3.1 · 2 players

Frontcourt-1.3 · 3 players

AFSmall

Frontcourt-2.6 · 3 players

Bench-7.9 · 5 players

ARMYBig

Bench-1.0 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestAF betterARMY 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

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

Army

Guards

R. Curry34 minK. McCarthy24 minD. Watt5 minJ. Green3 minB. O'Keefe2 minJ. EllisNew

Forwards

J. Holloway29 minT. Laczkowski22 minD. Benner6 minN. Ikechi3 minD. Murans3 minH. RasmussenNew

Centers

P. HendersonNew

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

AF61.5 #362

ARMY70.8 #268

Points per possession

AF0.91 #363

ARMY1.03 #281

Pace (possessions)

AF67.4 #259

ARMY68.6 #200

Shooting

Effective FG%

AF48.9 #292

ARMY49.3 #279

3-point %

AF30.6 #332

ARMY32.0 #278

3-point attempt rate

AF41.8 #139

ARMY53.3 #3

Free throw rate

AF35.1 #174

ARMY26.8 #352

Possessions

Turnover rate

AF21.9 #362

ARMY17.2 #221

Offensive rebound rate

AF21.4 #360

ARMY29.6 #219

Assists per game

AF12.2 #273

ARMY14.5 #118

Defense

Points allowed

AF79.9 #316

ARMY79.0 #298

Points allowed per possession

AF1.19 #352

ARMY1.15 #321

Opponent effective FG%

AF56.4 #350

ARMY55.1 #334

Opponent 3-point %

AF37.6 #352

ARMY35.5 #285

Turnovers forced

AF15.1 #280

ARMY15.4 #257

Defensive rebound rate

AF68.7 #215

ARMY72.3 #54

Steals per game

AF5.6 #281

ARMY5.4 #307

Blocks per game

AF2.4 #316

ARMY1.6 #359

AF		ARMY
Scoring
61.5 #362	Points per game	70.8 #268
0.91 #363	Points per possession	1.03 #281
67.4 #259	Pace (possessions)	68.6 #200
Shooting
48.9 #292	Effective FG%	49.3 #279
30.6 #332	3-point %	32.0 #278
41.8 #139	3-point attempt rate	53.3 #3
35.1 #174	Free throw rate	26.8 #352
Possessions
21.9 #362	Turnover rate	17.2 #221
21.4 #360	Offensive rebound rate	29.6 #219
12.2 #273	Assists per game	14.5 #118
Defense
79.9 #316	Points allowed	79.0 #298
1.19 #352	Points allowed per possession	1.15 #321
56.4 #350	Opponent effective FG%	55.1 #334
37.6 #352	Opponent 3-point %	35.5 #285
15.1 #280	Turnovers forced	15.4 #257
68.7 #215	Defensive rebound rate	72.3 #54
5.6 #281	Steals per game	5.4 #307
2.4 #316	Blocks per game	1.6 #359

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.

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.

Army

9-21 in 2025-26 overall · 5-14 in conference · Patriot League

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Bucknell55–65
L@ Lafayette77–83
Lvs Bucknell73–75
Lvs Navy63–81
W@ Loyola MD87–77

A week or more of rest.

Air Force Falcons vs Army Black Knights

What could decide it

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

Air Force

Army

Air Force has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Air Force

Army