Christl Arena · at Army
LineNo line yet
Total—
| 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 ARMY 77–69 · win probability ARMY 75%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 145.8
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: ARMY has more of the edges
RID 1, ARMY 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: RID 0%, ARMY 65%. Transfers in: RID 6, ARMY 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Free throws
Free throw rate: RID 30.1, ARMY 26.8. Allowed: RID 32.5, ARMY 39.6
Context
Schedule so far
RID has played the 201st-hardest schedule, ARMY the 302nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Three-pointers
RID hits 27.6% and allows 38.0%; ARMY hits 32.0% and allows 35.5%. Threes are 27.5% and 53.3% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: RID plays 65.7 a game (323rd fastest), ARMY 68.6 (200th). Faster games mean more points
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: RID 32.6%, ARMY 29.6%. Defensive: RID 67.2%, ARMY 72.3%
Home court
ARMY at home. This season: ARMY 0-0 at home, RID 0-0 away
RID offense vs ARMY defense
Offense 348th of 366 against a defense 304th, on the model’s ratings
ARMY offense vs RID defense
Offense 271st of 366 against a defense 315th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: RID 42.8 and allows 55.2; ARMY 49.3 and allows 55.1
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: RID 16.9%, ARMY 17.2%. Forced: RID 15.3%, ARMY 15.4%
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 | — | ARMY -7.7 | — |
| Total | — | 145.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | RID 69.1 · ARMY 76.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | ARMY -4.4 | — |
| 1H total | 68.2 | — |
| 1H projected score | RID 31.9 · ARMY 36.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-8 20% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | |
| 2-8 20% | 1-9 10% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Rider
28 games played
Straight up
3-25
11% wins
Against the spread
9-19
32% covers · avg −3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
9-19
32% overs · avg +0 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 | @ | L 53-87 | +26.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | U 140 |
| Nov 5 | @ | L 53-81 | +18.5 | L −9.5 | 139.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 65-99 | +30.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 45-91 | +40.5 | L −5.5 | 134.5 | O 136 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 65-68 | -8.5 | L −11.5 | 139.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 4 | @ | L 66-68 | +9.5 | W +7.5 | 138.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 58-72 | +14.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 130 |
| Dec 9 | vs | L 38-51 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 135.5 | U 89 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 57-65 | +8.5 | W +0.5 | 129.5 | U 122 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 79-100 | +30.5 | W +9.5 | 145.5 | O 179 |
| Dec 29 | vs | L 71-74 | +2.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 4 | vs | L 65-74 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 135.5 | O 139 |
| Jan 9 | @ | L 62-68 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 145.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 11 | vs | L 49-71 | +10.5 | L −11.5 | 131.5 | U 120 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 72-68 | +7.5 | W +11.5 | 141.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 58-69 | +10.5 | L −0.5 | 134.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 19 | vs | L 85-105 | +4.5 | L −15.5 | 144.5 | O 190 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 61-71 | +9.5 | L −0.5 | 139.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 30 | @ | L 90-95 | +5.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | O 185 |
| Feb 1 | vs | W 81-78 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 136.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 52-81 | +14.5 | L −14.5 | 135.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 47-73 | +8.5 | L −17.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 13 | vs | L 55-65 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 75-86 | +9.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 20 | vs | L 66-72 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 131.5 | O 138 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 67-62 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 131.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 27 | @ | L 58-80 | +11.5 | L −10.5 | 141.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 1 | @ | L 61-76 | +14.5 | L −0.5 | 137.5 | U 137 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
UVA
L 53-87
−7.5
5
@
RUTG
L 53-81
−9.5
18
@
TEX
L 65-99
−3.5
20
@
HOU
L 45-91
−5.5
25
vs
COPP
L 65-68
−11.5
4
@
MRMK
L 66-68
+7.5
7
@
QUIN
L 58-72
+0.5
9
vs
BUCK
L 38-51
−10.5
16
@
DEL
L 57-65
+0.5
22
@
VCU
L 79-100
+9.5
29
vs
MAN
L 71-74
−0.5
4
vs
SIE
L 65-74
−0.5
9
@
FAIR
L 62-68
+2.5
11
vs
MRST
L 49-71
−11.5
14
vs
IONA
W 72-68
+11.5
17
@
SPU
L 58-69
−0.5
19
vs
SHU
L 85-105
−15.5
24
@
MSM
L 61-71
−0.5
30
@
MAN
L 90-95
+0.5
1
vs
SPU
W 81-78
+10.5
5
@
MRST
L 52-81
−14.5
7
vs
MRMK
L 47-73
−17.5
13
vs
MSM
L 55-65
−4.5
15
@
SHU
L 75-86
−1.5
20
vs
CAN
L 66-72
−7.5
22
vs
NIA
W 67-62
+6.5
27
@
IONA
L 58-80
−10.5
1
@
SIE
L 61-76
−0.5
covered 9didn’t cover 19avg −3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
UVA
L 53-87
−8.5
5
@
RUTG
L 53-81
−5.5
18
@
TEX
L 65-99
+20.5
20
@
HOU
L 45-91
+1.5
25
vs
COPP
L 65-68
−6.5
4
@
MRMK
L 66-68
−4.5
7
@
QUIN
L 58-72
−17.5
9
vs
BUCK
L 38-51
−46.5
16
@
DEL
L 57-65
−7.5
22
@
VCU
L 79-100
+33.5
29
vs
MAN
L 71-74
−2.5
4
vs
SIE
L 65-74
+3.5
9
@
FAIR
L 62-68
−15.5
11
vs
MRST
L 49-71
−11.5
14
vs
IONA
W 72-68
−1.5
17
@
SPU
L 58-69
−7.5
19
vs
SHU
L 85-105
+45.5
24
@
MSM
L 61-71
−7.5
30
@
MAN
L 90-95
+39.5
1
vs
SPU
W 81-78
+22.5
5
@
MRST
L 52-81
−2.5
7
vs
MRMK
L 47-73
−17.5
13
vs
MSM
L 55-65
−17.5
15
@
SHU
L 75-86
+14.5
20
vs
CAN
L 66-72
+6.5
22
vs
NIA
W 67-62
−2.5
27
@
IONA
L 58-80
−3.5
1
@
SIE
L 61-76
−0.5
over 9under 19avg +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
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 8 | @ | L 76-83 | +18.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 59-114 | +33.5 | L −21.5 | 152.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 52-75 | +6.5 | L −16.5 | 146.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 73-86 | +17.5 | W +4.5 | 164.5 | U 159 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 65-76 | +12.5 | W +1.5 | 132.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 67-84 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 143.5 | O 151 |
| Nov 26 | @ | W 81-73 | +4.5 | W +12.5 | 152.5 | O 154 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 81-78 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 152.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 2 | vs | L 70-84 | +19.5 | W +5.5 | 156.5 | U 154 |
| Dec 12 | @ | W 63-60 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 146.5 | U 123 |
| Dec 23 | vs | W 95-85 | -12.5 | L −2.5 | 140.5 | O 180 |
| Dec 31 | @ | W 85-78 | +5.5 | W +12.5 | 146.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 69-76 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 76-84 | -4.5 | L −12.5 | 146.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 91-100 | +7.5 | L −1.5 | 140.5 | O 191 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 75-82 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 18 | vs | L 67-78 | +4.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 21 | @ | W 87-84 | +4.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 56-84 | +10.5 | L −17.5 | 143.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 67-64 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 147.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 69-68 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 55-69 | +10.5 | L −3.5 | 150.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 60-63 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 142.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 68-85 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 140.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 63-75 | +9.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 87-77 | +4.5 | W +14.5 | 149.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 63-81 | +8.5 | L −9.5 | 139.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 25 | vs | L 73-75 | -2.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 77-83 | +3.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 55-65 | +1.5 | L −8.5 | 144.5 | U 120 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
STMN
L 76-83
+11.5
11
vs
DUKE
L 59-114
−21.5
15
vs
HARV
L 52-75
−16.5
18
@
COR
L 73-86
+4.5
21
@
MRST
L 65-76
+1.5
25
vs
ETAM
L 67-84
−14.5
26
@
FDU
W 81-73
+12.5
29
vs
MAN
W 81-78
+4.5
2
vs
GW
L 70-84
+5.5
12
@
UMBC
W 63-60
+10.5
23
vs
BING
W 95-85
−2.5
31
@
LEH
W 85-78
+12.5
3
vs
COLG
L 69-76
+0.5
7
vs
L-MD
L 76-84
−12.5
10
@
BU
L 91-100
−1.5
14
@
HC
L 75-82
−2.5
18
vs
AMER
L 67-78
−6.5
21
@
BUCK
W 87-84
+7.5
24
@
NAVY
L 56-84
−17.5
28
vs
LEH
W 67-64
+4.5
31
vs
HC
W 69-68
−1.5
4
@
COLG
L 55-69
−3.5
7
vs
LAF
L 60-63
−1.5
11
vs
BU
L 68-85
−14.5
14
@
AMER
L 63-75
−2.5
18
@
L-MD
W 87-77
+14.5
21
vs
NAVY
L 63-81
−9.5
25
vs
BUCK
L 73-75
−4.5
28
@
LAF
L 77-83
−2.5
3
@
BUCK
L 55-65
−8.5
covered 12didn’t cover 18avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
STMN
L 76-83
+7.5
11
vs
DUKE
L 59-114
+20.5
15
vs
HARV
L 52-75
−19.5
18
@
COR
L 73-86
−5.5
21
@
MRST
L 65-76
+8.5
25
vs
ETAM
L 67-84
+7.5
26
@
FDU
W 81-73
+1.5
29
vs
MAN
W 81-78
+6.5
2
vs
GW
L 70-84
−2.5
12
@
UMBC
W 63-60
−23.5
23
vs
BING
W 95-85
+39.5
31
@
LEH
W 85-78
+16.5
3
vs
COLG
L 69-76
−2.5
7
vs
L-MD
L 76-84
+13.5
10
@
BU
L 91-100
+50.5
14
@
HC
L 75-82
+14.5
18
vs
AMER
L 67-78
−2.5
21
@
BUCK
W 87-84
+26.5
24
@
NAVY
L 56-84
−3.5
28
vs
LEH
W 67-64
−16.5
31
vs
HC
W 69-68
−7.5
4
@
COLG
L 55-69
−26.5
7
vs
LAF
L 60-63
−19.5
11
vs
BU
L 68-85
+12.5
14
@
AMER
L 63-75
−6.5
18
@
L-MD
W 87-77
+14.5
21
vs
NAVY
L 63-81
+4.5
25
vs
BUCK
L 73-75
+5.5
28
@
LAF
L 77-83
+15.5
3
@
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.
The starting fives are even
Position by position: Rider 0, Army 0, even 5
RiderBetterArmy
G M. Butler TR10.9 pts · 2.2 reb · 4.3 ast
Score 44
=Even
G R. Curry13.4 pts · 4.1 reb · 4.4 ast
Score 57
G K. Farmer TR3.5 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 6
=Even
G K. McCarthy7.2 pts · 2.6 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 13
G B. Baker TR1.6 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F J. Holloway10.7 pts · 3.6 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 37
G T. Bevins TR0.6 pts · 0.7 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F T. Laczkowski5.3 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 38
F H. Simmons TR1.7 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F D. Benner1.4 pts · 0.6 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
RiderBetterArmy
RID offense348th of 366 · -12.2
=Even
ARMY defense304th of 366 · -7.8
RID defense315th of 366 · -8.2
=Even
ARMY offense271st of 366 · -8.2
Backcourt-5.5 · 4 players
→ARMYSmall
Backcourt-3.1 · 2 players
Frontcourt-0.3 · 1 player
←RIDSmall
Frontcourt-2.6 · 3 players
Bench-0.3 · 1 player
=Even
Bench-1.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestRID betterARMY betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
M. Butler34 min · TRK. Farmer14 min · TRB. Baker13 min · TRT. Bevins5 min · TRN. WashingtonNewR. RosaNew
Forwards
H. Simmons6 min · TRR. Brisco2 min · TRK. WylieNewS. Ezekiel ObeNew
Centers
S. Avegah SemeyNew
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
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 62.6 #359 | Points per game | 70.8 #268 |
| 0.95 #355 | Points per possession | 1.03 #281 |
| 65.7 #323 | Pace (possessions) | 68.6 #200 |
| Shooting | ||
| 42.8 #365 | Effective FG% | 49.3 #279 |
| 27.6 #365 | 3-point % | 32.0 #278 |
| 27.5 #361 | 3-point attempt rate | 53.3 #3 |
| 30.1 #307 | Free throw rate | 26.8 #352 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.9 #197 | Turnover rate | 17.2 #221 |
| 32.6 #101 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.6 #219 |
| 10.1 #356 | Assists per game | 14.5 #118 |
| Defense | ||
| 76.8 #236 | Points allowed | 79.0 #298 |
| 1.17 #341 | Points allowed per possession | 1.15 #321 |
| 55.2 #335 | Opponent effective FG% | 55.1 #334 |
| 38.0 #356 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.5 #285 |
| 15.3 #266 | Turnovers forced | 15.4 #257 |
| 67.2 #294 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.3 #54 |
| 5.9 #247 | Steals per game | 5.4 #307 |
| 3.2 #188 | Blocks per game | 1.6 #359 |
Rider
3-25 in 2025-26 overall · 3-17 in conference · Metro Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Siena61–76
- L@ Iona58–80
- Wvs Niagara67–62
- Lvs Canisius66–72
- L@ Sacred Heart75–86
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.