America First Events Center · at Southern Utah · Conference game
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SUU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SUU 80–73 · win probability SUU 73%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.0
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: IDST has more of the edges
IDST 3, SUU 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: IDST 32.8%, SUU 28.8%. Defensive: IDST 72.1%, SUU 66.4%
SUU offense vs IDST defense
Offense 211th of 366 against a defense 349th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
IDST has played the 296th-hardest schedule, SUU the 186th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: IDST plays 67.3 a game (266th fastest), SUU 71.2 (62nd). Faster games mean more points
Three-pointers
IDST hits 33.6% and allows 34.5%; SUU hits 33.0% and allows 38.0%. Threes are 41.9% and 35.5% of their shots
Turnovers
Turnover rate: IDST 17.1%, SUU 20.3%. Forced: IDST 14.6%, SUU 14.8%
Home court
SUU at home. This season: SUU 0-0 at home, IDST 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: IDST 6%, SUU 27%. Transfers in: IDST 1, SUU 1. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: IDST 38.0, SUU 33.1. Allowed: IDST 38.0, SUU 29.8
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: IDST 51.9 and allows 54.5; SUU 50.8 and allows 53.3
Even
IDST offense vs SUU defense
Offense 324th of 366 against a defense 329th, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | SUU -7.0 | — |
| Total | — | 153.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | IDST 73 · SUU 80 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SUU -4.0 | — |
| 1H total | 71.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | IDST 33.7 · SUU 37.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3-7 30% | 3-7 30% | 6-4 60% | |
| 3-7 30% | 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
IDST 0–4 SUUSUU leads · 4 games since 2021-22 · SUU has won the last 4 meetings · IDST 1-3 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 9, 2023-24 | IDST 74 @ SUU 82 | SUU -4.5 | SUU W |
| Dec 3, 2022-23 | SUU 69 @ IDST 59 | IDST +4.5 | SUU W |
| Mar 3, 2021-22 | SUU 79 @ IDST 71 | IDST +6 | SUU W |
| Jan 22, 2021-22 | IDST 74 @ SUU 86 | SUU -16 | IDST W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Idaho St
30 games played
Straight up
10-20
33% wins
Against the spread
14-16
47% covers · avg −2.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-13
57% overs · avg +5.4 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 7 | @ | W 71-68 | +4.5 | W +7.5 | 152.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 57-73 | +21.5 | W +5.5 | 135.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 74-83 | +11.5 | W +2.5 | 138.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 55-64 | +14.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | U 119 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 81-84 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 142.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 82-50 | -1.5 | W +30.5 | 148.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 68-59 | -5.5 | W +3.5 | 137.5 | U 127 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 93-79 | -8.5 | W +5.5 | 142.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 69-73 | +9.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Dec 21 | vs | L 83-93 | -5.5 | L −15.5 | 143.5 | O 176 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 97-84 | -8.5 | W +4.5 | 153.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 87-93 | -3.5 | L −9.5 | 142.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 72-85 | +4.5 | L −8.5 | 155.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 81-79 | -4.5 | L −2.5 | 139.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 76-68 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 149.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 66-84 | -6.5 | L −24.5 | 152.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 62-74 | +5.5 | L −6.5 | 144.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 60-69 | +4.5 | L −4.5 | 148.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 79-81 | +2.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 2 | @ | L 65-88 | +7.5 | L −15.5 | 136.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 5 | vs | L 73-79 | -8.5 | L −14.5 | 141.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 61-69 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 75-88 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 147.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 69-99 | +6.5 | L −23.5 | 146.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 73-69 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 91-76 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 144.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 73-83 | -2.5 | L −12.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Mar 2 | @ | L 65-83 | -1.5 | L −19.5 | 160.5 | U 148 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 73-65 | -4.5 | W +3.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 78-85 | +5.5 | L −1.5 | 141.5 | O 163 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
@
USD
W 71-68
+7.5
9
@
SDSU
L 57-73
+5.5
15
@
SEA
L 74-83
+2.5
18
@
SCU
L 55-64
+5.5
26
vs
SHSU
L 81-84
−1.5
28
vs
CSUN
W 82-50
+30.5
3
@
KC
W 68-59
+3.5
6
vs
DEN
W 93-79
+5.5
10
@
UVU
L 69-73
+5.5
21
vs
UCD
L 83-93
−15.5
1
vs
SAC
W 97-84
+4.5
3
vs
PRST
L 87-93
−9.5
8
@
UNCO
L 72-85
−8.5
10
@
NAU
W 81-79
−2.5
15
vs
IDHO
W 76-68
+5.5
17
vs
EWU
L 66-84
−24.5
22
@
MTST
L 62-74
−6.5
24
@
MONT
L 60-69
−4.5
31
@
WEB
L 79-81
+0.5
2
@
PRST
L 65-88
−15.5
5
vs
NAU
L 73-79
−14.5
7
vs
UNCO
L 61-69
−5.5
12
@
EWU
L 75-88
−10.5
14
@
IDHO
L 69-99
−23.5
19
vs
MONT
W 73-69
+5.5
21
vs
MTST
W 91-76
+16.5
28
vs
WEB
L 73-83
−12.5
2
@
SAC
L 65-83
−19.5
7
vs
NAU
W 73-65
+3.5
8
vs
PRST
L 78-85
−1.5
covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −2.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
@
USD
W 71-68
−13.5
9
@
SDSU
L 57-73
−5.5
15
@
SEA
L 74-83
+18.5
18
@
SCU
L 55-64
−22.5
26
vs
SHSU
L 81-84
+22.5
28
vs
CSUN
W 82-50
−16.5
3
@
KC
W 68-59
−10.5
6
vs
DEN
W 93-79
+29.5
10
@
UVU
L 69-73
+0.5
21
vs
UCD
L 83-93
+32.5
1
vs
SAC
W 97-84
+27.5
3
vs
PRST
L 87-93
+37.5
8
@
UNCO
L 72-85
+1.5
10
@
NAU
W 81-79
+20.5
15
vs
IDHO
W 76-68
−5.5
17
vs
EWU
L 66-84
−2.5
22
@
MTST
L 62-74
−8.5
24
@
MONT
L 60-69
−19.5
31
@
WEB
L 79-81
+8.5
2
@
PRST
L 65-88
+16.5
5
vs
NAU
L 73-79
+10.5
7
vs
UNCO
L 61-69
−20.5
12
@
EWU
L 75-88
+15.5
14
@
IDHO
L 69-99
+21.5
19
vs
MONT
W 73-69
−7.5
21
vs
MTST
W 91-76
+22.5
28
vs
WEB
L 73-83
+3.5
2
@
SAC
L 65-83
−12.5
7
vs
NAU
W 73-65
−4.5
8
vs
PRST
L 78-85
+21.5
over 17under 13avg +5.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Southern Utah
29 games played
Straight up
7-22
24% wins
Against the spread
15-14
52% covers · avg +0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-12
59% overs · avg +3.3 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 4 | @ | L 64-81 | +17.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 8 | vs | L 72-95 | +1.5 | L −21.5 | 160.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 85-90 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 153.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 17 | @ | L 50-122 | +35.5 | L −36.5 | 160.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 74-98 | +12.5 | L −11.5 | 157.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 54-61 | +8.5 | W +1.5 | 152.5 | U 115 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 70-68 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | U 138 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 70-81 | +10.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | O 151 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 69-105 | +25.5 | L −10.5 | 153.5 | O 174 |
| Dec 18 | @ | L 57-65 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | U 122 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 66-80 | +7.5 | L −6.5 | 148.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 77-86 | +5.5 | L −3.5 | 138.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 72-89 | +18.5 | W +1.5 | 154.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 55-58 | +14.5 | W +11.5 | 150.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 106-105 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 150.5 | O 211 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 74-52 | +3.5 | W +25.5 | 149.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 84-70 | +12.5 | W +26.5 | 160.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 91-102 | +6.5 | L −4.5 | 149.5 | O 193 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 61-80 | +9.5 | L −9.5 | 144.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 79-76 | +6.5 | W +9.5 | 150.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 59-62 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 149.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 66-83 | +5.5 | L −11.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 78-73 | +8.5 | W +13.5 | 143.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 74-78 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 144.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 83-87 | +8.5 | W +4.5 | 143.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 81-67 | +1.5 | W +15.5 | 156.5 | U 148 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 88-92 | +9.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | O 180 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 75-82 | +6.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | O 157 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 63-69 | +4.5 | L −1.5 | 141.5 | U 132 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
ASU
L 64-81
+0.5
8
vs
RGV
L 72-95
−21.5
15
@
OMA
L 85-90
+3.5
17
@
GONZ
L 50-122
−36.5
19
@
WSU
L 74-98
−11.5
28
@
RMU
L 54-61
+1.5
29
vs
STET
W 70-68
+0.5
6
@
ORST
L 70-81
−0.5
13
@
WASH
L 69-105
−10.5
18
@
NAU
L 57-65
−2.5
29
@
UTU
L 66-80
−6.5
3
vs
UTA
L 77-86
−3.5
8
@
UVU
L 72-89
+1.5
10
@
CBU
L 55-58
+11.5
15
vs
TAR
W 106-105
+4.5
17
vs
ACU
W 74-52
+25.5
21
vs
UVU
W 84-70
+26.5
24
@
UTU
L 91-102
−4.5
29
@
UTA
L 61-80
−9.5
31
@
ACU
W 79-76
+9.5
7
vs
TAR
L 59-62
−1.5
12
vs
CBU
L 66-83
−11.5
14
@
UTA
W 78-73
+13.5
19
@
TAR
L 74-78
+0.5
21
@
ACU
L 83-87
+4.5
28
vs
UTU
W 81-67
+15.5
5
vs
UVU
L 88-92
+5.5
7
vs
CBU
L 75-82
−0.5
12
vs
UTA
L 63-69
−1.5
covered 15didn’t cover 14avg +0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
ASU
L 64-81
−6.5
8
vs
RGV
L 72-95
+6.5
15
@
OMA
L 85-90
+21.5
17
@
GONZ
L 50-122
+11.5
19
@
WSU
L 74-98
+14.5
28
@
RMU
L 54-61
−37.5
29
vs
STET
W 70-68
−10.5
6
@
ORST
L 70-81
+4.5
13
@
WASH
L 69-105
+20.5
18
@
NAU
L 57-65
−28.5
29
@
UTU
L 66-80
−2.5
3
vs
UTA
L 77-86
+24.5
8
@
UVU
L 72-89
+6.5
10
@
CBU
L 55-58
−37.5
15
vs
TAR
W 106-105
+60.5
17
vs
ACU
W 74-52
−23.5
21
vs
UVU
W 84-70
−6.5
24
@
UTU
L 91-102
+43.5
29
@
UTA
L 61-80
−3.5
31
@
ACU
W 79-76
+4.5
7
vs
TAR
L 59-62
−28.5
12
vs
CBU
L 66-83
+1.5
14
@
UTA
W 78-73
+7.5
19
@
TAR
L 74-78
+7.5
21
@
ACU
L 83-87
+26.5
28
vs
UTU
W 81-67
−8.5
5
vs
UVU
L 88-92
+29.5
7
vs
CBU
L 75-82
+8.5
12
vs
UTA
L 63-69
−9.5
over 17under 12avg +3.3 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: Idaho St 0, Southern Utah 0, even 5
Idaho StBetterSouthern Utah
G L. Birley0.5 pts · 0.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G B. Johnson0 pts · 0.3 reb · 0.9 ast
Not ranked
G E. Harel TR0 pts · 0 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G Z. Kidd0.3 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
G A. Goffe NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
F J. Feroah14 pts · 6.9 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 87
G J. Dorsey NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
F J. Nicholls TR10.8 pts · 5.3 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 95
F Q. Patterson0.9 pts · 0.6 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F C. Barclay4.5 pts · 2.7 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 8
Idaho StBetterSouthern Utah
IDST offense324th of 366 · -10.6
=Even
SUU defense329th of 366 · -8.6
IDST defense349th of 366 · -9.6
→SUUBig
SUU offense211th of 366 · -6.4
Backcourt-0.3 · 4 players
=Even
Backcourt-0.4 · 2 players
Frontcourt-1.3 · 1 player
→SUUBig
Frontcourt+3.8 · 3 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestIDST betterSUU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
L. Birley4 minE. Harel1 min · TRA. GoffeNewJ. DorseyNewM. MorrisNewT. VirgilNew
Forwards
Q. Patterson7 minM. JohnsonNewI. PalmerNewK. DeMuynckNewM. JohnsonNewB. LowenbachNew
Guards
B. Johnson4 minZ. Kidd3 minD. SandersNewA. BrelandNewJ. BrownNewC. DegraffenriedNew
Forwards
J. Feroah31 minJ. Nicholls18 min · TRC. Barclay16 minJ. RiakNewJ. NichollsNewD. SmithNew
Centers
M. ProtsenkoNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 73.6 #213 | Points per game | 72.3 #235 |
| 1.10 #135 | Points per possession | 1.01 #310 |
| 67.3 #266 | Pace (possessions) | 71.2 #62 |
| Shooting | ||
| 51.9 #151 | Effective FG% | 50.8 #200 |
| 33.6 #192 | 3-point % | 33.0 #231 |
| 41.9 #137 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.5 #261 |
| 38.0 #104 | Free throw rate | 33.1 #235 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.1 #213 | Turnover rate | 20.3 #352 |
| 32.8 #94 | Offensive rebound rate | 28.8 #239 |
| 11.8 #302 | Assists per game | 12.9 #223 |
| Defense | ||
| 77.6 #255 | Points allowed | 81.3 #335 |
| 1.14 #314 | Points allowed per possession | 1.14 #308 |
| 54.5 #315 | Opponent effective FG% | 53.3 #276 |
| 34.5 #220 | Opponent 3-point % | 38.0 #358 |
| 14.6 #316 | Turnovers forced | 14.8 #302 |
| 72.1 #63 | Defensive rebound rate | 66.4 #309 |
| 5.2 #322 | Steals per game | 5.2 #317 |
| 4.0 #78 | Blocks per game | 4.1 #60 |
Idaho St
10-20 in 2025-26 overall · 6-14 in conference · Big Sky Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Portland St78–85
- Wvs N Arizona73–65
- L@ Sacramento St65–83
- Lvs Weber St73–83
- Wvs Montana St91–76
A week or more of rest.
Southern Utah
7-22 in 2025-26 overall · 6-13 in conference · Big Sky Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UT Arlington63–69
- Lvs CA Baptist75–82
- Lvs Utah Valley88–92
- Wvs Utah Tech81–67
- L@ Abilene Chrstn83–87
A week or more of rest.