Simon Skjodt Assembly Hall · at Indiana
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | IU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 IU 82–79 · win probability IU 62%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 161.0
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: IU has more of the edges
UCF 1, IU 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UCF 35.0%, IU 26.9%. Defensive: UCF 71.2%, IU 70.8%
Shooting
Effective FG%: UCF 52.6 and allows 52.1; IU 56.1 and allows 49.0
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: UCF plays 71.2 a game (63rd fastest), IU 67.4 (260th). Faster games mean more points
IU offense vs UCF defense
Offense 41st of 366 against a defense 93rd, on the model’s ratings
Home court
IU at home. This season: IU 0-0 at home, UCF 0-0 away
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: UCF 30.5, IU 35.0. Allowed: UCF 34.9, IU 37.0
Even
Three-pointers
UCF hits 36.2% and allows 33.9%; IU hits 34.7% and allows 33.1%. Threes are 34.8% and 50.5% of their shots
Even
UCF offense vs IU defense
Offense 18th of 366 against a defense 38th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UCF 16.0%, IU 15.1%. Forced: UCF 15.7%, IU 15.1%
Context
Schedule so far
UCF has played the 41st-hardest schedule, IU the 48th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UCF 20%, IU 19%. Transfers in: UCF 7, IU 8. 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 | — | IU -3.6 | — |
| Total | — | 161.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | UCF 78.7 · IU 82.3 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | IU -2.0 | — |
| 1H total | 75.2 | — |
| 1H projected score | UCF 36.6 · IU 38.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% | |
| 3-7 30% | 2-8 20% | 4-6 40% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
No more games listed yet.
No more games listed yet.
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
UCF
33 games played
Straight up
21-12
64% wins
Against the spread
16-17
48% covers · avg +1.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-20
39% overs · avg +1.2 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 82-78 | -8.5 | L −4.5 | 140.5 | O 160 |
| Nov 8 | vs | L 93-105 | +10.5 | L −1.5 | 166.5 | O 198 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 97-60 | -23.5 | W +13.5 | 169.5 | U 157 |
| Nov 14 | @ | W 86-74 | +10.5 | W +22.5 | 172.5 | U 160 |
| Nov 17 | vs | W 87-83 | -13.5 | L −9.5 | 163.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 77-67 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 149.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 102-91 | -13.5 | L −2.5 | 162.5 | O 193 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 82-57 | -25.5 | L −0.5 | 159.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 86-61 | -9.5 | W +15.5 | 148.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 81-63 | -16.5 | W +1.5 | 160.5 | U 144 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 102-80 | -17.5 | W +4.5 | 161.5 | O 182 |
| Dec 23 | vs | W 85-80 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 162.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 81-75 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 157.5 | U 156 |
| Jan 6 | @ | L 76-87 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 175.5 | U 163 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 73-72 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 82-73 | +2.5 | W +11.5 | 170.5 | U 155 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 77-84 | +9.5 | W +2.5 | 165.5 | U 161 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 57-87 | +14.5 | L −15.5 | 156.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 95-86 | +3.5 | W +12.5 | 159.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 79-76 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 161.5 | U 155 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 88-80 | +5.5 | W +13.5 | 159.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 55-79 | +15.5 | L −8.5 | 146.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 8 | @ | L 72-92 | +4.5 | L −15.5 | 146.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 67-74 | -3.5 | L −10.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 17 | vs | W 82-71 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 73-71 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 154.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 24 | @ | W 97-84 | +14.5 | W +27.5 | 162.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 86-87 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 159.5 | O 173 |
| Mar 3 | vs | L 104-111 | -8.5 | L −15.5 | 167.5 | O 215 |
| Mar 6 | @ | L 62-77 | +4.5 | L −10.5 | 142.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 66-65 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 149.5 | U 131 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 59-81 | +15.5 | L −6.5 | 159.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 71-75 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
HOF
W 82-78
−4.5
8
vs
VAN
L 93-105
−1.5
11
vs
FAMU
W 97-60
+13.5
14
@
TA&M
W 86-74
+22.5
17
vs
OAK
W 87-83
−9.5
20
vs
PITT
W 77-67
+11.5
25
vs
QUIN
W 102-91
−2.5
29
vs
VMI
W 82-57
−0.5
7
vs
TOW
W 86-61
+15.5
17
vs
MER
W 81-63
+1.5
20
vs
FGCU
W 102-80
+4.5
23
vs
FAU
W 85-80
−3.5
3
vs
KU
W 81-75
+10.5
6
@
OKST
L 76-87
−9.5
11
vs
CIN
W 73-72
−1.5
14
@
KSU
W 82-73
+11.5
17
vs
ARIZ
L 77-84
+2.5
20
@
ISU
L 57-87
−15.5
24
@
COLO
W 95-86
+12.5
27
vs
ASU
W 79-76
−3.5
31
vs
TTU
W 88-80
+13.5
4
@
HOU
L 55-79
−8.5
8
@
CIN
L 72-92
−15.5
14
vs
WVU
L 67-74
−10.5
17
vs
TCU
W 82-71
+12.5
21
@
UTAH
W 73-71
+0.5
24
@
BYU
W 97-84
+27.5
28
vs
BAY
L 86-87
−2.5
3
vs
OKST
L 104-111
−15.5
6
@
WVU
L 62-77
−10.5
11
vs
CIN
W 66-65
+4.5
12
vs
ARIZ
L 59-81
−6.5
20
vs
UCLA
L 71-75
+1.5
covered 16didn’t cover 17avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
HOF
W 82-78
+19.5
8
vs
VAN
L 93-105
+31.5
11
vs
FAMU
W 97-60
−12.5
14
@
TA&M
W 86-74
−12.5
17
vs
OAK
W 87-83
+6.5
20
vs
PITT
W 77-67
−5.5
25
vs
QUIN
W 102-91
+30.5
29
vs
VMI
W 82-57
−20.5
7
vs
TOW
W 86-61
−1.5
17
vs
MER
W 81-63
−16.5
20
vs
FGCU
W 102-80
+20.5
23
vs
FAU
W 85-80
+2.5
3
vs
KU
W 81-75
−1.5
6
@
OKST
L 76-87
−12.5
11
vs
CIN
W 73-72
−5.5
14
@
KSU
W 82-73
−15.5
17
vs
ARIZ
L 77-84
−4.5
20
@
ISU
L 57-87
−12.5
24
@
COLO
W 95-86
+21.5
27
vs
ASU
W 79-76
−6.5
31
vs
TTU
W 88-80
+8.5
4
@
HOU
L 55-79
−12.5
8
@
CIN
L 72-92
+17.5
14
vs
WVU
L 67-74
+0.5
17
vs
TCU
W 82-71
−1.5
21
@
UTAH
W 73-71
−10.5
24
@
BYU
W 97-84
+18.5
28
vs
BAY
L 86-87
+13.5
3
vs
OKST
L 104-111
+47.5
6
@
WVU
L 62-77
−3.5
11
vs
CIN
W 66-65
−18.5
12
vs
ARIZ
L 59-81
−19.5
20
vs
UCLA
L 71-75
−5.5
over 13under 20avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Indiana
32 games played
Straight up
18-14
56% wins
Against the spread
14-18
44% covers · avg −1.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-18
44% overs · avg −0.8 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 5 | vs | W 98-51 | -30.5 | W +16.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Nov 9 | vs | W 100-77 | -3.5 | W +19.5 | 156.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 101-70 | -24.5 | W +6.5 | 165.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 69-61 | -28.5 | L −20.5 | 157.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 73-53 | -32.5 | L −12.5 | 155.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 86-69 | -10.5 | W +6.5 | 164.5 | U 155 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 100-56 | -29.5 | W +14.5 | 148.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 64-73 | -7.5 | L −16.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 78-87 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 162.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 9 | vs | W 113-72 | -14.5 | W +26.5 | 152.5 | O 185 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 60-72 | +3.5 | L −8.5 | 156.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 78-58 | -38.5 | L −18.5 | 152.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 81-60 | -21.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 90-80 | -9.5 | W +0.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 84-66 | -7.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 77-83 | -4.5 | L −10.5 | 150.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 13 | @ | L 60-81 | +6.5 | L −14.5 | 145.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 57-74 | -3.5 | L −20.5 | 146.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 72-86 | +15.5 | W +1.5 | 163.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 23 | @ | W 82-59 | -7.5 | W +15.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 72-67 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 150.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 98-97 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | O 195 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 75-81 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 153.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 78-77 | -3.5 | L −2.5 | 157.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 9 | vs | W 92-74 | -10.5 | W +7.5 | 143.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 51-71 | +8.5 | L −11.5 | 153.5 | U 122 |
| Feb 20 | @ | L 64-93 | +11.5 | L −17.5 | 150.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 24 | vs | L 68-72 | -9.5 | L −13.5 | 145.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 1 | vs | L 64-77 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | U 141 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 77-47 | -7.5 | W +22.5 | 138.5 | U 124 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 78-91 | +3.5 | L −9.5 | 148.5 | O 169 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 61-74 | -6.5 | L −19.5 | 142.5 | U 135 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
AAMU
W 98-51
+16.5
9
vs
MARQ
W 100-77
+19.5
12
vs
MILW
W 101-70
+6.5
16
vs
UIW
W 69-61
−20.5
20
vs
LIN
W 73-53
−12.5
25
vs
KSU
W 86-69
+6.5
29
vs
BCU
W 100-56
+14.5
3
@
MINN
L 64-73
−16.5
6
vs
LOU
L 78-87
−5.5
9
vs
PSU
W 113-72
+26.5
13
@
UK
L 60-72
−8.5
20
vs
CHST
W 78-58
−18.5
22
vs
SIE
W 81-60
−0.5
4
vs
WASH
W 90-80
+0.5
7
@
MD
W 84-66
+10.5
10
vs
NEB
L 77-83
−10.5
13
@
MSU
L 60-81
−14.5
17
vs
IOWA
L 57-74
−20.5
20
@
MICH
L 72-86
+1.5
23
@
RUTG
W 82-59
+15.5
27
vs
PUR
W 72-67
+9.5
31
@
UCLA
W 98-97
+4.5
3
@
USC
L 75-81
−7.5
7
vs
WIS
W 78-77
−2.5
9
vs
ORE
W 92-74
+7.5
15
@
ILL
L 51-71
−11.5
20
@
PUR
L 64-93
−17.5
24
vs
NU
L 68-72
−13.5
1
vs
MSU
L 64-77
−10.5
4
vs
MINN
W 77-47
+22.5
7
@
OSU
L 78-91
−9.5
11
vs
NU
L 61-74
−19.5
covered 14didn’t cover 18avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
AAMU
W 98-51
+1.5
9
vs
MARQ
W 100-77
+20.5
12
vs
MILW
W 101-70
+5.5
16
vs
UIW
W 69-61
−27.5
20
vs
LIN
W 73-53
−29.5
25
vs
KSU
W 86-69
−9.5
29
vs
BCU
W 100-56
+7.5
3
@
MINN
L 64-73
−7.5
6
vs
LOU
L 78-87
+2.5
9
vs
PSU
W 113-72
+32.5
13
@
UK
L 60-72
−24.5
20
vs
CHST
W 78-58
−16.5
22
vs
SIE
W 81-60
−4.5
4
vs
WASH
W 90-80
+17.5
7
@
MD
W 84-66
+2.5
10
vs
NEB
L 77-83
+9.5
13
@
MSU
L 60-81
−4.5
17
vs
IOWA
L 57-74
−15.5
20
@
MICH
L 72-86
−5.5
23
@
RUTG
W 82-59
−6.5
27
vs
PUR
W 72-67
−11.5
31
@
UCLA
W 98-97
+50.5
3
@
USC
L 75-81
+2.5
7
vs
WIS
W 78-77
−2.5
9
vs
ORE
W 92-74
+22.5
15
@
ILL
L 51-71
−31.5
20
@
PUR
L 64-93
+6.5
24
vs
NU
L 68-72
−5.5
1
vs
MSU
L 64-77
−3.5
4
vs
MINN
W 77-47
−14.5
7
@
OSU
L 78-91
+20.5
11
vs
NU
L 61-74
−7.5
over 14under 18avg −0.8 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: UCF 2, Indiana 2, even 1
UCFBetterIndiana
G C. Vasko TR11 pts · 4.7 reb · 4.1 ast
Score 52
→IUBig
G M. Burton TR18.5 pts · 2.8 reb · 3.7 ast
Score 98
G D. Johnson TR23.5 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 100
←UCFSmall
G B. Lindsay TR12.3 pts · 2.1 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 75
F L. Walker TR18.7 pts · 4.9 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 87
←UCFSmall
G J. Mustaf TR10.4 pts · 4.3 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 65
F I. Malone TR10.4 pts · 5.5 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 82
→IUSmall
F A. Sherrell TR11.1 pts · 6.2 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 98
F C. Abass TR8.4 pts · 5.7 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 70
=Even
C S. Yigitoglu TR10.7 pts · 7.9 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 64
UCFBetterIndiana
UCF offense18th of 366 · +8.0
=Even
IU defense38th of 366 · +3.0
UCF defense93rd of 366 · -0.4
=Even
IU offense41st of 366 · +4.8
Backcourt+7.4 · 2 players
←UCFSmall
Backcourt+6.3 · 3 players
Frontcourt+5.3 · 3 players
=Even
Frontcourt+5.8 · 2 players
Bench+2.0 · 5 players
←UCFSmall
Bench+0.1 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestUCF betterIU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
C. Vasko33 min · TRD. Johnson26 min · TRM. Dean17 min · TRC. Pacheco16 minA. DeanNewT. JonesNew
Forwards
L. Walker34 min · TRI. Malone23 min · TRC. Abass20 min · TRJ. Asemota8 min · TRL. GivanNewD. MannNew
Centers
J. Bol19 minE. Hulsewe5 min
Guards
M. Burton30 min · TRB. Lindsay29 min · TRJ. Mustaf28 min · TRJ. Monden21 min · TRD. Harris10 min · TRD. Snively2 min
Forwards
A. Sherrell24 min · TRS. Alexis21 minT. Sisley13 minB. Winker3 min · TRV. KarvalaNewT. ManhertzNew
Centers
S. Yigitoglu29 min · TRC. SokolovNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 80.7 #53 | Points per game | 78.2 #93 |
| 1.13 #77 | Points per possession | 1.16 #46 |
| 71.2 #63 | Pace (possessions) | 67.4 #260 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.6 #123 | Effective FG% | 56.1 #22 |
| 36.2 #49 | 3-point % | 34.7 #138 |
| 34.8 #281 | 3-point attempt rate | 50.5 #14 |
| 30.5 #295 | Free throw rate | 35.0 #179 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.0 #137 | Turnover rate | 15.1 #71 |
| 35.0 #47 | Offensive rebound rate | 26.9 #300 |
| 15.7 #56 | Assists per game | 16.6 #34 |
| Defense | ||
| 78.3 #274 | Points allowed | 72.2 #109 |
| 1.10 #219 | Points allowed per possession | 1.07 #131 |
| 52.1 #221 | Opponent effective FG% | 49.0 #68 |
| 33.9 #176 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.1 #128 |
| 15.7 #241 | Turnovers forced | 15.1 #284 |
| 71.2 #96 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.8 #122 |
| 5.6 #285 | Steals per game | 4.7 #348 |
| 3.0 #225 | Blocks per game | 2.7 #278 |
UCF
21-12 in 2025-26 overall · 10-10 in conference · Big 12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UCLA71–75
- Lvs Arizona59–81
- Wvs Cincinnati66–65
- L@ West Virginia62–77
- Lvs Oklahoma St104–111
A week or more of rest.
Indiana
18-14 in 2025-26 overall · 9-12 in conference · Big Ten Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Northwestern61–74
- L@ Ohio State78–91
- Wvs Minnesota77–47
- Lvs Michigan St64–77
- Lvs Northwestern68–72
A week or more of rest.