Minnesota Golden Gophers at Cincinnati Bearcats: Model Line and Edge

Mon, Nov 9, 7:00 PM ETFifth Third Arena · at Cincinnati

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Minnesota and Cincinnati
MINN	This season	CIN
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 CIN 73–64 · win probability CIN 79%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 137.7

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: CIN has more of the edges

MINN 2, CIN 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

MINNBig

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: MINN 66%, CIN 1%. Transfers in: MINN 5, CIN 12. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

CINBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: MINN 26.8%, CIN 30.6%. Defensive: MINN 70.5%, CIN 72.7%

Context

Tempo

About 67 possessions: MINN plays 63.6 a game (362nd fastest), CIN 69.4 (152nd). Faster games mean more points

MINNSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: MINN 35.8, CIN 29.4. Allowed: MINN 26.9, CIN 30.0

CINSmall

MINN offense vs CIN defense

Offense 120th of 366 against a defense 24th, on the model’s ratings

CINSmall

Three-pointers

MINN hits 34.1% and allows 34.6%; CIN hits 33.9% and allows 31.0%. Threes are 47.1% and 43.8% of their shots

CINSmall

Home court

CIN at home. This season: CIN 0-0 at home, MINN 0-0 away

Context

Schedule so far

MINN has played the 71st-hardest schedule, CIN the 39th. A record against a soft schedule means less

Even

CIN offense vs MINN defense

Offense 49th of 366 against a defense 22nd, on the model’s ratings

Even

Turnovers

Turnover rate: MINN 16.6%, CIN 17.0%. Forced: MINN 16.8%, CIN 18.2%

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: MINN 53.9 and allows 51.9; CIN 50.5 and allows 47.4

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	—	CIN -9.0	—
Total	—	137.7	—
Projected score	—	MINN 64.3 · CIN 73.4

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	CIN -5.3	—
1H total	64.5	—
1H projected score	MINN 29.6 · CIN 34.9	—

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	Venue	Role
MINN WLLLL	13-20	39%	5-6	—
CIN WWLLL	14-19	42%	10-8	—

Venue/role: MINN away; CIN home. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
MINN OUUOU	12-21	36%	15-18
CIN OOUOU	13-20	39%	18-15

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
MINN	4-6 40%	4-6 40%	3-7 30%
CIN	7-3 70%	5-5 50%	7-3 70%

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

Minnesota

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 12	vs SOU	No recent meeting
Nov 16	vs WIU	No recent meeting
Nov 20	vs OKST	No recent meeting

Cincinnati

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 14	@ DAY	W74–62WU
Nov 18	vs YSU	No recent meeting
Nov 22	vs UML	No recent meeting

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

ATS History · 2025-26

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

Minnesota

33 games played

Straight up

15-18

45% wins

Against the spread

13-20

39% covers · avg −1.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

12-21

36% overs · avg −4.3 pts vs the total

Straight up

15-1845%

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

2 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

13-2039%

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

4 straight misses ATS0 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

12-2136%

U U U U U O U O U U U U U O O U O O O U U O O U U U O U O U U O U

1 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 3	vsGWEB	W 87-60	-28.5	L −1.5	148.5	U 147
Nov 8	vsALCN	W 95-50	-31.5	W +13.5	152.5	U 145
Nov 12	@MIZ	L 60-83	+7.5	L −15.5	158.5	U 143
Nov 15	vsGB	W 72-65	-25.5	L −18.5	146.5	U 137
Nov 18	vsCHST	W 66-54	-27.5	L −15.5	144.5	U 120
Nov 22	vsSF	L 65-77	-1.5	L −13.5	140.5	O 142
Nov 27	vsSTAN	L 68-72	+2.5	L −1.5	142.5	U 140
Nov 28	vsSCU	L 75-86	+5.5	L −5.5	138.5	O 161
Dec 3	vsIU	W 73-64	+7.5	W +16.5	144.5	U 137
Dec 10	@PUR	L 57-85	+19.5	L −8.5	143.5	U 142
Dec 14	vsTXSO	W 89-53	-21.5	W +14.5	144.5	U 142
Dec 21	vsCAM	W 78-50	-13.5	W +14.5	145.5	U 128
Dec 29	vsFDU	W 60-43	-25.5	L −8.5	139.5	U 103
Jan 3	@NU	W 84-78	+4.5	W +10.5	138.5	O 162
Jan 6	vsIOWA	W 70-67	+4.5	W +7.5	130.5	O 137
Jan 9	vsUSC	L 69-70	-3.5	L −4.5	147.5	U 139
Jan 13	vsWIS	L 75-78	+1.5	L −1.5	146.5	O 153
Jan 17	@ILL	L 67-77	+15.5	W +5.5	142.5	O 144
Jan 20	@OSU	L 74-82	+7.5	L −0.5	143.5	O 156
Jan 24	vsNEB	L 57-76	+4.5	L −14.5	140.5	U 133
Jan 28	@WIS	L 63-67	+9.5	W +5.5	146.5	U 130
Feb 1	@PSU	L 75-77	-2.5	L −4.5	142.5	O 152
Feb 4	vsMSU	W 76-73	+8.5	W +11.5	136.5	O 149
Feb 8	vsMD	L 62-67	-10.5	L −15.5	138.5	U 129
Feb 14	@WASH	L 57-69	+6.5	L −5.5	138.5	U 126
Feb 17	@ORE	W 61-44	+3.5	W +20.5	136.5	U 105
Feb 21	vsRUTG	W 80-61	-8.5	W +10.5	136.5	O 141
Feb 24	@MICH	L 67-77	+22.5	W +12.5	145.5	U 144
Feb 28	vsUCLA	W 78-73	+1.5	W +6.5	136.5	O 151
Mar 4	@IU	L 47-77	+7.5	L −22.5	138.5	U 124
Mar 7	vsNU	W 67-66	-4.5	L −3.5	133.5	U 133
Mar 11	vsRUTG	L 67-72	-6.5	L −11.5	135.5	O 139
Apr 1	vsBAY	L 48-67	+3.5	L −15.5	146.5	U 115

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

GWEB

W 87-60

−1.5

ALCN

W 95-50

+13.5

MIZ

L 60-83

−15.5

W 72-65

−18.5

CHST

W 66-54

−15.5

L 65-77

−13.5

STAN

L 68-72

−1.5

SCU

L 75-86

−5.5

W 73-64

+16.5

PUR

L 57-85

−8.5

TXSO

W 89-53

+14.5

CAM

W 78-50

+14.5

FDU

W 60-43

−8.5

W 84-78

+10.5

IOWA

W 70-67

+7.5

USC

L 69-70

−4.5

WIS

L 75-78

−1.5

ILL

L 67-77

+5.5

OSU

L 74-82

−0.5

NEB

L 57-76

−14.5

WIS

L 63-67

+5.5

PSU

L 75-77

−4.5

MSU

W 76-73

+11.5

L 62-67

−15.5

WASH

L 57-69

−5.5

ORE

W 61-44

+20.5

RUTG

W 80-61

+10.5

MICH

L 67-77

+12.5

UCLA

W 78-73

+6.5

L 47-77

−22.5

W 67-66

−3.5

RUTG

L 67-72

−11.5

BAY

L 48-67

−15.5

covered 13didn’t cover 20avg −1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

GWEB

W 87-60

−1.5

ALCN

W 95-50

−7.5

MIZ

L 60-83

−15.5

W 72-65

−9.5

CHST

W 66-54

−24.5

L 65-77

+1.5

STAN

L 68-72

−2.5

SCU

L 75-86

+22.5

W 73-64

−7.5

PUR

L 57-85

−1.5

TXSO

W 89-53

−2.5

CAM

W 78-50

−17.5

FDU

W 60-43

−36.5

W 84-78

+23.5

IOWA

W 70-67

+6.5

USC

L 69-70

−8.5

WIS

L 75-78

+6.5

ILL

L 67-77

+1.5

OSU

L 74-82

+12.5

NEB

L 57-76

−7.5

WIS

L 63-67

−16.5

PSU

L 75-77

+9.5

MSU

W 76-73

+12.5

L 62-67

−9.5

WASH

L 57-69

−12.5

ORE

W 61-44

−31.5

RUTG

W 80-61

+4.5

MICH

L 67-77

−1.5

UCLA

W 78-73

+14.5

L 47-77

−14.5

W 67-66

−0.5

RUTG

L 67-72

+3.5

BAY

L 48-67

−31.5

over 12under 21avg −4.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Cincinnati

33 games played

Straight up

18-15

55% wins

Against the spread

14-19

42% covers · avg −0.4 pts vs the line

Over / Under

13-20

39% overs · avg −4.3 pts vs the total

Straight up

18-1555%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

14-1942%

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

3 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

13-2039%

O U U U U O U U O U U U O U U U U O U O U U U O O U O O O O U O U

2 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 3	vsWCU	W 94-63	-22.5	W +8.5	143.5	O 157
Nov 7	vsGAST	W 74-64	-29.5	L −19.5	151.5	U 138
Nov 11	vsDAY	W 74-62	-5.5	W +6.5	147.5	U 136
Nov 16	vsMSM	W 72-55	-25.5	L −8.5	145.5	U 127
Nov 21	vsLOU	L 64-74	+8.5	L −1.5	163.5	U 138
Nov 24	vsNJIT	W 94-67	-34.5	L −7.5	141.5	O 161
Nov 26	vsEMU	L 56-64	-22.5	L −30.5	146.5	U 120
Dec 1	vsTAR	W 76-58	-24.5	L −6.5	142.5	U 134
Dec 5	@XAV	L 74-79	-1.5	L −6.5	147.5	O 153
Dec 13	vsUGA	L 65-84	+5.5	L −13.5	157.5	U 149
Dec 17	vsALST	W 88-51	-21.5	W +15.5	145.5	U 139
Dec 21	vsCLEM	L 65-68	+3.5	W +0.5	140.5	U 133
Dec 29	vsLIP	W 89-62	-13.5	W +13.5	150.5	O 151
Jan 3	vsHOU	L 60-67	+4.5	L −2.5	135.5	U 127
Jan 6	@WVU	L 60-62	-1.5	L −3.5	132.5	U 122
Jan 11	@UCF	L 72-73	+2.5	W +1.5	150.5	U 145
Jan 14	vsCOLO	W 77-68	-8.5	W +0.5	145.5	U 145
Jan 17	vsISU	W 79-70	+5.5	W +14.5	141.5	O 149
Jan 21	@ARIZ	L 51-77	+13.5	L −12.5	152.5	U 128
Jan 24	@ASU	L 68-82	-3.5	L −17.5	146.5	O 150
Jan 28	vsBAY	W 67-57	-3.5	W +6.5	145.5	U 124
Jan 31	@HOU	L 54-76	+13.5	L −8.5	135.5	U 130
Feb 5	vsWVU	L 54-59	-5.5	L −10.5	127.5	U 113
Feb 8	vsUCF	W 92-72	-4.5	W +15.5	146.5	O 164
Feb 11	@KSU	W 91-62	-2.5	W +26.5	147.5	O 153
Feb 15	vsUTAH	W 69-65	-12.5	L −8.5	139.5	U 134
Feb 21	@KU	W 84-68	+8.5	W +24.5	139.5	O 152
Feb 24	@TTU	L 68-80	+6.5	L −5.5	143.5	O 148
Feb 28	vsOKST	W 91-68	-9.5	W +13.5	151.5	O 159
Mar 3	vsBYU	W 90-68	-1.5	W +20.5	151.5	O 158
Mar 7	@TCU	L 63-73	+2.5	L −7.5	140.5	U 136
Mar 10	vsUTAH	W 73-66	-12.5	L −5.5	138.5	O 139
Mar 11	vsUCF	L 65-66	-3.5	L −4.5	149.5	U 131

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

WCU

W 94-63

+8.5

GAST

W 74-64

−19.5

DAY

W 74-62

+6.5

MSM

W 72-55

−8.5

LOU

L 64-74

−1.5

NJIT

W 94-67

−7.5

EMU

L 56-64

−30.5

TAR

W 76-58

−6.5

XAV

L 74-79

−6.5

UGA

L 65-84

−13.5

ALST

W 88-51

+15.5

CLEM

L 65-68

+0.5

LIP

W 89-62

+13.5

HOU

L 60-67

−2.5

WVU

L 60-62

−3.5

UCF

L 72-73

+1.5

COLO

W 77-68

+0.5

ISU

W 79-70

+14.5

ARIZ

L 51-77

−12.5

ASU

L 68-82

−17.5

BAY

W 67-57

+6.5

HOU

L 54-76

−8.5

WVU

L 54-59

−10.5

UCF

W 92-72

+15.5

KSU

W 91-62

+26.5

UTAH

W 69-65

−8.5

W 84-68

+24.5

TTU

L 68-80

−5.5

OKST

W 91-68

+13.5

BYU

W 90-68

+20.5

TCU

L 63-73

−7.5

UTAH

W 73-66

−5.5

UCF

L 65-66

−4.5

covered 14didn’t cover 19avg −0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

WCU

W 94-63

+13.5

GAST

W 74-64

−13.5

DAY

W 74-62

−11.5

MSM

W 72-55

−18.5

LOU

L 64-74

−25.5

NJIT

W 94-67

+19.5

EMU

L 56-64

−26.5

TAR

W 76-58

−8.5

XAV

L 74-79

+5.5

UGA

L 65-84

−8.5

ALST

W 88-51

−6.5

CLEM

L 65-68

−7.5

LIP

W 89-62

+0.5

HOU

L 60-67

−8.5

WVU

L 60-62

−10.5

UCF

L 72-73

−5.5

COLO

W 77-68

−0.5

ISU

W 79-70

+7.5

ARIZ

L 51-77

−24.5

ASU

L 68-82

+3.5

BAY

W 67-57

−21.5

HOU

L 54-76

−5.5

WVU

L 54-59

−14.5

UCF

W 92-72

+17.5

KSU

W 91-62

+5.5

UTAH

W 69-65

−5.5

W 84-68

+12.5

TTU

L 68-80

+4.5

OKST

W 91-68

+7.5

BYU

W 90-68

+6.5

TCU

L 63-73

−4.5

UTAH

W 73-66

+0.5

UCF

L 65-66

−18.5

over 13under 20avg −4.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.

Cincinnati has the better starters

Position by position: Minnesota 0, Cincinnati 4, even 1

MinnesotaBetterCincinnati

G I. Asuma10.9 pts · 4 reb · 3.7 ast Score 64

CINSmall

G J. Campbell TR19.3 pts · 4.4 reb · 5.1 ast Score 95

G M. Palmer TR4.6 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.6 ast Score 43

CINSmall

G T. Carson TR12.2 pts · 6.5 reb · 2.9 ast Score 75

F B. Durkin10.2 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.8 ast Score 65

CINSmall

G M. Collins TR17.3 pts · 2.4 reb · 1.6 ast Score 94

F J. Crocker-Johnson13.4 pts · 6.8 reb · 1.8 ast Score 81

Even

G T. Riley TR15 pts · 3.9 reb · 4.4 ast Score 92

F G. Grove4 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.7 ast Score 59

CINSmall

F T. Tejada TR17.9 pts · 5.4 reb · 2.2 ast Score 91

MinnesotaBetterCincinnati

MINN offense120th of 366 · -2.8

CINSmall

CIN defense24th of 366 · +4.9

MINN defense22nd of 366 · +5.2

Even

CIN offense49th of 366 · +3.7

Backcourt-0.5 · 2 players

CINBig

Backcourt+12.2 · 4 players

Frontcourt+2.9 · 3 players

CINSmall

Frontcourt+4.0 · 1 player

Bench-2.3 · 5 players

CINBig

Bench+6.3 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestMINN betterCIN 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

Minnesota

Guards

I. Asuma34 minM. Palmer18 min · TRK. Evans18 min · TRK. Shinholster13 minN. Groves6 min · TRW. Grady6 min · TR

Forwards

B. Durkin33 minJ. Crocker-Johnson32 minG. Grove21 minN. AndersonNew

Centers

M. Kordel4 min · TRC. MpoyiNew

Cincinnati

Guards

J. Campbell35 min · TRT. Carson33 min · TRM. Collins31 min · TRT. Riley28 min · TRM. Colvin27 min · TRA. Fleming26 min · TR

Forwards

T. Tejada36 min · TRR. Allenspach25 min · TRJ. Hastings23 min · TRA. Elamin20 min · TRD. VadenNewD. IwezeNew

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

MINN69.4 #294

CIN73.1 #221

Points per possession

MINN1.10 #147

CIN1.05 #243

Pace (possessions)

MINN63.6 #362

CIN69.4 #152

Shooting

Effective FG%

MINN53.9 #69

CIN50.5 #213

3-point %

MINN34.1 #164

CIN33.9 #175

3-point attempt rate

MINN47.1 #31

CIN43.8 #94

Free throw rate

MINN35.8 #159

CIN29.4 #323

Possessions

Turnover rate

MINN16.6 #170

CIN17.0 #203

Offensive rebound rate

MINN26.8 #304

CIN30.6 #174

Assists per game

MINN17.0 #25

CIN16.6 #35

Defense

Points allowed

MINN68.5 #38

CIN67.6 #27

Points allowed per possession

MINN1.07 #139

CIN0.97 #9

Opponent effective FG%

MINN51.9 #207

CIN47.4 #27

Opponent 3-point %

MINN34.6 #229

CIN31.0 #35

Turnovers forced

MINN16.8 #168

CIN18.2 #89

Defensive rebound rate

MINN70.5 #137

CIN72.7 #45

Steals per game

MINN6.3 #197

CIN6.3 #208

Blocks per game

MINN2.7 #284

CIN4.2 #53

MINN		CIN
Scoring
69.4 #294	Points per game	73.1 #221
1.10 #147	Points per possession	1.05 #243
63.6 #362	Pace (possessions)	69.4 #152
Shooting
53.9 #69	Effective FG%	50.5 #213
34.1 #164	3-point %	33.9 #175
47.1 #31	3-point attempt rate	43.8 #94
35.8 #159	Free throw rate	29.4 #323
Possessions
16.6 #170	Turnover rate	17.0 #203
26.8 #304	Offensive rebound rate	30.6 #174
17.0 #25	Assists per game	16.6 #35
Defense
68.5 #38	Points allowed	67.6 #27
1.07 #139	Points allowed per possession	0.97 #9
51.9 #207	Opponent effective FG%	47.4 #27
34.6 #229	Opponent 3-point %	31.0 #35
16.8 #168	Turnovers forced	18.2 #89
70.5 #137	Defensive rebound rate	72.7 #45
6.3 #197	Steals per game	6.3 #208
2.7 #284	Blocks per game	4.2 #53

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.

Minnesota

15-18 in 2025-26 overall · 8-13 in conference · Big Ten Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Baylor48–67
Lvs Rutgers67–72
Wvs Northwestern67–66
L@ Indiana47–77
Wvs UCLA78–73

A week or more of rest.

Cincinnati

18-15 in 2025-26 overall · 10-10 in conference · Big 12 Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs UCF65–66
Wvs Utah73–66
L@ TCU63–73
Wvs BYU90–68
Wvs Oklahoma St91–68

A week or more of rest.

Minnesota Golden Gophers at Cincinnati Bearcats

What could decide it: CIN has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Minnesota

Cincinnati

Cincinnati has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Minnesota

Cincinnati