California Golden Bears vs Minnesota Golden Gophers: Model Line and Edge

Sat, Nov 28, 8:00 PM ETSanford Pentagon · Neutral site

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: California and Minnesota
CAL	This season	MINN
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 MINN 72–69 · win probability MINN 58%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 141.0

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: MINN has more of the edges

CAL 1, MINN 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

CALBig

Three-pointers

CAL hits 36.9% and allows 31.0%; MINN hits 34.1% and allows 34.6%. Threes are 43.1% and 47.1% of their shots

Context

Tempo

About 67 possessions: CAL plays 69.8 a game (126th fastest), MINN 63.6 (362nd). Faster games mean more points

MINNSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: CAL 36.2, MINN 35.8. Allowed: CAL 36.3, MINN 26.9

MINNSmall

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: CAL 29%, MINN 66%. Transfers in: CAL 5, MINN 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

MINNSmall

CAL offense vs MINN defense

Offense 84th of 366 against a defense 22nd, on the model’s ratings

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: CAL 52.6 and allows 49.8; MINN 53.9 and allows 51.9

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: CAL 26.0%, MINN 26.8%. Defensive: CAL 69.5%, MINN 70.5%

Even

Turnovers

Turnover rate: CAL 15.1%, MINN 16.6%. Forced: CAL 16.1%, MINN 16.8%

Even

MINN offense vs CAL defense

Offense 120th of 366 against a defense 100th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Neutral floor

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

Context

Schedule so far

CAL has played the 77th-hardest schedule, MINN the 71st. A record against a soft schedule means less

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	—	MINN -2.4	—
Total	—	141.0	—
Projected score	—	CAL 69.3 · MINN 71.7

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	MINN -1.3	—
1H total	66.0	—
1H projected score	CAL 32.3 · MINN 33.6	—

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
CAL WLLWL	17-16	52%	1-1	—
MINN WLLLL	13-20	39%	0-5	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
CAL UUOOU	14-19	42%	21-12
MINN OUUOU	12-21	36%	15-18

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
CAL	5-5 50%	5-5 50%	4-6 40%
MINN	4-6 40%	4-6 40%	3-7 30%

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

California

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 2	@ UTAH	W79–72LU
Dec 6	vs VAN	L69–85LU
Dec 10	vs SELA	No recent meeting

Minnesota

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 2	@ MSU	W76–73WO
Dec 8	vs ILL	L67–77WO
Dec 12	vs SMU	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

California

33 games played

Straight up

21-12

64% wins

Against the spread

17-16

52% covers · avg +1.7 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-19

42% overs · avg +1.1 pts vs the total

Straight up

21-1264%

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

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

17-1652%

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

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

14-1942%

U U U O U O O U U O U U O O U O U O U U O O U O O U U U U U O 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	vsCSUB	W 87-60	-15.5	W +11.5	147.5	U 147
Nov 6	vsWRST	W 77-67	-14.5	L −4.5	148.5	U 144
Nov 10	vsCSUF	W 93-65	-22.5	W +5.5	162.5	U 158
Nov 13	@KSU	L 96-99	+6.5	W +3.5	164.5	O 195
Nov 18	vsPRES	W 67-57	-10.5	L −0.5	124.5	U 124
Nov 21	vsSAC	W 91-67	-21.5	W +2.5	154.5	O 158
Nov 25	vsUCLA	W 80-72	+7.5	W +15.5	143.5	O 152
Dec 2	vsUTAH	W 79-72	-7.5	L −0.5	152.5	U 151
Dec 6	vsPAC	W 67-61	-7.5	L −1.5	144.5	U 128
Dec 13	vsNWST	W 79-70	-19.5	L −10.5	145.5	O 149
Dec 19	vsMORG	W 97-50	-26.5	W +20.5	151.5	U 147
Dec 21	vsCOLU	W 74-56	-8.5	W +9.5	153.5	U 130
Dec 30	vsLOU	L 70-90	+7.5	L −12.5	159.5	O 160
Jan 2	vsND	W 72-71	-3.5	L −2.5	138.5	O 143
Jan 7	@UVA	L 60-84	+14.5	L −9.5	148.5	U 144
Jan 10	@VT	L 75-78	+5.5	W +2.5	148.5	O 153
Jan 14	vsDUKE	L 56-71	+14.5	L −0.5	149.5	U 127
Jan 17	vsUNC	W 84-78	+7.5	W +13.5	151.5	O 162
Jan 24	@STAN	W 78-66	+4.5	W +16.5	146.5	U 144
Jan 28	@FSU	L 61-63	+3.5	W +1.5	157.5	U 124
Jan 31	@MIA	W 86-85	+11.5	W +12.5	148.5	O 171
Feb 4	vsGT	W 90-85	-7.5	L −2.5	152.5	O 175
Feb 7	vsCLEM	L 55-77	+4.5	L −17.5	139.5	U 132
Feb 11	@SYR	L 100-107	+6.5	L −0.5	148.5	O 207
Feb 14	@BC	W 86-75	-3.5	W +7.5	144.5	O 161
Feb 21	vsSTAN	W 72-66	-1.5	W +4.5	149.5	U 138
Feb 25	vsSMU	W 73-69	+4.5	W +8.5	163.5	U 142
Feb 28	vsPITT	L 56-72	-6.5	L −22.5	143.5	U 128
Mar 4	@GT	W 76-65	-2.5	W +8.5	154.5	U 141
Mar 7	@WAKE	L 73-80	+5.5	L −1.5	154.5	U 153
Mar 11	vsFSU	L 89-95	+1.5	L −4.5	154.5	O 184
Mar 18	vsUIC	W 91-73	-6.5	W +11.5	150.5	O 164
Mar 22	vsJOES	L 75-76	-5.5	L −6.5	152.5	U 151

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

CSUB

W 87-60

+11.5

WRST

W 77-67

−4.5

CSUF

W 93-65

+5.5

KSU

L 96-99

+3.5

PRES

W 67-57

−0.5

SAC

W 91-67

+2.5

UCLA

W 80-72

+15.5

UTAH

W 79-72

−0.5

PAC

W 67-61

−1.5

NWST

W 79-70

−10.5

MORG

W 97-50

+20.5

COLU

W 74-56

+9.5

LOU

L 70-90

−12.5

W 72-71

−2.5

UVA

L 60-84

−9.5

L 75-78

+2.5

DUKE

L 56-71

−0.5

UNC

W 84-78

+13.5

STAN

W 78-66

+16.5

FSU

L 61-63

+1.5

MIA

W 86-85

+12.5

W 90-85

−2.5

CLEM

L 55-77

−17.5

SYR

L 100-107

−0.5

W 86-75

+7.5

STAN

W 72-66

+4.5

SMU

W 73-69

+8.5

PITT

L 56-72

−22.5

W 76-65

+8.5

WAKE

L 73-80

−1.5

FSU

L 89-95

−4.5

UIC

W 91-73

+11.5

JOES

L 75-76

−6.5

covered 17didn’t cover 16avg +1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

CSUB

W 87-60

−0.5

WRST

W 77-67

−4.5

CSUF

W 93-65

−4.5

KSU

L 96-99

+30.5

PRES

W 67-57

−0.5

SAC

W 91-67

+3.5

UCLA

W 80-72

+8.5

UTAH

W 79-72

−1.5

PAC

W 67-61

−16.5

NWST

W 79-70

+3.5

MORG

W 97-50

−4.5

COLU

W 74-56

−23.5

LOU

L 70-90

+0.5

W 72-71

+4.5

UVA

L 60-84

−4.5

L 75-78

+4.5

DUKE

L 56-71

−22.5

UNC

W 84-78

+10.5

STAN

W 78-66

−2.5

FSU

L 61-63

−33.5

MIA

W 86-85

+22.5

W 90-85

+22.5

CLEM

L 55-77

−7.5

SYR

L 100-107

+58.5

W 86-75

+16.5

STAN

W 72-66

−11.5

SMU

W 73-69

−21.5

PITT

L 56-72

−15.5

W 76-65

−13.5

WAKE

L 73-80

−1.5

FSU

L 89-95

+29.5

UIC

W 91-73

+13.5

JOES

L 75-76

−1.5

over 14under 19avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

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

California has the better starters

Position by position: California 2, Minnesota 1, even 2

CaliforniaBetterMinnesota

G M. Cooper TR13.8 pts · 2.7 reb · 2 ast Score 74

Even

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

G N. Indrusaitis TR9.1 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.7 ast Score 76

CALSmall

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

G J. Ross TR6.7 pts · 2.5 reb · 2.3 ast Score 58

Even

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

G S. Carr3.6 pts · 2.5 reb · 2.2 ast Score 46

MINNBig

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

F L. Dort8 pts · 7.8 reb · 0.9 ast Score 83

CALSmall

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

CaliforniaBetterMinnesota

CAL offense84th of 366 · +0.4

MINNSmall

MINN defense22nd of 366 · +5.2

CAL defense100th of 366 · -0.7

Even

MINN offense120th of 366 · -2.8

Backcourt+1.0 · 4 players

CALSmall

Backcourt-0.5 · 2 players

Frontcourt+1.7 · 1 player

MINNSmall

Frontcourt+2.9 · 3 players

Bench+0.4 · 5 players

CALSmall

Bench-2.3 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestCAL betterMINN 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

California

Guards

M. Cooper27 min · TRN. Indrusaitis24 min · TRJ. Ross21 min · TRS. Carr17 minB. Fisher1 minL. Butler1 min

Forwards

L. Dort23 minJ. Wilkins10 min · TRA. Ali7 min · TRS. Yeanay5 minD. Manyiel Dut4 min

Centers

M. Kocanas7 minN. MitrovicNewD. DaubarisNew

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

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

CAL77.7 #99

MINN69.4 #294

Points per possession

CAL1.11 #118

MINN1.10 #147

Pace (possessions)

CAL69.8 #126

MINN63.6 #362

Shooting

Effective FG%

CAL52.6 #119

MINN53.9 #69

3-point %

CAL36.9 #30

MINN34.1 #164

3-point attempt rate

CAL43.1 #111

MINN47.1 #31

Free throw rate

CAL36.2 #146

MINN35.8 #159

Possessions

Turnover rate

CAL15.1 #74

MINN16.6 #170

Offensive rebound rate

CAL26.0 #322

MINN26.8 #304

Assists per game

CAL14.1 #142

MINN17.0 #25

Defense

Points allowed

CAL73.4 #140

MINN68.5 #38

Points allowed per possession

CAL1.05 #92

MINN1.07 #139

Opponent effective FG%

CAL49.8 #91

MINN51.9 #207

Opponent 3-point %

CAL31.0 #34

MINN34.6 #229

Turnovers forced

CAL16.1 #216

MINN16.8 #168

Defensive rebound rate

CAL69.5 #180

MINN70.5 #137

Steals per game

CAL5.9 #244

MINN6.3 #197

Blocks per game

CAL3.0 #217

MINN2.7 #284

CAL		MINN
Scoring
77.7 #99	Points per game	69.4 #294
1.11 #118	Points per possession	1.10 #147
69.8 #126	Pace (possessions)	63.6 #362
Shooting
52.6 #119	Effective FG%	53.9 #69
36.9 #30	3-point %	34.1 #164
43.1 #111	3-point attempt rate	47.1 #31
36.2 #146	Free throw rate	35.8 #159
Possessions
15.1 #74	Turnover rate	16.6 #170
26.0 #322	Offensive rebound rate	26.8 #304
14.1 #142	Assists per game	17.0 #25
Defense
73.4 #140	Points allowed	68.5 #38
1.05 #92	Points allowed per possession	1.07 #139
49.8 #91	Opponent effective FG%	51.9 #207
31.0 #34	Opponent 3-point %	34.6 #229
16.1 #216	Turnovers forced	16.8 #168
69.5 #180	Defensive rebound rate	70.5 #137
5.9 #244	Steals per game	6.3 #197
3.0 #217	Blocks per game	2.7 #284

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.

California

21-12 in 2025-26 overall · 9-10 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Saint Joseph's75–76
Wvs UIC91–73
Lvs Florida St89–95
L@ Wake Forest73–80
W@ Georgia Tech76–65

A week or more of rest.

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.

California Golden Bears vs Minnesota Golden Gophers

What could decide it: MINN has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

California

Minnesota

California has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

California

Minnesota