Resorts World Event Center · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | OMA | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 PAC 77–69 · win probability PAC 74%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 146.1
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: PAC has more of the edges
PAC 4, OMA 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: PAC 35.3%, OMA 25.5%. Defensive: PAC 75.0%, OMA 71.3%
Context
Schedule so far
PAC has played the 122nd-hardest schedule, OMA the 287th. A record against a soft schedule means less
PAC offense vs OMA defense
Offense 195th of 366 against a defense 306th, on the model’s ratings
OMA offense vs PAC defense
Offense 247th of 366 against a defense 147th, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: PAC 30.5, OMA 34.5. Allowed: PAC 36.3, OMA 33.6
Shooting
Effective FG%: PAC 52.2 and allows 50.0; OMA 52.2 and allows 52.7
Turnovers
Turnover rate: PAC 20.1%, OMA 16.1%. Forced: PAC 15.1%, OMA 14.1%
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: PAC plays 66.1 a game (312th fastest), OMA 68.9 (184th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: PAC 8%, OMA 23%. Transfers in: PAC 9, OMA 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Three-pointers
PAC hits 35.8% and allows 34.7%; OMA hits 34.0% and allows 32.9%. Threes are 35.4% and 40.9% of their shots
Context
Neutral floor
No home court: the model takes it out of the line
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 | — | PAC -7.4 | — |
| Total | — | 146.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | PAC 76.7 · OMA 69.4 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | PAC -4.5 | — |
| 1H total | 68.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | PAC 36.4 · OMA 31.9 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% | 3-7 30% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Pacific
31 games played
Straight up
16-15
52% wins
Against the spread
17-14
55% covers · avg +2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
11-20
35% overs · avg −2.1 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 77-78 | +13.5 | W +12.5 | 139.5 | O 155 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 69-66 | -12.5 | L −9.5 | 141.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 85-73 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 159.5 | U 158 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 59-82 | +7.5 | L −15.5 | 154.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 86-58 | -4.5 | W +23.5 | 145.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 68-53 | -2.5 | W +12.5 | 135.5 | U 121 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 68-54 | -10.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | U 122 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 80-65 | -5.5 | W +9.5 | 134.5 | O 145 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 61-67 | +7.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 57-93 | +23.5 | L −12.5 | 149.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 95-82 | -8.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | O 177 |
| Dec 28 | @ | L 54-66 | -2.5 | L −14.5 | 150.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 30 | @ | L 71-80 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 139.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 84-53 | -4.5 | W +26.5 | 137.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 74-69 | -11.5 | L −6.5 | 138.5 | O 143 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 89-90 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 144.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 77-70 | -8.5 | L −1.5 | 147.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 69-85 | +12.5 | L −3.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 81-64 | +1.5 | W +18.5 | 139.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 56-54 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 137.5 | U 110 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 74-51 | -8.5 | W +14.5 | 142.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 82-87 | +4.5 | L −0.5 | 138.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 56-71 | +6.5 | L −8.5 | 151.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 92-59 | -7.5 | W +25.5 | 142.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 65-59 | -5.5 | W +0.5 | 141.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 61-72 | +7.5 | L −3.5 | 135.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 70-87 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 144.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 62-71 | +22.5 | W +13.5 | 144.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 61-72 | -3.5 | L −14.5 | 142.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 61-58 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 129.5 | U 119 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 68-76 | +9.5 | W +1.5 | 148.5 | U 144 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
NEV
L 77-78
+12.5
12
vs
LBSU
W 69-66
−9.5
15
@
CSUF
W 85-73
+5.5
20
@
FAU
L 59-82
−15.5
24
vs
STBK
W 86-58
+23.5
25
vs
JAX
W 68-53
+12.5
29
vs
SAC
W 68-54
+3.5
3
@
AF
W 80-65
+9.5
6
@
CAL
L 61-67
+1.5
16
@
BYU
L 57-93
−12.5
21
vs
NICH
W 95-82
+4.5
28
@
USD
L 54-66
−14.5
30
@
LMU
L 71-80
−5.5
2
vs
ORST
W 84-53
+26.5
4
vs
PEPP
W 74-69
−6.5
8
@
PORT
L 89-90
−4.5
10
vs
USD
W 77-70
−1.5
14
@
SCU
L 69-85
−3.5
17
@
ORST
W 81-64
+18.5
24
vs
SEA
W 56-54
+0.5
28
vs
PORT
W 74-51
+14.5
31
@
SF
L 82-87
−0.5
4
vs
SCU
L 56-71
−8.5
7
@
PEPP
W 92-59
+25.5
11
vs
LMU
W 65-59
+0.5
14
vs
SMC
L 61-72
−3.5
18
@
WSU
L 70-87
−14.5
21
@
GONZ
L 62-71
+13.5
28
vs
SF
L 61-72
−14.5
7
vs
SEA
W 61-58
+1.5
8
vs
SCU
L 68-76
+1.5
covered 17didn’t cover 14avg +2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
NEV
L 77-78
+15.5
12
vs
LBSU
W 69-66
−6.5
15
@
CSUF
W 85-73
−1.5
20
@
FAU
L 59-82
−13.5
24
vs
STBK
W 86-58
−1.5
25
vs
JAX
W 68-53
−14.5
29
vs
SAC
W 68-54
−24.5
3
@
AF
W 80-65
+10.5
6
@
CAL
L 61-67
−16.5
16
@
BYU
L 57-93
+0.5
21
vs
NICH
W 95-82
+37.5
28
@
USD
L 54-66
−30.5
30
@
LMU
L 71-80
+11.5
2
vs
ORST
W 84-53
−0.5
4
vs
PEPP
W 74-69
+4.5
8
@
PORT
L 89-90
+34.5
10
vs
USD
W 77-70
−0.5
14
@
SCU
L 69-85
−0.5
17
@
ORST
W 81-64
+5.5
24
vs
SEA
W 56-54
−27.5
28
vs
PORT
W 74-51
−17.5
31
@
SF
L 82-87
+30.5
4
vs
SCU
L 56-71
−24.5
7
@
PEPP
W 92-59
+8.5
11
vs
LMU
W 65-59
−17.5
14
vs
SMC
L 61-72
−2.5
18
@
WSU
L 70-87
+12.5
21
@
GONZ
L 62-71
−11.5
28
vs
SF
L 61-72
−9.5
7
vs
SEA
W 61-58
−10.5
8
vs
SCU
L 68-76
−4.5
over 11under 20avg −2.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Omaha
29 games played
Straight up
12-17
41% wins
Against the spread
14-15
48% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% overs · avg −0.7 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 | L 77-85 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 153.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 6 | @ | L 71-73 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 74-97 | +14.5 | L −8.5 | 153.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 90-85 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 153.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 73-99 | +20.5 | L −5.5 | 163.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 77-88 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 152.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 26 | @ | L 61-74 | +4.5 | L −8.5 | 157.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 70-75 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 157.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 60-55 | +12.5 | W +17.5 | 144.5 | U 115 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 85-82 | +5.5 | W +8.5 | 141.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 28 | @ | L 57-80 | +21.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 69-84 | +9.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 66-73 | -8.5 | L −15.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 90-79 | -5.5 | W +5.5 | 146.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 76-78 | +5.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 73-62 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 149.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 21 | vs | L 64-68 | -6.5 | L −10.5 | 160.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 77-60 | -4.5 | W +12.5 | 148.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 80-71 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 84-82 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 158.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 73-76 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 84-92 | +9.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 176 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 98-94 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 156.5 | O 192 |
| Feb 15 | vs | W 83-76 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 160.5 | U 159 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 80-71 | -6.5 | W +2.5 | 151.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 72-89 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 152.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 53-68 | +11.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | U 121 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 76-62 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 150.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 50-74 | +8.5 | L −15.5 | 146.5 | U 124 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
MUR
L 77-85
−2.5
6
@
ACU
L 71-73
+2.5
9
@
CSU
L 74-97
−8.5
15
vs
SUU
W 90-85
−3.5
21
@
LSU
L 73-99
−5.5
25
vs
JMU
L 77-88
−9.5
26
@
FIU
L 61-74
−8.5
3
vs
UNCO
L 70-75
−1.5
6
@
PRST
W 60-55
+17.5
20
@
LAM
W 85-82
+8.5
28
@
ORE
L 57-80
−1.5
1
@
SDST
L 69-84
−5.5
3
vs
KC
L 66-73
−15.5
8
vs
UND
W 90-79
+5.5
10
vs
NDSU
L 76-78
+3.5
17
@
ORU
W 73-62
+12.5
21
vs
SDAK
L 64-68
−10.5
24
@
KC
W 77-60
+12.5
28
vs
SDST
W 80-71
+10.5
31
@
DEN
W 84-82
+3.5
5
@
UND
L 73-76
−1.5
7
@
NDSU
L 84-92
+1.5
12
vs
STMN
W 98-94
+8.5
15
vs
DEN
W 83-76
+4.5
18
vs
ORU
W 80-71
+2.5
25
@
SDAK
L 72-89
−15.5
28
@
STMN
L 53-68
−3.5
6
vs
SDAK
W 76-62
+12.5
7
vs
NDSU
L 50-74
−15.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
MUR
L 77-85
+8.5
6
@
ACU
L 71-73
−6.5
9
@
CSU
L 74-97
+17.5
15
vs
SUU
W 90-85
+21.5
21
@
LSU
L 73-99
+8.5
25
vs
JMU
L 77-88
+12.5
26
@
FIU
L 61-74
−22.5
3
vs
UNCO
L 70-75
−12.5
6
@
PRST
W 60-55
−29.5
20
@
LAM
W 85-82
+25.5
28
@
ORE
L 57-80
−14.5
1
@
SDST
L 69-84
+0.5
3
vs
KC
L 66-73
−9.5
8
vs
UND
W 90-79
+22.5
10
vs
NDSU
L 76-78
+6.5
17
@
ORU
W 73-62
−14.5
21
vs
SDAK
L 64-68
−28.5
24
@
KC
W 77-60
−11.5
28
vs
SDST
W 80-71
+0.5
31
@
DEN
W 84-82
+7.5
5
@
UND
L 73-76
−1.5
7
@
NDSU
L 84-92
+29.5
12
vs
STMN
W 98-94
+35.5
15
vs
DEN
W 83-76
−1.5
18
vs
ORU
W 80-71
−0.5
25
@
SDAK
L 72-89
+8.5
28
@
STMN
L 53-68
−37.5
6
vs
SDAK
W 76-62
−12.5
7
vs
NDSU
L 50-74
−22.5
over 14under 15avg −0.7 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: Pacific 1, Omaha 1, even 3
PacificBetterOmaha
G J. Winston TR15.5 pts · 3 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 74
=Even
G G. Stubblefield9.3 pts · 3.1 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 64
G C. Amundsen TR9.4 pts · 2 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 34
=Even
G C. Crosby TR2.5 pts · 0.9 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 24
G C. Jones TR3.6 pts · 1.8 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 17
=No call
G A. Skradis0.4 pts · 0.3 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
F G. Ripp TR3.9 pts · 2.4 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 10
→OMASmall
F C. Dockery TR7.3 pts · 5.7 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 41
F J. Pitt4.4 pts · 3.7 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 57
←PACSmall
F B. Scholl3.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 26
PacificBetterOmaha
PAC offense195th of 366 · -6.1
←PACSmall
OMA defense306th of 366 · -7.8
PAC defense147th of 366 · -3.2
←PACSmall
OMA offense247th of 366 · -7.5
Backcourt-2.4 · 3 players
→OMASmall
Backcourt-0.7 · 3 players
Frontcourt-1.7 · 2 players
=Even
Frontcourt-1.6 · 2 players
Bench-1.2 · 5 players
→OMASmall
Bench-0.0 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestPAC betterOMA betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Winston36 min · TRC. Amundsen30 min · TRC. Jones17 min · TRA. Nyorha10 min · TRD. Harris6 min · TRN. BuduNew
Forwards
G. Ripp17 min · TRJ. Pitt17 minJ. Thompson11 min · TRV. OsazeeNewJ. CarotNew
Centers
J. McFarland3 min · TRI. Matlekovic2 min · TR
Guards
G. Stubblefield29 minC. Crosby9 min · TRA. Skradis2 minD. Thompson1 min · TRB. OrgilboldNewC. CurtisNew
Forwards
C. Dockery22 min · TRB. Scholl14 minJ. Bolis2 min · TRD. PleasantNewE. SheatsNewG. BakerNew
Centers
I. OndekaneNewH. BukingaNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 71.3 #262 | Points per game | 73.9 #202 |
| 1.08 #176 | Points per possession | 1.07 #201 |
| 66.1 #312 | Pace (possessions) | 68.9 #184 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.2 #140 | Effective FG% | 52.2 #139 |
| 35.8 #65 | 3-point % | 34.0 #169 |
| 35.4 #266 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.9 #150 |
| 30.5 #297 | Free throw rate | 34.5 #196 |
| Possessions | ||
| 20.1 #350 | Turnover rate | 16.1 #146 |
| 35.3 #42 | Offensive rebound rate | 25.5 #331 |
| 14.9 #93 | Assists per game | 12.1 #276 |
| Defense | ||
| 69.8 #60 | Points allowed | 77.7 #259 |
| 1.05 #93 | Points allowed per possession | 1.13 #278 |
| 50.0 #101 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.7 #258 |
| 34.7 #233 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.9 #114 |
| 15.1 #281 | Turnovers forced | 14.1 #333 |
| 75.0 #8 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.3 #90 |
| 5.4 #309 | Steals per game | 5.7 #277 |
| 2.2 #332 | Blocks per game | 3.0 #234 |
Pacific
16-15 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · West Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Santa Clara68–76
- Wvs Seattle U61–58
- Lvs San Francisco61–72
- L@ Gonzaga62–71
- L@ Washington St70–87
A week or more of rest.
Omaha
12-17 in 2025-26 overall · 9-9 in conference · Summit League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs N Dakota St50–74
- Wvs South Dakota76–62
- L@ St Thomas53–68
- L@ South Dakota72–89
- Wvs Oral Roberts80–71
A week or more of rest.