Jenny Craig Pavilion · at San Diego
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | USD | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 USD 80–74 · win probability USD 70%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 154.0
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
UNCO 3, USD 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Shooting
Effective FG%: UNCO 55.7 and allows 50.1; USD 51.2 and allows 54.7
Context
Schedule so far
UNCO has played the 303rd-hardest schedule, USD the 130th. A record against a soft schedule means less
USD offense vs UNCO defense
Offense 127th of 366 against a defense 281st, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UNCO 27.2%, USD 28.1%. Defensive: UNCO 75.8%, USD 65.5%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UNCO 15.5%, USD 17.6%. Forced: UNCO 12.4%, USD 18.8%
Home court
USD at home. This season: USD 0-0 at home, UNCO 0-0 away
Three-pointers
UNCO hits 35.0% and allows 30.7%; USD hits 34.6% and allows 32.7%. Threes are 41.5% and 43.7% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: UNCO plays 71.3 a game (60th fastest), USD 69.6 (139th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UNCO 28%, USD 7%. Transfers in: UNCO 4, USD 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
UNCO offense vs USD defense
Offense 167th of 366 against a defense 189th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: UNCO 27.5, USD 25.8. Allowed: UNCO 38.8, USD 38.8
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 | — | USD -6.0 | — |
| Total | — | 154.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | UNCO 74 · USD 80 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | USD -3.4 | — |
| 1H total | 72.0 | — |
| 1H projected score | UNCO 34.3 · USD 37.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% | |
| 2-8 20% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
UNCO 0–1 USDUSD leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · UNCO 1-0 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 2023-24 | UNCO 72 @ USD 74 | USD -4.5 | UNCO W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
N Colorado
29 games played
Straight up
17-12
59% wins
Against the spread
15-14
52% covers · avg +0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-13
55% overs · avg +2.4 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 15 | @ | W 88-81 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 72-73 | +4.5 | W +3.5 | 157.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 22 | @ | W 86-80 | -3.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | O 166 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 97-93 | -8.5 | L −4.5 | 164.5 | O 190 |
| Nov 26 | @ | W 71-53 | -4.5 | W +13.5 | 146.5 | U 124 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 75-70 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 157.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 89-87 | -8.5 | L −6.5 | 162.5 | O 176 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 90-101 | +25.5 | W +14.5 | 152.5 | O 191 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 79-86 | -8.5 | L −15.5 | 159.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 28 | @ | W 86-81 | +15.5 | W +20.5 | 158.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 75-89 | +2.5 | L −11.5 | 154.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 79-88 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 161.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 85-72 | -4.5 | W +8.5 | 155.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 71-76 | -6.5 | L −11.5 | 162.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 73-76 | +2.5 | L −0.5 | 155.5 | U 149 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 89-93 | -6.5 | L −10.5 | 163.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 19 | vs | L 68-73 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 153.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 77-81 | -6.5 | L −10.5 | 150.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 91-83 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 74-71 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 156.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 5 | @ | W 88-74 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 162.5 | U 162 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 69-61 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 95-79 | -11.5 | W +4.5 | 164.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 77-65 | -3.5 | W +8.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 78-77 | -13.5 | L −12.5 | 151.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 72-82 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 157.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 76-67 | +2.5 | W +11.5 | 156.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 2 | vs | W 85-57 | -5.5 | W +22.5 | 154.5 | U 142 |
| Mar 9 | vs | L 89-95 | -4.5 | L −10.5 | 152.5 | O 184 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
15
@
PEPP
W 88-81
+5.5
21
vs
STMN
L 72-73
+3.5
22
@
PORT
W 86-80
+2.5
23
vs
CSUF
W 97-93
−4.5
26
@
AF
W 71-53
+13.5
3
@
OMA
W 75-70
+1.5
6
vs
SDAK
W 89-87
−6.5
16
@
TTU
L 90-101
+14.5
20
vs
DEN
L 79-86
−15.5
28
@
COLO
W 86-81
+20.5
1
@
MTST
L 75-89
−11.5
3
@
MONT
L 79-88
−10.5
8
vs
IDST
W 85-72
+8.5
10
vs
WEB
L 71-76
−11.5
15
@
PRST
L 73-76
−0.5
17
@
SAC
L 89-93
−10.5
19
vs
MTST
L 68-73
−7.5
24
@
NAU
L 77-81
−10.5
29
vs
IDHO
W 91-83
+5.5
31
vs
EWU
W 74-71
−3.5
5
@
WEB
W 88-74
+12.5
7
@
IDST
W 69-61
+5.5
12
vs
SAC
W 95-79
+4.5
14
vs
PRST
W 77-65
+8.5
21
vs
NAU
W 78-77
−12.5
26
@
EWU
L 72-82
−11.5
28
@
IDHO
W 76-67
+11.5
2
vs
MONT
W 85-57
+22.5
9
vs
MONT
L 89-95
−10.5
covered 15didn’t cover 14avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
15
@
PEPP
W 88-81
+15.5
21
vs
STMN
L 72-73
−12.5
22
@
PORT
W 86-80
+8.5
23
vs
CSUF
W 97-93
+25.5
26
@
AF
W 71-53
−22.5
3
@
OMA
W 75-70
−12.5
6
vs
SDAK
W 89-87
+13.5
16
@
TTU
L 90-101
+38.5
20
vs
DEN
L 79-86
+5.5
28
@
COLO
W 86-81
+8.5
1
@
MTST
L 75-89
+9.5
3
@
MONT
L 79-88
+5.5
8
vs
IDST
W 85-72
+1.5
10
vs
WEB
L 71-76
−15.5
15
@
PRST
L 73-76
−6.5
17
@
SAC
L 89-93
+18.5
19
vs
MTST
L 68-73
−12.5
24
@
NAU
L 77-81
+7.5
29
vs
IDHO
W 91-83
+18.5
31
vs
EWU
W 74-71
−11.5
5
@
WEB
W 88-74
−0.5
7
@
IDST
W 69-61
−20.5
12
vs
SAC
W 95-79
+9.5
14
vs
PRST
W 77-65
−7.5
21
vs
NAU
W 78-77
+3.5
26
@
EWU
L 72-82
−3.5
28
@
IDHO
W 76-67
−13.5
2
vs
MONT
W 85-57
−12.5
9
vs
MONT
L 89-95
+31.5
over 16under 13avg +2.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
San Diego
31 games played
Straight up
10-21
32% wins
Against the spread
16-15
52% covers · avg −0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-18
42% overs · avg +0.5 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 | vs | L 68-71 | -4.5 | L −7.5 | 152.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 78-74 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 78-68 | -6.5 | W +3.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 71-85 | -7.5 | L −21.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 61-76 | +7.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 30 | @ | L 72-76 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 5 | @ | L 69-86 | +6.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 9 | vs | L 81-94 | +14.5 | W +1.5 | 158.5 | O 175 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 78-69 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 19 | @ | W 82-80 | +12.5 | W +14.5 | 156.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 56-86 | +18.5 | L −11.5 | 159.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 28 | vs | W 66-54 | +2.5 | W +14.5 | 150.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 30 | vs | L 93-99 | +29.5 | W +23.5 | 160.5 | O 192 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 64-74 | +12.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 70-98 | +17.5 | L −10.5 | 161.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 83-63 | -4.5 | W +15.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 70-77 | +8.5 | W +1.5 | 147.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 64-75 | +9.5 | L −1.5 | 147.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 96-92 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | O 188 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 73-85 | +13.5 | W +1.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 92-88 | -2.5 | W +1.5 | 151.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 76-78 | -3.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 60-87 | +20.5 | L −6.5 | 148.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 63-83 | +6.5 | L −13.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 71-58 | -1.5 | W +11.5 | 150.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 15 | vs | L 79-92 | +5.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 65-77 | +2.5 | L −9.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 82-92 | +6.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 74-87 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 66-62 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 145.5 | U 128 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 56-58 | +8.5 | W +6.5 | 139.5 | U 114 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
vs
IDST
L 68-71
−7.5
12
vs
IDHO
W 78-74
+5.5
18
vs
GRAM
W 78-68
+3.5
21
vs
UCR
L 71-85
−21.5
25
vs
CBU
L 61-76
−7.5
30
@
LBSU
L 72-76
−6.5
5
@
SJSU
L 69-86
−10.5
9
vs
USC
L 81-94
+1.5
13
vs
NAU
W 78-69
+4.5
19
@
UCSD
W 82-80
+14.5
22
@
WASH
L 56-86
−11.5
28
vs
PAC
W 66-54
+14.5
30
vs
GONZ
L 93-99
+23.5
2
@
SF
L 64-74
+2.5
4
@
SCU
L 70-98
−10.5
8
vs
PEPP
W 83-63
+15.5
10
@
PAC
L 70-77
+1.5
15
@
SEA
L 64-75
−1.5
21
vs
WSU
W 96-92
+5.5
24
vs
SCU
L 73-85
+1.5
28
@
PEPP
W 92-88
+1.5
31
vs
ORST
L 76-78
−5.5
4
@
SMC
L 60-87
−6.5
7
@
LMU
L 63-83
−13.5
11
vs
PORT
W 71-58
+11.5
15
vs
SF
L 79-92
−7.5
21
vs
LMU
L 65-77
−9.5
25
@
ORST
L 82-92
−3.5
28
@
PORT
L 74-87
−10.5
5
vs
LMU
W 66-62
+9.5
6
vs
SEA
L 56-58
+6.5
covered 16didn’t cover 15avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
vs
IDST
L 68-71
−13.5
12
vs
IDHO
W 78-74
−3.5
18
vs
GRAM
W 78-68
−3.5
21
vs
UCR
L 71-85
+3.5
25
vs
CBU
L 61-76
−9.5
30
@
LBSU
L 72-76
+0.5
5
@
SJSU
L 69-86
+10.5
9
vs
USC
L 81-94
+16.5
13
vs
NAU
W 78-69
−2.5
19
@
UCSD
W 82-80
+5.5
22
@
WASH
L 56-86
−17.5
28
vs
PAC
W 66-54
−30.5
30
vs
GONZ
L 93-99
+31.5
2
@
SF
L 64-74
−14.5
4
@
SCU
L 70-98
+6.5
8
vs
PEPP
W 83-63
−3.5
10
@
PAC
L 70-77
−0.5
15
@
SEA
L 64-75
−8.5
21
vs
WSU
W 96-92
+35.5
24
vs
SCU
L 73-85
−4.5
28
@
PEPP
W 92-88
+28.5
31
vs
ORST
L 76-78
+3.5
4
@
SMC
L 60-87
−1.5
7
@
LMU
L 63-83
−5.5
11
vs
PORT
W 71-58
−21.5
15
vs
SF
L 79-92
+22.5
21
vs
LMU
L 65-77
−7.5
25
@
ORST
L 82-92
+29.5
28
@
PORT
L 74-87
+12.5
5
vs
LMU
W 66-62
−17.5
6
vs
SEA
L 56-58
−25.5
over 13under 18avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
San Diego has the better starters
Position by position: N Colorado 0, San Diego 2, even 3
N ColoradoBetterSan Diego
G L. Reynolds TR11.6 pts · 4.3 reb · 4.5 ast
Score 79
=Even
G M. Worthy TR16.6 pts · 4.7 reb · 3 ast
Score 72
G V. Delano6.4 pts · 1.8 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 11
→USDBig
G D. Hill TR14.2 pts · 4.5 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 92
G C. Tramble TR3.6 pts · 1.1 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 16
=Even
G D. Stromer TR6.4 pts · 2.7 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 29
F K. Rayfield TR6.3 pts · 4.3 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 40
=Even
F T. McMorris TR7.5 pts · 5.6 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 47
C E. Shields6.4 pts · 4.7 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 41
→USDSmall
F A. Munoz TR12.7 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 56
N ColoradoBetterSan Diego
UNCO offense167th of 366 · -5.1
=Even
USD defense189th of 366 · -4.4
UNCO defense281st of 366 · -7.0
→USDBig
USD offense127th of 366 · -3.5
Backcourt-2.2 · 3 players
→USDBig
Backcourt+2.0 · 3 players
Frontcourt-1.0 · 2 players
=Even
Frontcourt-0.4 · 2 players
Bench-1.5 · 4 players
→USDSmall
Bench+0.3 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestUNCO betterUSD betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
L. Reynolds33 min · TRV. Delano20 minC. Tramble12 min · TRA. Mawien8 minT. Braketa5 minC. BloggNew
Forwards
K. Rayfield20 min · TRA. Crawford5 min · TRM. ShareefNewD. PaineNew
Centers
E. Shields18 minH. Caldwell4 min
Guards
M. Worthy35 min · TRD. Hill27 min · TRD. Stromer23 min · TRC. Versher2 minN. Del Bosque1 minB. RomanNew
Forwards
T. McMorris26 min · TRA. Munoz25 min · TRJ. Roberto Tanchyn19 min · TRS. Konneh13 min · TRA. Aviles11 minJ. HillNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 80.8 #51 | Points per game | 72.8 #228 |
| 1.14 #75 | Points per possession | 1.05 #251 |
| 71.3 #60 | Pace (possessions) | 69.6 #139 |
| Shooting | ||
| 55.7 #24 | Effective FG% | 51.2 #185 |
| 35.0 #121 | 3-point % | 34.6 #141 |
| 41.5 #140 | 3-point attempt rate | 43.7 #96 |
| 27.5 #348 | Free throw rate | 25.8 #358 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.5 #103 | Turnover rate | 17.6 #242 |
| 27.2 #288 | Offensive rebound rate | 28.1 #262 |
| 15.8 #54 | Assists per game | 15.4 #68 |
| Defense | ||
| 78.1 #270 | Points allowed | 78.8 #290 |
| 1.09 #209 | Points allowed per possession | 1.13 #286 |
| 50.1 #106 | Opponent effective FG% | 54.7 #320 |
| 30.7 #28 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.7 #100 |
| 12.4 #363 | Turnovers forced | 18.8 #55 |
| 75.8 #6 | Defensive rebound rate | 65.5 #328 |
| 4.0 #364 | Steals per game | 7.7 #65 |
| 2.7 #273 | Blocks per game | 2.6 #294 |
N Colorado
17-12 in 2025-26 overall · 10-9 in conference · Big Sky Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Montana89–95
- Wvs Montana85–57
- W@ Idaho76–67
- L@ E Washington72–82
- Wvs N Arizona78–77
A week or more of rest.
San Diego
10-21 in 2025-26 overall · 6-14 in conference · West Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Seattle U56–58
- Wvs LMU66–62
- L@ Portland74–87
- L@ Oregon St82–92
- Lvs LMU65–77
A week or more of rest.