Gersten Pavilion · at LMU
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | LMU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 LMU 79–67 · win probability LMU 86%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 145.4
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: LMU has more of the edges
FGCU 1, LMU 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: FGCU 31.1%, LMU 26.7%. Defensive: FGCU 71.8%, LMU 68.0%
FGCU offense vs LMU defense
Offense 259th of 366 against a defense 104th, on the model’s ratings
LMU offense vs FGCU defense
Offense 152nd of 366 against a defense 274th, on the model’s ratings
Shooting
Effective FG%: FGCU 52.0 and allows 53.4; LMU 51.9 and allows 48.9
Free throws
Free throw rate: FGCU 29.1, LMU 31.1. Allowed: FGCU 38.3, LMU 32.5
Context
Schedule so far
FGCU has played the 231st-hardest schedule, LMU the 131st. A record against a soft schedule means less
Three-pointers
FGCU hits 33.2% and allows 35.5%; LMU hits 34.8% and allows 34.6%. Threes are 38.4% and 40.4% of their shots
Home court
LMU at home. This season: LMU 0-0 at home, FGCU 0-0 away
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: FGCU 16.0%, LMU 17.4%. Forced: FGCU 16.4%, LMU 16.6%
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: FGCU plays 69.9 a game (122nd fastest), LMU 68.9 (185th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: FGCU 25%, LMU 22%. Transfers in: FGCU 3, LMU 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 | — | LMU -12.5 | — |
| Total | — | 145.4 | — |
| Projected score | — | FGCU 66.5 · LMU 78.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | LMU -7.3 | — |
| 1H total | 68.0 | — |
| 1H projected score | FGCU 30.4 · LMU 37.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% | 3-7 30% | |
| 4-6 40% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
FGCU
32 games played
Straight up
14-18
44% wins
Against the spread
9-23
28% covers · avg −1.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-17
47% overs · avg +1.4 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 7 | @ | L 70-113 | +29.5 | L −13.5 | 160.5 | O 183 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 94-95 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 163.5 | O 189 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 91-73 | +1.5 | W +19.5 | 152.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 19 | @ | W 77-62 | +5.5 | W +20.5 | 154.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 93-88 | -11.5 | L −6.5 | 153.5 | O 181 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 78-63 | -5.5 | W +9.5 | 149.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 100-102 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 160.5 | O 202 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 83-89 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 154.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 7 | vs | L 76-81 | +2.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 14 | @ | L 59-75 | +15.5 | L −0.5 | 159.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 80-102 | +17.5 | L −4.5 | 161.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 83-85 | -2.5 | L −4.5 | 156.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 72-55 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 147.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 71-82 | -3.5 | L −14.5 | 153.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 77-84 | -2.5 | L −9.5 | 157.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 15 | vs | L 74-85 | -1.5 | L −12.5 | 166.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 90-72 | -9.5 | W +8.5 | 152.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 62-83 | +6.5 | L −14.5 | 155.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 23 | @ | L 71-86 | +5.5 | L −9.5 | 153.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 72-64 | -9.5 | L −1.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 68-49 | +1.5 | W +20.5 | 136.5 | U 117 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 74-76 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 154.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 65-81 | -2.5 | L −18.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 90-81 | -13.5 | L −4.5 | 163.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 78-76 | -11.5 | L −9.5 | 148.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 86-84 | -6.5 | L −4.5 | 136.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 75-71 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 70-76 | -6.5 | L −12.5 | 160.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 63-78 | -5.5 | L −20.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 69-58 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 139.5 | U 127 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 77-53 | +3.5 | W +27.5 | 150.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 63-73 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 144.5 | U 136 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
@
ILL
L 70-113
−13.5
11
vs
GASO
L 94-95
−4.5
15
vs
UTC
W 91-73
+19.5
19
@
SAM
W 77-62
+20.5
24
vs
ORU
W 93-88
−6.5
25
vs
RICE
W 78-63
+9.5
26
vs
KENN
L 100-102
−3.5
3
@
FIU
L 83-89
−7.5
7
vs
FAU
L 76-81
−2.5
14
@
UNM
L 59-75
−0.5
20
@
UCF
L 80-102
−4.5
1
@
CARK
L 83-85
−4.5
3
@
UNA
W 72-55
+14.5
8
vs
APSU
L 71-82
−14.5
10
vs
LIP
L 77-84
−9.5
15
vs
QUC
L 74-85
−12.5
17
vs
WGA
W 90-72
+8.5
22
@
APSU
L 62-83
−14.5
23
@
LIP
L 71-86
−9.5
29
vs
UNA
W 72-64
−1.5
31
@
JAX
W 68-49
+20.5
5
@
EKU
L 74-76
−0.5
7
@
BELL
L 65-81
−18.5
11
vs
UNF
W 90-81
−4.5
14
vs
STET
W 78-76
−9.5
18
vs
JAX
W 86-84
−4.5
21
vs
CARK
W 75-71
+5.5
26
@
UNF
L 70-76
−12.5
28
@
STET
L 63-78
−20.5
4
vs
UNA
W 69-58
+2.5
6
vs
LIP
W 77-53
+27.5
7
vs
CARK
L 63-73
−5.5
covered 9didn’t cover 23avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
@
ILL
L 70-113
+22.5
11
vs
GASO
L 94-95
+25.5
15
vs
UTC
W 91-73
+11.5
19
@
SAM
W 77-62
−15.5
24
vs
ORU
W 93-88
+27.5
25
vs
RICE
W 78-63
−8.5
26
vs
KENN
L 100-102
+41.5
3
@
FIU
L 83-89
+17.5
7
vs
FAU
L 76-81
+6.5
14
@
UNM
L 59-75
−25.5
20
@
UCF
L 80-102
+20.5
1
@
CARK
L 83-85
+11.5
3
@
UNA
W 72-55
−20.5
8
vs
APSU
L 71-82
−0.5
10
vs
LIP
L 77-84
+3.5
15
vs
QUC
L 74-85
−7.5
17
vs
WGA
W 90-72
+9.5
22
@
APSU
L 62-83
−10.5
23
@
LIP
L 71-86
+3.5
29
vs
UNA
W 72-64
−11.5
31
@
JAX
W 68-49
−19.5
5
@
EKU
L 74-76
−4.5
7
@
BELL
L 65-81
−5.5
11
vs
UNF
W 90-81
+7.5
14
vs
STET
W 78-76
+5.5
18
vs
JAX
W 86-84
+33.5
21
vs
CARK
W 75-71
−6.5
26
@
UNF
L 70-76
−14.5
28
@
STET
L 63-78
−9.5
4
vs
UNA
W 69-58
−12.5
6
vs
LIP
W 77-53
−20.5
7
vs
CARK
L 63-73
−8.5
over 15under 17avg +1.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
LMU
31 games played
Straight up
14-17
45% wins
Against the spread
14-17
45% covers · avg −1.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-16
48% overs · avg −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 5 | vs | W 70-62 | -9.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 94-72 | -19.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | O 166 |
| Nov 11 | @ | W 71-58 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 144.5 | U 129 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 74-63 | -4.5 | W +6.5 | 140.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 17 | @ | W 78-74 | +3.5 | W +7.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 65-76 | +3.5 | L −7.5 | 144.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 70-58 | -3.5 | W +8.5 | 144.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 68-71 | -10.5 | L −13.5 | 138.5 | O 139 |
| Dec 2 | vs | L 70-91 | +7.5 | L −13.5 | 150.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 16 | vs | L 57-67 | +1.5 | L −8.5 | 150.5 | U 124 |
| Dec 19 | vs | W 91-57 | -10.5 | W +23.5 | 140.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 23 | vs | W 83-56 | -23.5 | W +3.5 | 144.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 28 | vs | L 73-78 | +9.5 | W +4.5 | 143.5 | O 151 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 80-71 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 139.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 76-78 | +3.5 | W +1.5 | 142.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 47-82 | +25.5 | L −9.5 | 154.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 84-82 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 141.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 72-103 | +11.5 | L −19.5 | 153.5 | O 175 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 70-76 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 140.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 58-71 | -8.5 | L −21.5 | 148.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 59-69 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 28 | vs | L 69-72 | -5.5 | L −8.5 | 141.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 73-104 | +8.5 | L −22.5 | 153.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 84-75 | +8.5 | W +17.5 | 145.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 83-63 | -6.5 | W +13.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 59-65 | +5.5 | L −0.5 | 141.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 89-90 | -5.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | O 179 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 77-65 | -2.5 | W +9.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 67-66 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 149.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 66-71 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 136.5 | O 137 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 62-66 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 145.5 | U 128 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
EWU
W 70-62
−1.5
8
vs
UAPB
W 94-72
+2.5
11
@
UTEP
W 71-58
+14.5
14
vs
TROY
W 74-63
+6.5
17
@
UCSB
W 78-74
+7.5
24
vs
FAU
L 65-76
−7.5
25
vs
OHIO
W 70-58
+8.5
28
vs
STBK
L 68-71
−13.5
2
vs
SLU
L 70-91
−13.5
16
vs
UCSD
L 57-67
−8.5
19
vs
UNA
W 91-57
+23.5
23
vs
MORG
W 83-56
+3.5
28
vs
SMC
L 73-78
+4.5
30
vs
PAC
W 80-71
+5.5
2
@
WSU
L 76-78
+1.5
4
@
GONZ
L 47-82
−9.5
8
vs
SF
W 84-82
+0.5
10
@
SCU
L 72-103
−19.5
14
@
ORST
L 70-76
−7.5
17
vs
PORT
L 58-71
−21.5
21
@
SEA
L 59-69
−5.5
28
vs
ORST
L 69-72
−8.5
31
vs
SCU
L 73-104
−22.5
4
@
SF
W 84-75
+17.5
7
vs
USD
W 83-63
+13.5
11
@
PAC
L 59-65
−0.5
14
@
PEPP
L 89-90
−6.5
21
@
USD
W 77-65
+9.5
25
vs
WSU
W 67-66
−0.5
28
vs
SEA
L 66-71
−6.5
5
vs
USD
L 62-66
−9.5
covered 14didn’t cover 17avg −1.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
EWU
W 70-62
−21.5
8
vs
UAPB
W 94-72
+8.5
11
@
UTEP
W 71-58
−15.5
14
vs
TROY
W 74-63
−3.5
17
@
UCSB
W 78-74
+6.5
24
vs
FAU
L 65-76
−3.5
25
vs
OHIO
W 70-58
−16.5
28
vs
STBK
L 68-71
+0.5
2
vs
SLU
L 70-91
+10.5
16
vs
UCSD
L 57-67
−26.5
19
vs
UNA
W 91-57
+7.5
23
vs
MORG
W 83-56
−5.5
28
vs
SMC
L 73-78
+7.5
30
vs
PAC
W 80-71
+11.5
2
@
WSU
L 76-78
+11.5
4
@
GONZ
L 47-82
−25.5
8
vs
SF
W 84-82
+24.5
10
@
SCU
L 72-103
+21.5
14
@
ORST
L 70-76
+5.5
17
vs
PORT
L 58-71
−19.5
21
@
SEA
L 59-69
−13.5
28
vs
ORST
L 69-72
−0.5
31
vs
SCU
L 73-104
+23.5
4
@
SF
W 84-75
+13.5
7
vs
USD
W 83-63
−5.5
11
@
PAC
L 59-65
−17.5
14
@
PEPP
L 89-90
+31.5
21
@
USD
W 77-65
−7.5
25
vs
WSU
W 67-66
−16.5
28
vs
SEA
L 66-71
+0.5
5
vs
USD
L 62-66
−17.5
over 15under 16avg −1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
LMU has the better starters
Position by position: FGCU 0, LMU 3, even 2
FGCUBetterLMU
G E. Brooks TR12.3 pts · 4.5 reb · 3.1 ast
Score 47
→LMUSmall
G Z. Sensley TR10.5 pts · 7.2 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 72
G D. Williams6.1 pts · 2 reb · 1 ast
Score 21
→LMUBig
G A. Wright TR7.5 pts · 1.6 reb · 2 ast
Score 59
G G. Washington2.6 pts · 0.2 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F C. Humphrey-Rembert TR7.7 pts · 6.7 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 24
F G. Tanner2.5 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.8 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F A. McBride7.2 pts · 5.6 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 50
C T. Guillouette2.9 pts · 2.6 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 26
→LMUSmall
F D. Rivers TR8.6 pts · 4.5 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 48
FGCUBetterLMU
FGCU offense259th of 366 · -8.0
→LMUBig
LMU defense104th of 366 · -1.0
FGCU defense274th of 366 · -6.9
→LMUSmall
LMU offense152nd of 366 · -4.6
Backcourt-4.1 · 3 players
→LMUBig
Backcourt+0.5 · 2 players
Frontcourt-1.2 · 2 players
←FGCUSmall
Frontcourt-2.6 · 3 players
Bench-0.7 · 3 players
→LMUSmall
Bench+1.1 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestFGCU betterLMU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
E. Brooks30 min · TRD. Williams19 minG. Washington8 minM. McCarthy2 minB. WashingtonNewN. SermpezisNew
Forwards
G. Tanner8 minC. Outlaw2 min · TRB. LucasNewE. BarlowNewC. KoniecznyNewT. WestercampNew
Centers
T. Guillouette13 minJ. Houser6 min · TR
Guards
Z. Sensley25 min · TRA. Wright22 min · TRA. Thomas14 minJ. Miles10 min · TRM. Mosley7 min · TRC. Smith2 min
Forwards
C. Humphrey-Rembert31 min · TRA. McBride27 minD. Rivers20 min · TRJ. Porter17 min · TRA. Sigiscar16 min · TRG. Tupy2 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 76.6 #130 | Points per game | 72.2 #236 |
| 1.10 #138 | Points per possession | 1.04 #263 |
| 69.9 #122 | Pace (possessions) | 68.9 #185 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.0 #147 | Effective FG% | 51.9 #152 |
| 33.2 #219 | 3-point % | 34.8 #130 |
| 38.4 #202 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.4 #162 |
| 29.1 #331 | Free throw rate | 31.1 #280 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.0 #135 | Turnover rate | 17.4 #234 |
| 31.1 #161 | Offensive rebound rate | 26.7 #307 |
| 14.5 #115 | Assists per game | 12.7 #234 |
| Defense | ||
| 78.0 #266 | Points allowed | 72.7 #122 |
| 1.11 #254 | Points allowed per possession | 1.06 #103 |
| 53.4 #280 | Opponent effective FG% | 48.9 #60 |
| 35.5 #275 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.6 #225 |
| 16.4 #191 | Turnovers forced | 16.6 #178 |
| 71.8 #73 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.0 #258 |
| 7.7 #66 | Steals per game | 6.0 #236 |
| 3.4 #153 | Blocks per game | 3.9 #81 |
FGCU
14-18 in 2025-26 overall · 10-11 in conference · Atlantic Sun Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs C Arkansas63–73
- Wvs Lipscomb77–53
- Wvs North Alabama69–58
- L@ Stetson63–78
- L@ North Florida70–76
A week or more of rest.
LMU
14-17 in 2025-26 overall · 6-13 in conference · West Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs San Diego62–66
- Lvs Seattle U66–71
- Wvs Washington St67–66
- W@ San Diego77–65
- L@ Pepperdine89–90
A week or more of rest.