Lee's Family Forum · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | MCN | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SCU 77–74 · win probability SCU 61%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 150.7
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: SCU has more of the edges
SCU 2, MCN 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
SCU has played the 86th-hardest schedule, MCN the 258th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Free throws
Free throw rate: SCU 25.5, MCN 37.4. Allowed: SCU 38.2, MCN 42.0
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: SCU plays 69.7 a game (135th fastest), MCN 67.1 (276th). Faster games mean more points
Three-pointers
SCU hits 34.9% and allows 33.1%; MCN hits 31.7% and allows 32.7%. Threes are 45.0% and 35.2% of their shots
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: SCU 36.4%, MCN 35.1%. Defensive: SCU 67.9%, MCN 65.1%
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: SCU 15.3%, MCN 14.2%. Forced: SCU 20.1%, MCN 24.4%
Even
SCU offense vs MCN defense
Offense 93rd of 366 against a defense 117th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: SCU 42%, MCN 33%. Transfers in: SCU 3, MCN 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
MCN offense vs SCU defense
Offense 153rd of 366 against a defense 137th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Neutral floor
No home court: the model takes it out of the line
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: SCU 54.5 and allows 52.0; MCN 50.7 and allows 49.3
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 | — | SCU -3.2 | — |
| Total | — | 150.7 | — |
| Projected score | — | SCU 76.9 · MCN 73.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SCU -2.0 | — |
| 1H total | 70.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | SCU 36.2 · MCN 34.2 | — |
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% | 6-4 60% | |
| 9-1 90% | 5-5 50% | 5-5 50% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
No more games listed yet.
No more games listed yet.
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
SCU 2–0 MCNSCU leads · 2 games since 2021-22 · SCU has won the last 2 meetings · SCU 2-0 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 7, 2025-26 | MCN 67 @ SCU 79 | SCU -6.5 | SCU W |
| Dec 3, 2024-25 | SCU 74 @ MCN 67 | MCN -5.5 | SCU W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Santa Clara
34 games played
Straight up
25-9
74% wins
Against the spread
18-16
53% covers · avg +2.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
19-15
56% overs · avg +4 pts vs the total
Against the spread
18-1653%
2 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered
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 | W 79-67 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 10 | @ | W 87-68 | +3.5 | W +22.5 | 155.5 | U 155 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 98-83 | -6.5 | W +8.5 | 144.5 | O 181 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 64-55 | -14.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | U 119 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 80-43 | -19.5 | W +17.5 | 140.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 27 | vs | L 70-71 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 158.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 86-75 | -5.5 | W +5.5 | 138.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 90-80 | -20.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 71-98 | +1.5 | L −25.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 79-82 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 154.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 63-60 | -12.5 | L −9.5 | 139.5 | U 123 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 78-80 | -15.5 | L −17.5 | 151.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 28 | @ | W 102-64 | -7.5 | W +30.5 | 150.5 | O 166 |
| Dec 30 | @ | W 92-85 | -13.5 | L −6.5 | 157.5 | O 177 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 82-63 | -20.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 98-70 | -17.5 | W +10.5 | 161.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 77-89 | +17.5 | W +5.5 | 163.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 103-72 | -11.5 | W +19.5 | 153.5 | O 175 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 85-69 | -12.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 62-54 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | U 116 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 85-73 | -13.5 | L −1.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 88-73 | -9.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 104-73 | -8.5 | W +22.5 | 153.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 71-56 | -6.5 | W +8.5 | 151.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 96-92 | -8.5 | L −4.5 | 160.5 | O 188 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 84-72 | -12.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 86-94 | +4.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 94-73 | -6.5 | W +14.5 | 158.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 67-86 | +5.5 | L −13.5 | 153.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 93-72 | -15.5 | W +5.5 | 153.5 | O 165 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 76-68 | -9.5 | L −1.5 | 148.5 | U 144 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 76-71 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 150.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 68-79 | +8.5 | L −2.5 | 157.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 84-89 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 157.5 | O 173 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
vs
MCN
W 79-67
+5.5
10
@
XAV
W 87-68
+22.5
15
vs
NEV
W 98-83
+8.5
18
vs
IDST
W 64-55
−5.5
21
vs
UL
W 80-43
+17.5
27
vs
SLU
L 70-71
+0.5
28
vs
MINN
W 86-75
+5.5
3
vs
UTU
W 90-80
−10.5
6
@
UNM
L 71-98
−25.5
13
vs
ASU
L 79-82
−4.5
17
vs
UNT
W 63-60
−9.5
20
vs
LUC
L 78-80
−17.5
28
@
ORST
W 102-64
+30.5
30
@
PORT
W 92-85
−6.5
2
vs
PEPP
W 82-63
−1.5
4
vs
USD
W 98-70
+10.5
8
@
GONZ
L 77-89
+5.5
10
vs
LMU
W 103-72
+19.5
14
vs
PAC
W 85-69
+3.5
17
vs
SMC
W 62-54
+6.5
24
@
USD
W 85-73
−1.5
28
vs
SF
W 88-73
+5.5
31
@
LMU
W 104-73
+22.5
4
@
PAC
W 71-56
+8.5
7
@
WSU
W 96-92
−4.5
11
vs
SEA
W 84-72
−0.5
14
vs
GONZ
L 86-94
−3.5
21
@
SF
W 94-73
+14.5
25
@
SMC
L 67-86
−13.5
28
vs
ORST
W 93-72
+5.5
8
vs
PAC
W 76-68
−1.5
9
vs
SMC
W 76-71
+9.5
10
vs
GONZ
L 68-79
−2.5
20
vs
UK
L 84-89
−1.5
covered 18didn’t cover 16avg +2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
vs
MCN
W 79-67
−5.5
10
@
XAV
W 87-68
−0.5
15
vs
NEV
W 98-83
+36.5
18
vs
IDST
W 64-55
−22.5
21
vs
UL
W 80-43
−17.5
27
vs
SLU
L 70-71
−17.5
28
vs
MINN
W 86-75
+22.5
3
vs
UTU
W 90-80
+25.5
6
@
UNM
L 71-98
+15.5
13
vs
ASU
L 79-82
+6.5
17
vs
UNT
W 63-60
−16.5
20
vs
LUC
L 78-80
+6.5
28
@
ORST
W 102-64
+15.5
30
@
PORT
W 92-85
+19.5
2
vs
PEPP
W 82-63
−5.5
4
vs
USD
W 98-70
+6.5
8
@
GONZ
L 77-89
+2.5
10
vs
LMU
W 103-72
+21.5
14
vs
PAC
W 85-69
−0.5
17
vs
SMC
W 62-54
−36.5
24
@
USD
W 85-73
−4.5
28
vs
SF
W 88-73
+10.5
31
@
LMU
W 104-73
+23.5
4
@
PAC
W 71-56
−24.5
7
@
WSU
W 96-92
+27.5
11
vs
SEA
W 84-72
+8.5
14
vs
GONZ
L 86-94
+21.5
21
@
SF
W 94-73
+8.5
25
@
SMC
L 67-86
−0.5
28
vs
ORST
W 93-72
+11.5
8
vs
PAC
W 76-68
−4.5
9
vs
SMC
W 76-71
−3.5
10
vs
GONZ
L 68-79
−10.5
20
vs
UK
L 84-89
+15.5
over 19under 15avg +4 ptslonger = bigger margin
McNeese
32 games played
Straight up
26-6
81% wins
Against the spread
16-16
50% covers · avg +0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-17
47% overs · avg −0.9 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 67-79 | +6.5 | L −5.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 88-62 | -15.5 | W +10.5 | 134.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 92-86 | +5.5 | W +11.5 | 157.5 | O 178 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 73-60 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 158.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 72-62 | -9.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 1 | @ | L 67-71 | -10.5 | L −14.5 | 145.5 | U 138 |
| Dec 5 | vs | W 92-54 | -19.5 | W +18.5 | 139.5 | O 146 |
| Dec 9 | @ | W 66-64 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 146.5 | U 130 |
| Dec 12 | vs | W 102-66 | -20.5 | W +15.5 | 142.5 | O 168 |
| Dec 15 | @ | W 78-68 | -14.5 | L −4.5 | 137.5 | O 146 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 71-112 | +24.5 | L −16.5 | 161.5 | O 183 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 82-70 | -16.5 | L −4.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 5 | vs | W 66-64 | -10.5 | L −8.5 | 144.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 73-61 | -16.5 | L −4.5 | 138.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 12 | vs | W 94-68 | -15.5 | W +10.5 | 146.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 76-79 | -9.5 | L −12.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 19 | @ | W 69-53 | -9.5 | W +6.5 | 140.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 82-63 | -18.5 | W +0.5 | 156.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 27 | @ | W 76-66 | -12.5 | L −2.5 | 139.5 | O 142 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 64-63 | -10.5 | L −9.5 | 144.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 2 | @ | L 60-67 | -2.5 | L −9.5 | 141.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 81-64 | -16.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 9 | vs | W 73-69 | -21.5 | L −17.5 | 137.5 | O 142 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 97-54 | -13.5 | W +29.5 | 142.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 16 | @ | W 75-64 | -14.5 | L −3.5 | 138.5 | O 139 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 70-54 | -14.5 | W +1.5 | 139.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 23 | vs | W 75-68 | -11.5 | L −4.5 | 146.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 66-63 | -10.5 | L −7.5 | 150.5 | U 129 |
| Mar 2 | @ | W 75-65 | -9.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 84-80 | -8.5 | L −4.5 | 140.5 | O 164 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 76-59 | -3.5 | W +13.5 | 134.5 | O 135 |
| Mar 19 | vs | L 68-78 | +12.5 | W +2.5 | 148.5 | U 146 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
@
SCU
L 67-79
−5.5
14
vs
UL
W 88-62
+10.5
23
vs
GW
W 92-86
+11.5
24
vs
MUR
W 73-60
+10.5
25
vs
MTSU
W 72-62
+0.5
1
@
UIW
L 67-71
−14.5
5
vs
NWST
W 92-54
+18.5
9
@
URI
W 66-64
+0.5
12
vs
ETAM
W 102-66
+15.5
15
@
HCU
W 78-68
−4.5
29
@
MICH
L 71-112
−16.5
2
vs
LAM
W 82-70
−4.5
5
vs
SFA
W 66-64
−8.5
10
vs
SELA
W 73-61
−4.5
12
vs
NICH
W 94-68
+10.5
17
@
RGV
L 76-79
−12.5
19
@
AMCC
W 69-53
+6.5
24
vs
NOLA
W 82-63
+0.5
27
@
SELA
W 76-66
−2.5
31
@
LAM
W 64-63
−9.5
2
@
SFA
L 60-67
−9.5
7
vs
UIW
W 81-64
+0.5
9
vs
HCU
W 73-69
−17.5
14
@
ETAM
W 97-54
+29.5
16
@
NWST
W 75-64
−3.5
21
vs
AMCC
W 70-54
+1.5
23
vs
RGV
W 75-68
−4.5
28
@
NOLA
W 66-63
−7.5
2
@
NICH
W 75-65
+0.5
10
vs
RGV
W 84-80
−4.5
11
vs
SFA
W 76-59
+13.5
19
vs
VAN
L 68-78
+2.5
covered 16didn’t cover 16avg +0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
@
SCU
L 67-79
−5.5
14
vs
UL
W 88-62
+15.5
23
vs
GW
W 92-86
+20.5
24
vs
MUR
W 73-60
−25.5
25
vs
MTSU
W 72-62
−13.5
1
@
UIW
L 67-71
−7.5
5
vs
NWST
W 92-54
+6.5
9
@
URI
W 66-64
−16.5
12
vs
ETAM
W 102-66
+25.5
15
@
HCU
W 78-68
+8.5
29
@
MICH
L 71-112
+21.5
2
vs
LAM
W 82-70
+6.5
5
vs
SFA
W 66-64
−14.5
10
vs
SELA
W 73-61
−4.5
12
vs
NICH
W 94-68
+15.5
17
@
RGV
L 76-79
+8.5
19
@
AMCC
W 69-53
−18.5
24
vs
NOLA
W 82-63
−11.5
27
@
SELA
W 76-66
+2.5
31
@
LAM
W 64-63
−17.5
2
@
SFA
L 60-67
−14.5
7
vs
UIW
W 81-64
−0.5
9
vs
HCU
W 73-69
+4.5
14
@
ETAM
W 97-54
+8.5
16
@
NWST
W 75-64
+0.5
21
vs
AMCC
W 70-54
−15.5
23
vs
RGV
W 75-68
−3.5
28
@
NOLA
W 66-63
−21.5
2
@
NICH
W 75-65
−5.5
10
vs
RGV
W 84-80
+23.5
11
vs
SFA
W 76-59
+0.5
19
vs
VAN
L 68-78
−2.5
over 15under 17avg −0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
McNeese has the better starters
Position by position: Santa Clara 0, McNeese 2, even 3
Santa ClaraBetterMcNeese
G J. Ensminger6.4 pts · 5.5 reb · 2.8 ast
Score 53
→MCNBig
G L. Johnson16.8 pts · 5.5 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 98
G D. Castillo TR10.3 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 41
=Even
G C. Cherenfant3.6 pts · 2.9 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 38
G S. Gavalyugov9 pts · 1.9 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 61
=No call
G D. Warren TR1.2 pts · 0.4 reb · 0.9 ast
Not ranked
G T. Darlan5.9 pts · 3.3 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 35
=Even
F J. Colbert5.3 pts · 4.1 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 29
G F. Zugic TR5.2 pts · 2 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 56
→MCNSmall
F C. Chest TR2.6 pts · 3.8 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 71
Santa ClaraBetterMcNeese
SCU offense93rd of 366 · -0.4
=Even
MCN defense117th of 366 · -1.6
SCU defense137th of 366 · -2.8
=Even
MCN offense153rd of 366 · -4.7
Backcourt-2.9 · 5 players
→MCNBig
Backcourt+3.2 · 3 players
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
=No call
Frontcourt-0.6 · 2 players
Bench-0.2 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-0.3 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestSCU betterMCN betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Ensminger29 minD. Castillo28 min · TRS. Gavalyugov20 minT. Darlan18 minF. Zugic16 min · TRK. Cochran12 min
Forwards
C. TadjoNewN. BadibangaNew
Centers
F. Chukwudebelu6 minS. Gueye4 min · TRA. EnsorNew
Guards
L. Johnson26 minC. Cherenfant16 minD. Warren8 min · TRE. Moore5 min · TRJ. Rembert4 minJ. Dean-Vines3 min · TR
Forwards
J. Colbert20 minC. Chest13 min · TRA. Maluk7 min · TRC. NituNewM. MadisonNewA. MazouNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 82.9 #30 | Points per game | 76.6 #131 |
| 1.18 #37 | Points per possession | 1.14 #69 |
| 69.7 #135 | Pace (possessions) | 67.1 #276 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.5 #53 | Effective FG% | 50.7 #202 |
| 34.9 #125 | 3-point % | 31.7 #290 |
| 45.0 #67 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.2 #269 |
| 25.5 #363 | Free throw rate | 37.4 #114 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.3 #86 | Turnover rate | 14.2 #28 |
| 36.4 #20 | Offensive rebound rate | 35.1 #46 |
| 16.6 #33 | Assists per game | 13.1 #205 |
| Defense | ||
| 73.5 #141 | Points allowed | 67.4 #23 |
| 1.06 #117 | Points allowed per possession | 1.00 #27 |
| 52.0 #213 | Opponent effective FG% | 49.3 #76 |
| 33.1 #127 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.7 #102 |
| 20.1 #20 | Turnovers forced | 24.4 #1 |
| 67.9 #262 | Defensive rebound rate | 65.1 #338 |
| 8.7 #14 | Steals per game | 10.3 #1 |
| 3.6 #125 | Blocks per game | 4.4 #42 |
Santa Clara
25-9 in 2025-26 overall · 17-4 in conference · West Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Kentucky84–89
- Lvs Gonzaga68–79
- Wvs Saint Mary's76–71
- Wvs Pacific76–68
- Wvs Oregon St93–72
A week or more of rest.
McNeese
26-6 in 2025-26 overall · 21-3 in conference · Southland Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Vanderbilt68–78
- Wvs SF Austin76–59
- Wvs UT Rio Grande84–80
- W@ Nicholls75–65
- W@ LSU N Orleans66–63
A week or more of rest.