Swisher Gymnasium · at Jacksonville
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | JAX | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 JAX 74–73 · win probability JAX 53%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 147.0
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: CARK has more of the edges
CARK 5, JAX 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Turnovers
Turnover rate: CARK 15.4%, JAX 17.2%. Forced: CARK 19.1%, JAX 15.0%
Three-pointers
CARK hits 35.5% and allows 35.2%; JAX hits 31.8% and allows 36.3%. Threes are 48.7% and 37.4% of their shots
Free throws
Free throw rate: CARK 31.2, JAX 32.8. Allowed: CARK 30.1, JAX 42.7
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: CARK plays 70.2 a game (105th fastest), JAX 65.7 (322nd). Faster games mean more points
Shooting
Effective FG%: CARK 54.0 and allows 54.9; JAX 50.0 and allows 54.8
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: CARK 62%, JAX 27%. Transfers in: CARK 2, JAX 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
JAX at home. This season: JAX 0-0 at home, CARK 0-0 away
Even
CARK offense vs JAX defense
Offense 231st of 366 against a defense 210th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: CARK 28.8%, JAX 31.7%. Defensive: CARK 72.6%, JAX 70.9%
Even
JAX offense vs CARK defense
Offense 232nd of 366 against a defense 241st, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
CARK has played the 241st-hardest schedule, JAX the 247th. A record against a soft schedule means less
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 | — | JAX -0.9 | — |
| Total | — | 147.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | CARK 73.1 · JAX 73.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | JAX -0.4 | — |
| 1H total | 68.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | CARK 34.2 · JAX 34.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% | |
| 3-7 30% | 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Last 5 of 7 since 2021-22
CARK 1–6 JAXJAX leads · 7 games since 2021-22 · CARK 2-4-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 15, 2025-26 | JAX 60 @ CARK 62 | CARK -7.5 | JAX W |
| Feb 13, 2024-25 | JAX 77 @ CARK 62 | CARK +11.5 | JAX W |
| Jan 18, 2024-25 | CARK 62 @ JAX 72 | JAX -13.5 | CARK W |
| Feb 8, 2023-24 | CARK 55 @ JAX 59 | JAX -6.5 | CARK W |
| Jan 28, 2022-23 | JAX 74 @ CARK 64 | CARK +4.5 | JAX W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
C Arkansas
32 games played
Straight up
20-12
63% wins
Against the spread
20-12
63% covers · avg +5.6 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-16
50% overs · avg +3.9 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 3 | @ | L 54-94 | +31.5 | L −8.5 | 157.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 56-93 | +35.5 | L −1.5 | 158.5 | U 149 |
| Nov 16 | vs | L 77-84 | +6.5 | L −0.5 | 151.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 56-74 | +16.5 | L −1.5 | 134.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 92-65 | +4.5 | W +31.5 | 154.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 81-60 | -5.5 | W +15.5 | 139.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 57-80 | +12.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 85-47 | -3.5 | W +34.5 | 138.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 68-75 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 145.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 72-83 | +36.5 | W +25.5 | 158.5 | U 155 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 82-99 | +24.5 | W +7.5 | 156.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 85-83 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 156.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 93-73 | -11.5 | W +8.5 | 147.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 78-84 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 75-79 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 156.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 62-60 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 136.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 98-69 | -12.5 | W +16.5 | 164.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 86-65 | -3.5 | W +17.5 | 154.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 100-90 | +5.5 | W +15.5 | 158.5 | O 190 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 90-81 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 151.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 81-60 | -10.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 86-78 | +3.5 | W +11.5 | 155.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 9 | @ | W 72-65 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 84-76 | -8.5 | L −0.5 | 150.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 79-62 | -10.5 | W +6.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 88-76 | -9.5 | W +2.5 | 149.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 71-75 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 93-88 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 152.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 84-79 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 163.5 | U 163 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 86-73 | -6.5 | W +6.5 | 154.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 73-63 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | U 136 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 93-98 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 157.5 | O 191 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
UNC
L 54-94
−8.5
11
@
ARK
L 56-93
−1.5
16
vs
SAM
L 77-84
−0.5
20
@
UNT
L 56-74
−1.5
23
vs
EWU
W 92-65
+31.5
25
vs
EIU
W 81-60
+15.5
29
@
ETSU
L 57-80
−10.5
3
vs
LR
W 85-47
+34.5
7
@
ETAM
L 68-75
−4.5
13
@
VAN
L 72-83
+25.5
21
@
SMU
L 82-99
+7.5
1
vs
FGCU
W 85-83
+4.5
3
vs
STET
W 93-73
+8.5
8
@
BELL
L 78-84
−8.5
10
@
EKU
L 75-79
−5.5
15
vs
JAX
W 62-60
−5.5
17
vs
UNF
W 98-69
+16.5
22
@
WGA
W 86-65
+17.5
28
@
QUC
W 100-90
+15.5
31
vs
EKU
W 90-81
+4.5
4
vs
UNA
W 81-60
+10.5
7
@
LIP
W 86-78
+11.5
9
@
UNA
W 72-65
+0.5
11
vs
BELL
W 84-76
−0.5
14
vs
WGA
W 79-62
+6.5
19
@
STET
W 88-76
+2.5
21
@
FGCU
L 71-75
−5.5
25
@
APSU
W 93-88
+9.5
28
vs
QUC
W 84-79
+2.5
6
vs
BELL
W 86-73
+6.5
7
vs
FGCU
W 73-63
+5.5
8
vs
QUC
L 93-98
−6.5
covered 20didn’t cover 12avg +5.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
UNC
L 54-94
−9.5
11
@
ARK
L 56-93
−9.5
16
vs
SAM
L 77-84
+9.5
20
@
UNT
L 56-74
−4.5
23
vs
EWU
W 92-65
+2.5
25
vs
EIU
W 81-60
+1.5
29
@
ETSU
L 57-80
−7.5
3
vs
LR
W 85-47
−6.5
7
@
ETAM
L 68-75
−2.5
13
@
VAN
L 72-83
−3.5
21
@
SMU
L 82-99
+24.5
1
vs
FGCU
W 85-83
+11.5
3
vs
STET
W 93-73
+18.5
8
@
BELL
L 78-84
+7.5
10
@
EKU
L 75-79
−2.5
15
vs
JAX
W 62-60
−14.5
17
vs
UNF
W 98-69
+2.5
22
@
WGA
W 86-65
−3.5
28
@
QUC
W 100-90
+31.5
31
vs
EKU
W 90-81
+19.5
4
vs
UNA
W 81-60
−6.5
7
@
LIP
W 86-78
+8.5
9
@
UNA
W 72-65
−8.5
11
vs
BELL
W 84-76
+9.5
14
vs
WGA
W 79-62
−9.5
19
@
STET
W 88-76
+14.5
21
@
FGCU
L 71-75
−6.5
25
@
APSU
W 93-88
+28.5
28
vs
QUC
W 84-79
−0.5
6
vs
BELL
W 86-73
+4.5
7
vs
FGCU
W 73-63
−8.5
8
vs
QUC
L 93-98
+33.5
over 16under 16avg +3.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Jacksonville
30 games played
Straight up
10-20
33% wins
Against the spread
12-18
40% covers · avg −1.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-18
40% overs · avg +1.3 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 | @ | L 69-86 | +18.5 | W +1.5 | 142.5 | O 155 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 64-85 | +17.5 | L −3.5 | 156.5 | U 149 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 69-67 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 57-79 | +16.5 | L −5.5 | 136.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 69-64 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 143.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 53-68 | +2.5 | L −12.5 | 135.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 85-82 | -10.5 | L −7.5 | 138.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 65-88 | +5.5 | L −17.5 | 145.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 14 | @ | L 75-112 | +26.5 | L −10.5 | 147.5 | O 187 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 65-72 | -3.5 | L −10.5 | 139.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 63-87 | +23.5 | L −0.5 | 159.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 57-76 | +12.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 68-71 | +10.5 | W +7.5 | 140.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 51-77 | +4.5 | L −21.5 | 154.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 75-43 | -1.5 | W +30.5 | 141.5 | U 118 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 60-62 | +7.5 | W +5.5 | 136.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 90-68 | +1.5 | W +23.5 | 133.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 22 | vs | L 70-77 | -4.5 | L −11.5 | 138.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 81-76 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 142.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 70-65 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 142.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 49-68 | -1.5 | L −20.5 | 136.5 | U 117 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 84-93 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 73-87 | -1.5 | L −15.5 | 138.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 62-67 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 138.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 63-56 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 153.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 84-86 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 136.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 61-65 | +6.5 | W +2.5 | 142.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 89-85 | -7.5 | L −3.5 | 138.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 85-61 | -1.5 | W +22.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 79-82 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | O 161 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
MIA
L 69-86
+1.5
11
@
HPU
L 64-85
−3.5
15
@
VMI
W 69-67
+0.5
18
@
GMU
L 57-79
−5.5
24
vs
BCU
W 69-64
+8.5
25
vs
PAC
L 53-68
−12.5
2
vs
FAMU
W 85-82
−7.5
6
@
FIU
L 65-88
−17.5
14
@
TA&M
L 75-112
−10.5
17
@
FAMU
L 65-72
−10.5
22
@
FSU
L 63-87
−0.5
1
@
LIP
L 57-76
−6.5
3
@
APSU
L 68-71
+7.5
8
vs
QUC
L 51-77
−21.5
10
vs
WGA
W 75-43
+30.5
15
@
CARK
L 60-62
+5.5
17
@
UNA
W 90-68
+23.5
22
vs
BELL
L 70-77
−11.5
24
vs
EKU
W 81-76
+3.5
29
vs
LIP
W 70-65
+8.5
31
vs
FGCU
L 49-68
−20.5
5
@
QUC
L 84-93
−0.5
7
@
WGA
L 73-87
−15.5
11
@
STET
L 62-67
−7.5
14
vs
UNF
W 63-56
−0.5
18
@
FGCU
L 84-86
+4.5
21
vs
APSU
L 61-65
+2.5
26
vs
STET
W 89-85
−3.5
28
@
UNF
W 85-61
+22.5
4
vs
BELL
L 79-82
−1.5
covered 12didn’t cover 18avg −1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
MIA
L 69-86
+12.5
11
@
HPU
L 64-85
−7.5
15
@
VMI
W 69-67
−15.5
18
@
GMU
L 57-79
−0.5
24
vs
BCU
W 69-64
−10.5
25
vs
PAC
L 53-68
−14.5
2
vs
FAMU
W 85-82
+28.5
6
@
FIU
L 65-88
+7.5
14
@
TA&M
L 75-112
+39.5
17
@
FAMU
L 65-72
−2.5
22
@
FSU
L 63-87
−9.5
1
@
LIP
L 57-76
−14.5
3
@
APSU
L 68-71
−1.5
8
vs
QUC
L 51-77
−26.5
10
vs
WGA
W 75-43
−23.5
15
@
CARK
L 60-62
−14.5
17
@
UNA
W 90-68
+24.5
22
vs
BELL
L 70-77
+8.5
24
vs
EKU
W 81-76
+14.5
29
vs
LIP
W 70-65
−7.5
31
vs
FGCU
L 49-68
−19.5
5
@
QUC
L 84-93
+30.5
7
@
WGA
L 73-87
+21.5
11
@
STET
L 62-67
−9.5
14
vs
UNF
W 63-56
−34.5
18
@
FGCU
L 84-86
+33.5
21
vs
APSU
L 61-65
−16.5
26
vs
STET
W 89-85
+35.5
28
@
UNF
W 85-61
−5.5
4
vs
BELL
L 79-82
+16.5
over 12under 18avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Jacksonville has the better starters
Position by position: C Arkansas 1, Jacksonville 4, even 0
C ArkansasBetterJacksonville
G L. Moore9.6 pts · 2.8 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 28
→JAXBig
G C. Williams TR16.1 pts · 3.6 reb · 3.2 ast
Score 65
G T. Robinson14.2 pts · 5.6 reb · 2 ast
Score 89
←CARKSmall
G J. Phillips TR15.5 pts · 5 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 59
G C. McCormick9.1 pts · 3.4 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 44
→JAXSmall
G H. Wood11.6 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 64
G H. Beauchamp4.3 pts · 1.3 reb · 1 ast
Score 8
→JAXSmall
G E. Sterck6.5 pts · 2.1 reb · 2.9 ast
Score 23
F M. Marable3.7 pts · 4.4 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 3
→JAXBig
F J. Morrow TR7.8 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 58
C ArkansasBetterJacksonville
CARK offense231st of 366 · -7.1
=Even
JAX defense210th of 366 · -5.4
CARK defense241st of 366 · -6.4
=Even
JAX offense232nd of 366 · -7.1
Backcourt-2.6 · 4 players
=Even
Backcourt-1.9 · 4 players
Frontcourt-3.0 · 1 player
→JAXSmall
Frontcourt-0.2 · 1 player
Bench-1.8 · 4 players
=Even
Bench-1.1 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestCARK betterJAX betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
L. Moore30 minT. Robinson28 minC. McCormick23 minH. Beauchamp15 minO. Dehrmann3 minJ. Shulman3 min
Forwards
M. Marable21 minT. Anderson12 min · TRS. Saadi9 min · TRA. HoernerNew
Guards
C. Williams33 min · TRJ. Phillips31 min · TRH. Wood28 minE. Sterck25 minR. Loux1 minL. BuckinghamNew
Forwards
J. Morrow21 min · TRR. Stirling15 min · TRN. Turner6 min · TRJ. Newell2 min · TR
Centers
S. MbingazoNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 79.3 #77 | Points per game | 69.5 #293 |
| 1.13 #90 | Points per possession | 1.06 #237 |
| 70.2 #105 | Pace (possessions) | 65.7 #322 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.0 #68 | Effective FG% | 50.0 #232 |
| 35.5 #89 | 3-point % | 31.8 #289 |
| 48.7 #21 | 3-point attempt rate | 37.4 #223 |
| 31.2 #278 | Free throw rate | 32.8 #242 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.4 #92 | Turnover rate | 17.2 #222 |
| 28.8 #240 | Offensive rebound rate | 31.7 #137 |
| 16.0 #46 | Assists per game | 11.1 #335 |
| Defense | ||
| 76.0 #216 | Points allowed | 75.2 #194 |
| 1.08 #180 | Points allowed per possession | 1.14 #313 |
| 54.9 #328 | Opponent effective FG% | 54.8 #325 |
| 35.2 #262 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.3 #318 |
| 19.1 #45 | Turnovers forced | 15.0 #290 |
| 72.6 #48 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.9 #115 |
| 8.5 #18 | Steals per game | 6.3 #206 |
| 1.9 #351 | Blocks per game | 2.8 #261 |
C Arkansas
20-12 in 2025-26 overall · 17-4 in conference · United Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Queens University Royals93–98
- Wvs FGCU73–63
- Wvs Bellarmine86–73
- Wvs Queens University Royals84–79
- W@ Austin Peay93–88
A week or more of rest.
Jacksonville
10-20 in 2025-26 overall · 7-12 in conference · Atlantic Sun Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Bellarmine79–82
- W@ North Florida85–61
- Wvs Stetson89–85
- Lvs Austin Peay61–65
- L@ FGCU84–86
A week or more of rest.