Timmons Arena · at Furman
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | FUR | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 FUR 77–71 · win probability FUR 70%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 148.8
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: FUR has more of the edges
APSU 1, FUR 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Turnovers
Turnover rate: APSU 15.4%, FUR 17.8%. Forced: APSU 17.9%, FUR 13.7%
Context
Schedule so far
APSU has played the 318th-hardest schedule, FUR the 224th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Shooting
Effective FG%: APSU 53.0 and allows 52.2; FUR 54.8 and allows 50.2
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: APSU plays 70.1 a game (114th fastest), FUR 67.2 (273rd). Faster games mean more points
FUR offense vs APSU defense
Offense 166th of 366 against a defense 240th, on the model’s ratings
Home court
FUR at home. This season: FUR 0-0 at home, APSU 0-0 away
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: APSU 29.7%, FUR 30.5%. Defensive: APSU 71.1%, FUR 71.8%
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: APSU 30%, FUR 46%. Transfers in: APSU 2, FUR 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
APSU offense vs FUR defense
Offense 174th of 366 against a defense 146th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: APSU 37.6, FUR 32.7. Allowed: APSU 32.8, FUR 28.9
Even
Three-pointers
APSU hits 35.3% and allows 33.2%; FUR hits 33.4% and allows 32.3%. Threes are 38.0% and 46.5% of their shots
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 | — | FUR -6.0 | — |
| Total | — | 148.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | APSU 71.4 · FUR 77.4 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | FUR -3.4 | — |
| 1H total | 69.6 | — |
| 1H projected score | APSU 33.1 · FUR 36.5 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% | |
| 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Austin Peay
29 games played
Straight up
20-9
69% wins
Against the spread
14-15
48% covers · avg +1.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% 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 | @ | W 74-54 | -1.5 | W +18.5 | 136.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 65-79 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 153.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 69-63 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 145.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 65-72 | +20.5 | W +13.5 | 145.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 75-84 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 77-59 | -6.5 | W +11.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 84-96 | +8.5 | L −3.5 | 153.5 | O 180 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 50-63 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 151.5 | U 113 |
| Dec 12 | vs | W 76-75 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 143.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 102-83 | -15.5 | W +3.5 | 162.5 | O 185 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 71-68 | -10.5 | L −7.5 | 140.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 82-71 | +3.5 | W +14.5 | 153.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 81-69 | -9.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 74-72 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 153.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 78-82 | +2.5 | L −1.5 | 155.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 83-62 | -6.5 | W +14.5 | 155.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 23 | vs | W 73-65 | -16.5 | L −8.5 | 148.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 90-82 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 151.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 81-78 | -7.5 | L −4.5 | 150.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 87-76 | -4.5 | W +6.5 | 156.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 91-62 | -12.5 | W +16.5 | 145.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 95-87 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 161.5 | O 182 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 90-70 | -9.5 | W +10.5 | 153.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 77-76 | -11.5 | L −10.5 | 166.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 65-61 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 25 | vs | L 88-93 | -4.5 | L −9.5 | 152.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 97-111 | -5.5 | L −19.5 | 153.5 | O 208 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 69-60 | -11.5 | L −2.5 | 153.5 | U 129 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 83-90 | -2.5 | L −9.5 | 161.5 | O 173 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
AF
W 74-54
+18.5
11
@
WYO
L 65-79
−8.5
15
@
UNCG
W 69-63
+7.5
18
@
MISS
L 65-72
+13.5
21
@
TLSA
L 75-84
−0.5
25
vs
NIU
W 77-59
+11.5
3
@
KENT
L 84-96
−3.5
7
@
RGV
L 50-63
−10.5
12
vs
ETSU
W 76-75
+4.5
1
vs
UNF
W 102-83
+3.5
3
vs
JAX
W 71-68
−7.5
8
@
FGCU
W 82-71
+14.5
10
@
STET
W 81-69
+2.5
15
vs
EKU
W 74-72
−5.5
17
@
LIP
L 78-82
−1.5
22
vs
FGCU
W 83-62
+14.5
23
vs
STET
W 73-65
−8.5
28
@
EKU
W 90-82
+5.5
31
@
WGA
W 81-78
−4.5
4
vs
LIP
W 87-76
+6.5
7
vs
UNA
W 91-62
+16.5
11
@
QUC
W 95-87
+10.5
14
vs
BELL
W 90-70
+10.5
19
@
UNF
W 77-76
−10.5
21
@
JAX
W 65-61
−2.5
25
vs
CARK
L 88-93
−9.5
28
@
BELL
L 97-111
−19.5
6
vs
STET
W 69-60
−2.5
7
vs
QUC
L 83-90
−9.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
AF
W 74-54
−8.5
11
@
WYO
L 65-79
−9.5
15
@
UNCG
W 69-63
−13.5
18
@
MISS
L 65-72
−8.5
21
@
TLSA
L 75-84
+10.5
25
vs
NIU
W 77-59
−11.5
3
@
KENT
L 84-96
+26.5
7
@
RGV
L 50-63
−38.5
12
vs
ETSU
W 76-75
+7.5
1
vs
UNF
W 102-83
+22.5
3
vs
JAX
W 71-68
−1.5
8
@
FGCU
W 82-71
−0.5
10
@
STET
W 81-69
−0.5
15
vs
EKU
W 74-72
−7.5
17
@
LIP
L 78-82
+4.5
22
vs
FGCU
W 83-62
−10.5
23
vs
STET
W 73-65
−10.5
28
@
EKU
W 90-82
+20.5
31
@
WGA
W 81-78
+8.5
4
vs
LIP
W 87-76
+6.5
7
vs
UNA
W 91-62
+7.5
11
@
QUC
W 95-87
+20.5
14
vs
BELL
W 90-70
+6.5
19
@
UNF
W 77-76
−13.5
21
@
JAX
W 65-61
−16.5
25
vs
CARK
L 88-93
+28.5
28
@
BELL
L 97-111
+54.5
6
vs
STET
W 69-60
−24.5
7
vs
QUC
L 83-90
+11.5
over 14under 15avg +2.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Furman
32 games played
Straight up
19-13
59% wins
Against the spread
16-16
50% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-16
50% 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 71-97 | +3.5 | L −22.5 | 153.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 7 | vs | L 61-64 | -2.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | U 125 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 54-70 | +9.5 | L −6.5 | 141.5 | U 124 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 90-79 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 73-72 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 65-72 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 145.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 97-88 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 153.5 | O 185 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 79-69 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 18 | @ | W 75-68 | -10.5 | L −3.5 | 154.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 84-76 | -10.5 | L −2.5 | 155.5 | O 160 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 74-72 | -2.5 | L −0.5 | 154.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 77-80 | -8.5 | L −11.5 | 157.5 | U 157 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 78-67 | -2.5 | W +8.5 | 146.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 69-48 | -12.5 | W +8.5 | 149.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 77-73 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 149.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 70-74 | -4.5 | L −8.5 | 149.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 75-77 | -11.5 | L −13.5 | 142.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 23 | @ | W 89-66 | -4.5 | W +18.5 | 150.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 78-73 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 149.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 1 | vs | W 75-70 | -7.5 | L −2.5 | 146.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 71-75 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | O 146 |
| Feb 8 | vs | L 64-67 | -10.5 | L −13.5 | 149.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 64-69 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 90-72 | -11.5 | W +6.5 | 148.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 69-78 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 140.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 76-67 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 153.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 72-51 | -15.5 | W +5.5 | 143.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 67-86 | -1.5 | L −20.5 | 147.5 | O 153 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 86-81 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 147.5 | O 167 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 81-75 | -5.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | O 156 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 76-61 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 139.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 71-82 | +20.5 | W +9.5 | 133.5 | O 153 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
HPU
L 71-97
−22.5
7
vs
TROY
L 61-64
−5.5
14
@
UNI
L 54-70
−6.5
23
vs
QUC
W 90-79
+2.5
27
vs
RICH
W 73-72
+4.5
28
vs
ILST
L 65-72
−3.5
3
@
ELON
W 97-88
+7.5
6
vs
HARV
W 79-69
+5.5
18
@
MAN
W 75-68
−3.5
21
vs
CHSO
W 84-76
−2.5
31
vs
MER
W 74-72
−0.5
3
vs
WCU
L 77-80
−11.5
7
@
UTC
W 78-67
+8.5
10
vs
VMI
W 69-48
+8.5
14
@
SAM
W 77-73
+2.5
17
vs
WOF
L 70-74
−8.5
21
@
CIT
L 75-77
−13.5
23
@
UNCG
W 89-66
+18.5
29
vs
SAM
W 78-73
−0.5
1
vs
UTC
W 75-70
−2.5
4
@
ETSU
L 71-75
+1.5
8
vs
UNCG
L 64-67
−13.5
11
@
MER
L 64-69
−1.5
14
@
VMI
W 90-72
+6.5
18
vs
ETSU
L 69-78
−10.5
21
@
WOF
W 76-67
+7.5
25
vs
CIT
W 72-51
+5.5
28
@
WCU
L 67-86
−20.5
7
vs
SAM
W 86-81
+6.5
8
vs
UNCG
W 81-75
+0.5
9
vs
ETSU
W 76-61
+16.5
20
vs
CONN
L 71-82
+9.5
covered 16didn’t cover 16avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
HPU
L 71-97
+14.5
7
vs
TROY
L 61-64
−27.5
14
@
UNI
L 54-70
−17.5
23
vs
QUC
W 90-79
+15.5
27
vs
RICH
W 73-72
−2.5
28
vs
ILST
L 65-72
−8.5
3
@
ELON
W 97-88
+31.5
6
vs
HARV
W 79-69
+6.5
18
@
MAN
W 75-68
−11.5
21
vs
CHSO
W 84-76
+4.5
31
vs
MER
W 74-72
−8.5
3
vs
WCU
L 77-80
−0.5
7
@
UTC
W 78-67
−1.5
10
vs
VMI
W 69-48
−32.5
14
@
SAM
W 77-73
+0.5
17
vs
WOF
L 70-74
−5.5
21
@
CIT
L 75-77
+9.5
23
@
UNCG
W 89-66
+4.5
29
vs
SAM
W 78-73
+1.5
1
vs
UTC
W 75-70
−1.5
4
@
ETSU
L 71-75
+4.5
8
vs
UNCG
L 64-67
−18.5
11
@
MER
L 64-69
−18.5
14
@
VMI
W 90-72
+13.5
18
vs
ETSU
L 69-78
+6.5
21
@
WOF
W 76-67
−10.5
25
vs
CIT
W 72-51
−20.5
28
@
WCU
L 67-86
+5.5
7
vs
SAM
W 86-81
+19.5
8
vs
UNCG
W 81-75
+8.5
9
vs
ETSU
W 76-61
−2.5
20
vs
CONN
L 71-82
+19.5
over 16under 16avg −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: Austin Peay 1, Furman 1, even 3
Austin PeayBetterFurman
G Z. Collins13.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 4.2 ast
Score 60
→FURSmall
G J. Bell TR12.3 pts · 5 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 76
G C. Love TR7.2 pts · 2.6 reb · 1 ast
Score 44
=Even
G C. Bowser5.2 pts · 5.3 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 31
G S. Hugie TR4.4 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 32
=Even
G L. Toews TR6.3 pts · 1.6 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 45
G C. Ryans NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
F M. Kell TR13.6 pts · 4.7 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 59
F R. Marshall16.3 pts · 7 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 92
←APSUSmall
F C. Johnston9.6 pts · 8.9 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 66
Austin PeayBetterFurman
APSU offense174th of 366 · -5.4
=Even
FUR defense146th of 366 · -3.2
APSU defense240th of 366 · -6.3
→FURSmall
FUR offense166th of 366 · -5.1
Backcourt-1.7 · 4 players
=Even
Backcourt-1.4 · 3 players
Frontcourt+3.8 · 1 player
←APSUSmall
Frontcourt+0.9 · 2 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-2.5 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestAPSU betterFUR betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
Z. Collins30 minC. Love25 min · TRS. Hugie12 min · TRC. RyansNewP. SingletonNewT. ToddNew
Forwards
R. Marshall30 minD. BoldenNewA. DavisNew
Guards
J. Bell26 min · TRC. Bowser23 minL. Toews21 min · TRA. Franklin11 minC. O'Neal11 minG. LewisNew
Forwards
M. Kell30 min · TRC. Johnston29 minM. Smith12 minJ. Butler9 min · TRO. Ritger7 minD. MolnarNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 79.0 #79 | Points per game | 74.9 #164 |
| 1.13 #91 | Points per possession | 1.11 #114 |
| 70.1 #114 | Pace (possessions) | 67.2 #273 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.0 #105 | Effective FG% | 54.8 #43 |
| 35.3 #99 | 3-point % | 33.4 #204 |
| 38.0 #215 | 3-point attempt rate | 46.5 #40 |
| 37.6 #110 | Free throw rate | 32.7 #246 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.4 #94 | Turnover rate | 17.8 #260 |
| 29.7 #214 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.5 #180 |
| 15.3 #76 | Assists per game | 14.9 #91 |
| Defense | ||
| 74.6 #179 | Points allowed | 72.5 #116 |
| 1.06 #119 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #163 |
| 52.2 #227 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.2 #112 |
| 33.2 #137 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.3 #75 |
| 17.9 #103 | Turnovers forced | 13.7 #342 |
| 71.1 #100 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.8 #72 |
| 8.4 #22 | Steals per game | 4.4 #357 |
| 2.2 #329 | Blocks per game | 3.3 #183 |
Austin Peay
20-9 in 2025-26 overall · 16-4 in conference · United Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Queens University Royals83–90
- Wvs Stetson69–60
- L@ Bellarmine97–111
- Lvs C Arkansas88–93
- W@ Jacksonville65–61
A week or more of rest.
Furman
19-13 in 2025-26 overall · 13-8 in conference · Southern Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UConn71–82
- Wvs ETSU76–61
- Wvs UNC Greensboro81–75
- Wvs Samford86–81
- L@ W Carolina67–86
A week or more of rest.