UL Monroe Warhawks at Tulane Green Wave: Model Line and Edge

Sun, Nov 29, 2:00 PM ETAvron B. Fogelman Arena in the Devlin Fieldhouse · at Tulane

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: UL Monroe and Tulane
ULM	This season	TULN
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 TULN 87–67 · win probability TULN 95%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 153.7

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: TULN has more of the edges

ULM 1, TULN 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

TULNBig

TULN offense vs ULM defense

Offense 114th of 366 against a defense 361st, on the model’s ratings

TULNBig

ULM offense vs TULN defense

Offense 332nd of 366 against a defense 180th, on the model’s ratings

TULNBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: ULM 47.8 and allows 57.1; TULN 49.4 and allows 50.7

Context

Schedule so far

ULM has played the 216th-hardest schedule, TULN the 115th. A record against a soft schedule means less

TULNSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: ULM 16.9%, TULN 15.4%. Forced: ULM 15.7%, TULN 17.1%

ULMSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: ULM 38.8, TULN 43.5. Allowed: ULM 27.7, TULN 38.1

Context

Tempo

About 70 possessions: ULM plays 71.3 a game (58th fastest), TULN 68.5 (205th). Faster games mean more points

TULNSmall

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: ULM 1%, TULN 40%. Transfers in: ULM 6, TULN 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

TULNSmall

Three-pointers

ULM hits 32.2% and allows 36.9%; TULN hits 32.0% and allows 34.5%. Threes are 41.9% and 45.0% of their shots

TULNSmall

Home court

TULN at home. This season: TULN 0-0 at home, ULM 0-0 away

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: ULM 25.1%, TULN 22.8%. Defensive: ULM 64.6%, TULN 64.2%

Sorted by how lopsided each matchup is, from national ranks. Reasons to look, not picks: the market already knows most of this.

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	—	TULN -19.2	—
Total	—	153.7	—
Projected score	—	ULM 67.3 · TULN 86.5

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	TULN -11.3	—
1H total	71.9	—
1H projected score	ULM 30.3 · TULN 41.6	—

The 1st-half model is fitted from the full-game model and past halves. ESPN has no 1st-half lines for college games, so there is no market to compare it with.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

ATS

2025-26 season

	Season	Cover	Venue	Role
ULM WWLWW	17-12	59%	9-7	—
TULN LLWWL	15-17	47%	7-10	—

Venue/role: ULM away; TULN home. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
ULM UOUUO	20-9	69%	2-28
TULN UOOUU	13-19	41%	17-15

Squares: last 5 games (O over, U under), oldest first. Tap for the score and line.

Last 10 games

2025-26

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
ULM	1-9 10%	7-3 70%	6-4 60%
TULN	5-5 50%	6-4 60%	4-6 40%

Wins-losses (pushes last). Spread and over / under skip games without a line.

Next 3 games

With how the last meeting with each opponent went

UL Monroe

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 2	@ LAM	L66–79LO
Dec 5	vs GAST	L57–77LU
Dec 12	vs MISS	L65–86WO

Tulane

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 2	@ USM	W86–58WU
Dec 6	vs UL	W66–62LU
Dec 12	vs URI	W78–75LO

Last meeting: result, against the spread, over / under. Hover a result for its date.

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

ULM 0–2 TULNTULN leads · 2 games since 2021-22 · TULN has won the last 2 meetings · ULM 1-1 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Nov 8, 2024-25	ULM 64 @ TULN 80	TULN -11.5	TULN W
Nov 28, 2022-23	ULM 60 @ TULN 75	TULN -18.5	ULM W

ATS History · 2025-26

WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total

UL Monroe

30 games played

Straight up

2-28

7% wins

Against the spread

17-12

59% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

20-9

69% overs · avg +6.4 pts vs the total

Straight up

2-287%

L L L L L L W L L L L L L L L L L L L L L W L L L L L L L L

8 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

17-1259%

L W L L W L W L W W L W L W W W L L W–W W L L W W W L W W

2 straight covers3 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

20-969%

O O U O O O U O O O O O O O O U U O U–O O U O O U O U U O

2 of last 4 overno streak

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	@NIU	L 82-102	+7.5	L −12.5	147.5	O 184
Nov 7	@MISS	L 65-86	+37.5	W +16.5	149.5	O 151
Nov 13	@HCU	L 61-72	+8.5	L −2.5	143.5	U 133
Nov 17	vsLAM	L 66-79	+11.5	L −1.5	140.5	O 145
Nov 22	vsMORE	L 80-83	+6.5	W +3.5	145.5	O 163
Nov 23	@ETSU	L 55-97	+19.5	L −22.5	146.5	O 152
Dec 3	vsMVSU	W 66-52	-9.5	W +4.5	149.5	U 118
Dec 7	@SFA	L 76-96	+19.5	L −0.5	142.5	O 172
Dec 13	@MIA	L 79-104	+35.5	W +10.5	153.5	O 183
Dec 17	vsUSA	L 92-96	+9.5	W +5.5	148.5	O 188
Dec 20	vsUL	L 62-76	+1.5	L −12.5	136.5	O 138
Dec 28	@KSU	L 85-94	+32.5	W +23.5	169.5	O 179
Jan 1	vsUSM	L 73-87	+9.5	L −4.5	152.5	O 160
Jan 3	vsTXST	L 79-84	+10.5	W +5.5	150.5	O 163
Jan 8	@UL	L 79-85	+7.5	W +1.5	139.5	O 164
Jan 10	@USM	L 60-70	+14.5	W +4.5	155.5	U 130
Jan 17	vsGAST	L 57-77	+6.5	L −13.5	155.5	U 134
Jan 22	@MRSH	L 60-115	+18.5	L −36.5	160.5	O 175
Jan 23	@APP	L 43-59	+16.5	W +0.5	144.5	U 102
Jan 30	vsGASO	L 76-79	—	—	—	—
Feb 1	vsCCU	L 79-83	+10.5	W +6.5	146.5	O 162
Feb 4	@ODU	W 85-79	+14.5	W +20.5	154.5	O 164
Feb 7	vsBALL	L 68-73	+4.5	L −0.5	143.5	U 141
Feb 11	@ARST	L 70-103	+20.5	L −12.5	162.5	O 173
Feb 14	@TXST	L 84-95	+14.5	W +3.5	149.5	O 179
Feb 18	vsTROY	L 76-77	+17.5	W +16.5	153.5	U 153
Feb 21	vsARST	L 94-102	+15.5	W +7.5	165.5	O 196
Feb 25	@USA	L 54-89	+14.5	L −20.5	153.5	U 143
Feb 27	@TROY	L 65-80	+18.5	W +3.5	153.5	U 145
Mar 3	vsODU	L 80-87	+9.5	W +2.5	157.5	O 167

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

NIU

L 82-102

−12.5

MISS

L 65-86

+16.5

HCU

L 61-72

−2.5

LAM

L 66-79

−1.5

L 80-83

+3.5

ETSU

L 55-97

−22.5

MVSU

W 66-52

+4.5

SFA

L 76-96

−0.5

MIA

L 79-104

+10.5

USA

L 92-96

+5.5

L 62-76

−12.5

KSU

L 85-94

+23.5

USM

L 73-87

−4.5

TXST

L 79-84

+5.5

L 79-85

+1.5

USM

L 60-70

+4.5

GAST

L 57-77

−13.5

MRSH

L 60-115

−36.5

APP

L 43-59

+0.5

CCU

L 79-83

+6.5

ODU

W 85-79

+20.5

BALL

L 68-73

−0.5

ARST

L 70-103

−12.5

TXST

L 84-95

+3.5

TROY

L 76-77

+16.5

ARST

L 94-102

+7.5

USA

L 54-89

−20.5

TROY

L 65-80

+3.5

ODU

L 80-87

+2.5

covered 17didn’t cover 12avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

NIU

L 82-102

+36.5

MISS

L 65-86

+1.5

HCU

L 61-72

−10.5

LAM

L 66-79

+4.5

L 80-83

+17.5

ETSU

L 55-97

+5.5

MVSU

W 66-52

−31.5

SFA

L 76-96

+29.5

MIA

L 79-104

+29.5

USA

L 92-96

+39.5

L 62-76

+1.5

KSU

L 85-94

+9.5

USM

L 73-87

+7.5

TXST

L 79-84

+12.5

L 79-85

+24.5

USM

L 60-70

−25.5

GAST

L 57-77

−21.5

MRSH

L 60-115

+14.5

APP

L 43-59

−42.5

CCU

L 79-83

+15.5

ODU

W 85-79

+9.5

BALL

L 68-73

−2.5

ARST

L 70-103

+10.5

TXST

L 84-95

+29.5

TROY

L 76-77

−0.5

ARST

L 94-102

+30.5

USA

L 54-89

−10.5

TROY

L 65-80

−8.5

ODU

L 80-87

+9.5

over 20under 9avg +6.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

Tulane

32 games played

Straight up

17-15

53% wins

Against the spread

15-17

47% covers · avg −2.7 pts vs the line

Over / Under

13-19

41% overs · avg −1.3 pts vs the total

Straight up

17-1553%

W W W L L W W W L L W W W W W L L L L L W L W W W W L L L L W L

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

15-1747%

W L L L L W W L L L W L W W W L L W L L W L W W W W L L L W W L

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

13-1941%

O O U U O O O U U O U U O U U U U U U O O U U U O O U U O O U U

2 straight unders2 of last 4 over

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	vsSAM	W 85-72	-7.5	W +5.5	154.5	O 157
Nov 8	vsTXST	W 79-71	-12.5	L −4.5	146.5	O 150
Nov 11	@UL	W 66-62	-5.5	L −1.5	135.5	U 128
Nov 14	vsNOLA	L 63-85	-11.5	L −33.5	153.5	U 148
Nov 21	vsUSU	L 75-96	+8.5	L −12.5	151.5	O 171
Nov 23	vsBC	W 93-90	+2.5	W +5.5	140.5	O 183
Nov 28	vsNICH	W 82-72	-8.5	W +1.5	148.5	O 154
Dec 2	vsGRAM	W 65-63	-11.5	L −9.5	148.5	U 128
Dec 6	vsAKR	L 71-88	+6.5	L −10.5	162.5	U 159
Dec 13	vsUCSD	L 67-93	+5.5	L −20.5	149.5	O 160
Dec 17	vsLT	W 61-53	-4.5	W +3.5	140.5	U 114
Dec 20	vsPRST	W 63-61	-2.5	L −0.5	145.5	U 124
Dec 31	@ECU	W 79-70	-1.5	W +7.5	145.5	O 149
Jan 4	vsFAU	W 69-66	+3.5	W +6.5	158.5	U 135
Jan 10	@UTSA	W 85-52	-7.5	W +25.5	147.5	U 137
Jan 14	vsUAB	L 69-82	+1.5	L −11.5	153.5	U 151
Jan 18	vsUNT	L 63-71	-1.5	L −9.5	137.5	U 134
Jan 21	@FAU	L 74-79	+10.5	W +5.5	155.5	U 153
Jan 23	@CLT	L 70-73	+2.5	L −0.5	143.5	U 143
Jan 28	vsUSF	L 83-97	+8.5	L −5.5	158.5	O 180
Feb 1	@MEM	W 78-76	+8.5	W +10.5	151.5	O 154
Feb 8	vsWICH	L 61-75	+5.5	L −8.5	148.5	U 136
Feb 11	vsTEM	W 77-66	-1.5	W +9.5	144.5	U 143
Feb 15	@UAB	W 55-54	+6.5	W +7.5	152.5	U 109
Feb 19	@UNT	W 77-71	+6.5	W +12.5	137.5	O 148
Feb 22	vsRICE	W 81-75	-4.5	W +1.5	147.5	O 156
Feb 25	vsTLSA	L 56-90	+5.5	L −28.5	156.5	U 146
Mar 1	@USF	L 62-90	+15.5	L −12.5	155.5	U 152
Mar 5	@TEM	L 60-89	+4.5	L −24.5	144.5	O 149
Mar 8	vsMEM	L 95-96	+2.5	W +1.5	154.5	O 191
Mar 11	vsMEM	W 81-69	+4.5	W +16.5	151.5	U 150
Mar 12	vsCLT	L 60-74	+1.5	L −12.5	144.5	U 134

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

SAM

W 85-72

+5.5

TXST

W 79-71

−4.5

W 66-62

−1.5

NOLA

L 63-85

−33.5

USU

L 75-96

−12.5

W 93-90

+5.5

NICH

W 82-72

+1.5

GRAM

W 65-63

−9.5

AKR

L 71-88

−10.5

UCSD

L 67-93

−20.5

W 61-53

+3.5

PRST

W 63-61

−0.5

ECU

W 79-70

+7.5

FAU

W 69-66

+6.5

UTSA

W 85-52

+25.5

UAB

L 69-82

−11.5

UNT

L 63-71

−9.5

FAU

L 74-79

+5.5

CLT

L 70-73

−0.5

USF

L 83-97

−5.5

MEM

W 78-76

+10.5

WICH

L 61-75

−8.5

TEM

W 77-66

+9.5

UAB

W 55-54

+7.5

UNT

W 77-71

+12.5

RICE

W 81-75

+1.5

TLSA

L 56-90

−28.5

USF

L 62-90

−12.5

TEM

L 60-89

−24.5

MEM

L 95-96

+1.5

MEM

W 81-69

+16.5

CLT

L 60-74

−12.5

covered 15didn’t cover 17avg −2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

SAM

W 85-72

+2.5

TXST

W 79-71

+3.5

W 66-62

−7.5

NOLA

L 63-85

−5.5

USU

L 75-96

+19.5

W 93-90

+42.5

NICH

W 82-72

+5.5

GRAM

W 65-63

−20.5

AKR

L 71-88

−3.5

UCSD

L 67-93

+10.5

W 61-53

−26.5

PRST

W 63-61

−21.5

ECU

W 79-70

+3.5

FAU

W 69-66

−23.5

UTSA

W 85-52

−10.5

UAB

L 69-82

−2.5

UNT

L 63-71

−3.5

FAU

L 74-79

−2.5

CLT

L 70-73

−0.5

USF

L 83-97

+21.5

MEM

W 78-76

+2.5

WICH

L 61-75

−12.5

TEM

W 77-66

−1.5

UAB

W 55-54

−43.5

UNT

W 77-71

+10.5

RICE

W 81-75

+8.5

TLSA

L 56-90

−10.5

USF

L 62-90

−3.5

TEM

L 60-89

+4.5

MEM

L 95-96

+36.5

MEM

W 81-69

−1.5

CLT

L 60-74

−10.5

over 13under 19avg −1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.

Tulane has the better starters

Position by position: UL Monroe 0, Tulane 2, even 3

UL MonroeBetterTulane

G D. Anderson TR5.1 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.6 ast Score 23

TULNBig

G K. Lewis TR18.8 pts · 4.6 reb · 3.1 ast Score 65

G K. London TR5.6 pts · 1.4 reb · 1 ast Score 5

TULNBig

G T. Nadeau TR13.5 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.1 ast Score 73

G Q. McPherson TR4.4 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.5 ast Score 60

Even

F T. Ringgold9.6 pts · 4 reb · 1.4 ast Score 57

G R. Cowherd TR0.9 pts · 0 reb · 0.1 ast Not ranked

No call

F C. Schwieger10.4 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.8 ast Score 32

C J. Lafleur TR1 pts · 2.5 reb · 0 ast Not ranked

No call

F J. Chappelle TR6.8 pts · 5.1 reb · 0.5 ast Score 37

UL MonroeBetterTulane

ULM offense332nd of 366 · -10.8

TULNBig

TULN defense180th of 366 · -4.1

ULM defense361st of 366 · -11.5

TULNBig

TULN offense114th of 366 · -2.4

Backcourt-4.2 · 4 players

TULNBig

Backcourt+1.1 · 2 players

Frontcourt-0.3 · 1 player

ULMSmall

Frontcourt-2.2 · 3 players

Bench-0.1 · 2 players

Even

Bench-1.1 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestULM betterTULN betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers

Projected starters: college teams publish no depth chart, so these come from minutes played, and a freshman or a new starter can change them. The score is the share of ranked players at the position that player is ahead of. Numbers are this season's once a player has 30 minutes, 2025-26's before that. Bench is the next five by minutes. Tap a player for the full numbers.

Depth chart

Projected rotation by position, starters outlined

UL Monroe

Guards

D. Anderson16 min · TRK. London14 min · TRQ. McPherson11 min · TRR. Cowherd5 min · TRC. Campbell1 minP. TillmanNew

Forwards

L. Carr2 min · TRG. ChamberlainNewJ. RegisteNewG. SchoentgenNew

Centers

J. Lafleur6 min · TRM. AdonryNewZ. NdanckyNew

Tulane

Guards

K. Lewis36 min · TRT. Nadeau27 min · TRK. Greene15 minJ. Moore12 minR. Moore2 minR. BlountNew

Forwards

T. Ringgold25 minC. Schwieger25 minJ. Chappelle24 min · TRJ. Dumont2 min · TRL. Cronin2 min

Centers

D. SalaneNew

In order of minutes, from rosters as of today. ESPN lists players only as guards, forwards or centers, and no injury report exists for college basketball, so a player who is out may still show here.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams

ChartTable

Scoring

Points per game

ULM71.7 #255

TULN72.0 #239

Points per possession

ULM1.00 #321

TULN1.05 #245

Pace (possessions)

ULM71.3 #58

TULN68.5 #205

Shooting

Effective FG%

ULM47.8 #316

TULN49.4 #275

3-point %

ULM32.2 #270

TULN32.0 #279

3-point attempt rate

ULM41.9 #135

TULN45.0 #68

Free throw rate

ULM38.8 #85

TULN43.5 #14

Possessions

Turnover rate

ULM16.9 #196

TULN15.4 #99

Offensive rebound rate

ULM25.1 #338

TULN22.8 #352

Assists per game

ULM11.9 #288

TULN12.6 #244

Defense

Points allowed

ULM85.4 #361

TULN75.7 #208

Points allowed per possession

ULM1.20 #358

TULN1.11 #229

Opponent effective FG%

ULM57.1 #358

TULN50.7 #140

Opponent 3-point %

ULM36.9 #343

TULN34.5 #216

Turnovers forced

ULM15.7 #235

TULN17.1 #139

Defensive rebound rate

ULM64.6 #345

TULN64.2 #352

Steals per game

ULM6.0 #237

TULN7.5 #85

Blocks per game

ULM3.2 #189

TULN4.5 #38

ULM		TULN
Scoring
71.7 #255	Points per game	72.0 #239
1.00 #321	Points per possession	1.05 #245
71.3 #58	Pace (possessions)	68.5 #205
Shooting
47.8 #316	Effective FG%	49.4 #275
32.2 #270	3-point %	32.0 #279
41.9 #135	3-point attempt rate	45.0 #68
38.8 #85	Free throw rate	43.5 #14
Possessions
16.9 #196	Turnover rate	15.4 #99
25.1 #338	Offensive rebound rate	22.8 #352
11.9 #288	Assists per game	12.6 #244
Defense
85.4 #361	Points allowed	75.7 #208
1.20 #358	Points allowed per possession	1.11 #229
57.1 #358	Opponent effective FG%	50.7 #140
36.9 #343	Opponent 3-point %	34.5 #216
15.7 #235	Turnovers forced	17.1 #139
64.6 #345	Defensive rebound rate	64.2 #352
6.0 #237	Steals per game	7.5 #85
3.2 #189	Blocks per game	4.5 #38

From the box scores. A longer bar is a better national rank, on every row; the better team's bar is solid. A green rank is near the top of Division I, a red one near the bottom. Pace and 3-point rate are styles, so they have no better side.

UL Monroe

2-28 in 2025-26 overall · 1-18 in conference · Sun Belt Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Old Dominion80–87
L@ Troy65–80
L@ South Alabama54–89
Lvs Arkansas St94–102
Lvs Troy76–77

A week or more of rest.

Tulane

17-15 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · American Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Charlotte60–74
Wvs Memphis81–69
Lvs Memphis95–96
L@ Temple60–89
L@ South Florida62–90

A week or more of rest.

UL Monroe Warhawks at Tulane Green Wave

What could decide it: TULN has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

UL Monroe

Tulane

Tulane has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

UL Monroe

Tulane