Auburn Tigers at Clemson Tigers: Model Line and Edge

Tue, Dec 1, 7:00 PM ETLittlejohn Coliseum · at Clemson

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Auburn and Clemson
AUB	This season	CLEM
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 CLEM 78–76 · win probability CLEM 55%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 154.0

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: CLEM has more of the edges

AUB 1, CLEM 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

CLEMBig

Three-pointers

AUB hits 34.4% and allows 36.7%; CLEM hits 34.1% and allows 32.4%. Threes are 40.2% and 43.1% of their shots

CLEMSmall

Shooting

Effective FG%: AUB 53.0 and allows 53.7; CLEM 52.5 and allows 48.8

Context

Tempo

About 68 possessions: AUB plays 69.7 a game (136th fastest), CLEM 65.6 (326th). Faster games mean more points

Context

Schedule so far

AUB has played the 10th-hardest schedule, CLEM the 66th. A record against a soft schedule means less

AUBSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: AUB 43.2, CLEM 36.7. Allowed: AUB 34.3, CLEM 33.9

CLEMSmall

Home court

CLEM at home. This season: CLEM 0-0 at home, AUB 0-0 away

CLEMSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: AUB 14.6%, CLEM 14.0%. Forced: AUB 16.3%, CLEM 17.4%

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: AUB 37.0%, CLEM 28.1%. Defensive: AUB 69.1%, CLEM 73.7%

Even

CLEM offense vs AUB defense

Offense 51st of 366 against a defense 41st, on the model’s ratings

Even

AUB offense vs CLEM defense

Offense 16th of 366 against a defense 25th, on the model’s ratings

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: AUB 38%, CLEM 37%. Transfers in: AUB 5, CLEM 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

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	—	CLEM -1.5	—
Total	—	154.0	—
Projected score	—	AUB 76.3 · CLEM 77.7

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	CLEM -0.8	—
1H total	72.0	—
1H projected score	AUB 35.6 · CLEM 36.4	—

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
AUB LLLWW	16-22	42%	3-7	—
CLEM LWLLL	17-18	49%	8-8	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
AUB UOUOO	22-16	58%	22-16
CLEM OUOUU	14-21	40%	24-11

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
AUB	7-3 70%	4-6 40%	6-4 60%
CLEM	4-6 40%	2-8 20%	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

Auburn

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 6	vs EKU	No recent meeting
Dec 13	vs ALST	W83–63LU
Dec 15	vs MTSU	No recent meeting

Clemson

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 6	vs LEM	No recent meeting
Dec 12	@ TCU	W74–66WU
Dec 15	@ SC	W68–61LU

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

ATS History · 2025-26

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

Auburn

38 games played

Straight up

22-16

58% wins

Against the spread

16-22

42% covers · avg −1.6 pts vs the line

Over / Under

22-16

58% overs · avg +4.3 pts vs the total

Straight up

22-1658%

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

5 straight wins4 of last 4 won

Against the spread

16-2242%

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

2 straight covers2 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

22-1658%

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

2 straight overs3 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	vsBCU	W 95-90	-24.5	L −19.5	153.5	O 185
Nov 6	vsMRMK	W 95-57	-23.5	W +14.5	148.5	O 152
Nov 11	vsWOF	W 93-62	-27.5	W +3.5	152.5	O 155
Nov 16	vsHOU	L 72-73	+7.5	W +6.5	140.5	O 145
Nov 19	vsJKST	W 112-66	-30.5	W +15.5	156.5	O 178
Nov 24	vsORE	W 84-73	-4.5	W +6.5	155.5	O 157
Nov 25	vsMICH	L 72-102	+4.5	L −25.5	163.5	O 174
Nov 26	vsSJU	W 85-74	+4.5	W +15.5	166.5	U 159
Dec 3	vsNCSU	W 83-73	-5.5	W +4.5	162.5	U 156
Dec 6	@ARIZ	L 68-97	+11.5	L −17.5	162.5	O 165
Dec 13	vsUTC	W 92-78	-19.5	L −5.5	150.5	O 170
Dec 20	vsPUR	L 60-88	+7.5	L −20.5	152.5	U 148
Dec 29	vsQUC	W 106-65	-25.5	W +15.5	171.5	U 171
Jan 3	@UGA	L 100-104	+6.5	W +2.5	173.5	O 204
Jan 6	vsTA&M	L 88-90	-6.5	L −8.5	168.5	O 178
Jan 10	vsARK	W 95-73	-2.5	W +19.5	169.5	U 168
Jan 14	@MIZ	L 74-84	-1.5	L −11.5	153.5	O 158
Jan 17	vsSC	W 71-67	-13.5	L −9.5	152.5	U 138
Jan 20	@MISS	W 78-66	-3.5	W +8.5	151.5	U 144
Jan 24	@FLA	W 76-67	+11.5	W +20.5	159.5	U 143
Jan 28	vsTEX	W 88-82	-6.5	L −0.5	154.5	O 170
Jan 31	@TENN	L 69-77	+5.5	L −2.5	147.5	U 146
Feb 7	vsALA	L 92-96	-2.5	L −6.5	175.5	O 188
Feb 10	vsVAN	L 76-84	-3.5	L −11.5	161.5	U 160
Feb 14	@ARK	L 75-88	+7.5	L −5.5	165.5	U 163
Feb 18	@MSST	L 85-91	-5.5	L −11.5	155.5	O 176
Feb 21	vsUK	W 75-74	-3.5	L −2.5	153.5	U 149
Feb 24	@OU	L 79-91	-3.5	L −15.5	157.5	O 170
Feb 28	vsMISS	L 79-85	-10.5	L −16.5	153.5	O 164
Mar 3	vsLSU	W 88-74	-10.5	W +3.5	155.5	O 162
Mar 7	@ALA	L 84-96	+5.5	L −6.5	175.5	O 180
Mar 11	vsMSST	W 79-61	-8.5	W +9.5	160.5	U 140
Mar 12	vsTENN	L 62-72	+5.5	L −4.5	144.5	U 134
Mar 17	vsUSA	W 78-67	-18.5	L −7.5	151.5	U 145
Mar 22	vsSEA	W 91-85	-14.5	L −8.5	145.5	O 176
Mar 25	vsNEV	W 75-69	-8.5	L −2.5	151.5	U 144
Apr 2	vsILST	W 88-66	-7.5	W +14.5	149.5	O 154
Apr 5	vsTLSA	W 92-86	-5.5	W +0.5	158.5	O 178

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

BCU

W 95-90

−19.5

MRMK

W 95-57

+14.5

WOF

W 93-62

+3.5

HOU

L 72-73

+6.5

JKST

W 112-66

+15.5

ORE

W 84-73

+6.5

MICH

L 72-102

−25.5

SJU

W 85-74

+15.5

NCSU

W 83-73

+4.5

ARIZ

L 68-97

−17.5

UTC

W 92-78

−5.5

PUR

L 60-88

−20.5

QUC

W 106-65

+15.5

UGA

L 100-104

+2.5

TA&M

L 88-90

−8.5

ARK

W 95-73

+19.5

MIZ

L 74-84

−11.5

W 71-67

−9.5

MISS

W 78-66

+8.5

FLA

W 76-67

+20.5

TEX

W 88-82

−0.5

TENN

L 69-77

−2.5

ALA

L 92-96

−6.5

VAN

L 76-84

−11.5

ARK

L 75-88

−5.5

MSST

L 85-91

−11.5

W 75-74

−2.5

L 79-91

−15.5

MISS

L 79-85

−16.5

LSU

W 88-74

+3.5

ALA

L 84-96

−6.5

MSST

W 79-61

+9.5

TENN

L 62-72

−4.5

USA

W 78-67

−7.5

SEA

W 91-85

−8.5

NEV

W 75-69

−2.5

ILST

W 88-66

+14.5

TLSA

W 92-86

+0.5

covered 16didn’t cover 22avg −1.6 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

BCU

W 95-90

+31.5

MRMK

W 95-57

+3.5

WOF

W 93-62

+2.5

HOU

L 72-73

+4.5

JKST

W 112-66

+21.5

ORE

W 84-73

+1.5

MICH

L 72-102

+10.5

SJU

W 85-74

−7.5

NCSU

W 83-73

−6.5

ARIZ

L 68-97

+2.5

UTC

W 92-78

+19.5

PUR

L 60-88

−4.5

QUC

W 106-65

−0.5

UGA

L 100-104

+30.5

TA&M

L 88-90

+9.5

ARK

W 95-73

−1.5

MIZ

L 74-84

+4.5

W 71-67

−14.5

MISS

W 78-66

−7.5

FLA

W 76-67

−16.5

TEX

W 88-82

+15.5

TENN

L 69-77

−1.5

ALA

L 92-96

+12.5

VAN

L 76-84

−1.5

ARK

L 75-88

−2.5

MSST

L 85-91

+20.5

W 75-74

−4.5

L 79-91

+12.5

MISS

L 79-85

+10.5

LSU

W 88-74

+6.5

ALA

L 84-96

+4.5

MSST

W 79-61

−20.5

TENN

L 62-72

−10.5

USA

W 78-67

−6.5

SEA

W 91-85

+30.5

NEV

W 75-69

−7.5

ILST

W 88-66

+4.5

TLSA

W 92-86

+19.5

over 22under 16avg +4.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Clemson

35 games played

Straight up

24-11

69% wins

Against the spread

17-18

49% covers · avg −0.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-21

40% overs · avg −2 pts vs the total

Straight up

24-1169%

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

2 straight losses2 of last 4 won

Against the spread

17-1849%

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

3 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

14-2140%

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

2 straight unders1 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	vsUNH	W 88-38	-29.5	W +20.5	146.5	U 126
Nov 7	vsGWEB	W 97-59	-29.5	W +8.5	145.5	O 156
Nov 11	vsMORE	W 83-56	-29.5	L −2.5	151.5	U 139
Nov 15	@GTWN	L 74-79	-1.5	L −6.5	142.5	O 153
Nov 17	vsUNA	W 81-61	-25.5	L −5.5	144.5	U 142
Nov 21	vsWVU	W 70-67	-4.5	L −1.5	132.5	O 137
Nov 23	vsUGA	W 97-94	-1.5	W +1.5	152.5	O 191
Nov 28	vsAAMU	W 92-56	-27.5	W +8.5	141.5	O 148
Dec 3	@ALA	L 84-90	+8.5	W +2.5	165.5	O 174
Dec 9	vsBYU	L 64-67	+4.5	W +1.5	152.5	U 131
Dec 13	vsMER	W 70-63	-22.5	L −15.5	152.5	U 133
Dec 16	vsSC	W 68-61	-12.5	L −5.5	142.5	U 129
Dec 21	vsCIN	W 68-65	-3.5	L −0.5	140.5	U 133
Dec 31	@SYR	W 64-61	-1.5	W +1.5	140.5	U 125
Jan 3	@PITT	W 73-68	-3.5	W +1.5	135.5	O 141
Jan 7	vsSMU	W 74-70	-3.5	W +0.5	149.5	U 144
Jan 10	@ND	W 76-61	-3.5	W +11.5	133.5	O 137
Jan 13	vsBC	W 74-50	-15.5	W +8.5	136.5	U 124
Jan 17	vsMIA	W 69-59	-4.5	W +5.5	143.5	U 128
Jan 20	vsNCSU	L 76-80	-2.5	L −6.5	142.5	O 156
Jan 24	@GT	W 77-63	-8.5	W +5.5	142.5	U 140
Jan 31	vsPITT	W 63-52	-10.5	W +0.5	135.5	U 115
Feb 4	@STAN	W 66-64	-3.5	L −1.5	138.5	U 130
Feb 7	@CAL	W 77-55	-4.5	W +17.5	139.5	U 132
Feb 11	vsVT	L 66-76	-8.5	L −18.5	138.5	O 142
Feb 14	@DUKE	L 54-67	+12.5	L −0.5	134.5	U 121
Feb 18	@WAKE	L 77-85	-4.5	L −12.5	140.5	O 162
Feb 21	vsFSU	L 65-70	-8.5	L −13.5	145.5	U 135
Feb 28	vsLOU	W 80-75	+2.5	W +7.5	146.5	O 155
Mar 3	@UNC	L 63-67	+2.5	L −1.5	141.5	U 130
Mar 7	vsGT	W 79-76	-15.5	L −12.5	145.5	O 155
Mar 11	vsWAKE	W 71-62	-5.5	W +3.5	143.5	U 133
Mar 12	vsUNC	W 80-79	-2.5	L −1.5	140.5	O 159
Mar 13	vsDUKE	L 61-73	+10.5	L −1.5	134.5	U 134
Mar 20	vsIOWA	L 61-67	+1.5	L −4.5	130.5	U 128

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

UNH

W 88-38

+20.5

GWEB

W 97-59

+8.5

W 83-56

−2.5

GTWN

L 74-79

−6.5

UNA

W 81-61

−5.5

WVU

W 70-67

−1.5

UGA

W 97-94

+1.5

AAMU

W 92-56

+8.5

ALA

L 84-90

+2.5

BYU

L 64-67

+1.5

MER

W 70-63

−15.5

W 68-61

−5.5

CIN

W 68-65

−0.5

SYR

W 64-61

+1.5

PITT

W 73-68

+1.5

SMU

W 74-70

+0.5

W 76-61

+11.5

W 74-50

+8.5

MIA

W 69-59

+5.5

NCSU

L 76-80

−6.5

W 77-63

+5.5

PITT

W 63-52

+0.5

STAN

W 66-64

−1.5

CAL

W 77-55

+17.5

L 66-76

−18.5

DUKE

L 54-67

−0.5

WAKE

L 77-85

−12.5

FSU

L 65-70

−13.5

LOU

W 80-75

+7.5

UNC

L 63-67

−1.5

W 79-76

−12.5

WAKE

W 71-62

+3.5

UNC

W 80-79

−1.5

DUKE

L 61-73

−1.5

IOWA

L 61-67

−4.5

covered 17didn’t cover 18avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

UNH

W 88-38

−20.5

GWEB

W 97-59

+10.5

W 83-56

−12.5

GTWN

L 74-79

+10.5

UNA

W 81-61

−2.5

WVU

W 70-67

+4.5

UGA

W 97-94

+38.5

AAMU

W 92-56

+6.5

ALA

L 84-90

+8.5

BYU

L 64-67

−21.5

MER

W 70-63

−19.5

W 68-61

−13.5

CIN

W 68-65

−7.5

SYR

W 64-61

−15.5

PITT

W 73-68

+5.5

SMU

W 74-70

−5.5

W 76-61

+3.5

W 74-50

−12.5

MIA

W 69-59

−15.5

NCSU

L 76-80

+13.5

W 77-63

−2.5

PITT

W 63-52

−20.5

STAN

W 66-64

−8.5

CAL

W 77-55

−7.5

L 66-76

+3.5

DUKE

L 54-67

−13.5

WAKE

L 77-85

+21.5

FSU

L 65-70

−10.5

LOU

W 80-75

+8.5

UNC

L 63-67

−11.5

W 79-76

+9.5

WAKE

W 71-62

−10.5

UNC

W 80-79

+18.5

DUKE

L 61-73

−0.5

IOWA

L 61-67

−2.5

over 14under 21avg −2 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Clemson has the better starters

Position by position: Auburn 0, Clemson 1, even 4

AuburnBetterClemson

G T. Pettiford15.4 pts · 3 reb · 3.8 ast Score 88

Even

G C. Certa TR12.8 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.8 ast Score 83

G K. Overton14.1 pts · 3.3 reb · 1.3 ast Score 90

Even

F D. Faulkner TR17.3 pts · 8.6 reb · 1.8 ast Score 99

G K. King TR7.3 pts · 3.4 reb · 1.6 ast Score 83

Even

F D. Fuchs TR13 pts · 7.8 reb · 1.5 ast Score 95

F T. Dowd TR14.5 pts · 10.3 reb · 2 ast Score 83

Even

F L. Lelevicius TR8 pts · 3.4 reb · 0.7 ast Score 72

F A. Olsen TR17 pts · 4.1 reb · 1 ast Score 66

CLEMSmall

F C. Welling10.2 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.1 ast Score 97

AuburnBetterClemson

AUB offense16th of 366 · +8.7

Even

CLEM defense25th of 366 · +4.8

AUB defense41st of 366 · +2.8

Even

CLEM offense51st of 366 · +3.6

Backcourt+6.5 · 3 players

AUBBig

Backcourt+1.5 · 1 player

Frontcourt+3.6 · 2 players

CLEMBig

Frontcourt+14.4 · 4 players

Bench+3.8 · 5 players

AUBSmall

Bench+2.5 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestAUB betterCLEM 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

Auburn

Guards

T. Pettiford32 minK. Overton32 minK. King19 min · TRB. Muschalek6 minS. Walker5 minD. Cardwell1 min

Forwards

T. Dowd37 min · TRA. Olsen37 min · TRO. Freeman12 min · TRJ. BowmanNew

Centers

B. Oboye18 min · TRN. NgoyNew

Clemson

Guards

C. Certa27 min · TRA. Buckner20 minZ. Foster19 minH. ReynoldsNewA. JamesNew

Forwards

D. Faulkner27 min · TRD. Fuchs24 min · TRL. Lelevicius24 min · TRC. Welling21 minC. Thompson9 minD. Thomas4 min

Centers

W. StevensNew

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

AUB83.0 #27

CLEM73.8 #209

Points per possession

AUB1.19 #19

CLEM1.12 #95

Pace (possessions)

AUB69.7 #136

CLEM65.6 #326

Shooting

Effective FG%

AUB53.0 #104

CLEM52.5 #126

3-point %

AUB34.4 #147

CLEM34.1 #165

3-point attempt rate

AUB40.2 #166

CLEM43.1 #115

Free throw rate

AUB43.2 #19

CLEM36.7 #136

Possessions

Turnover rate

AUB14.6 #45

CLEM14.0 #24

Offensive rebound rate

AUB37.0 #15

CLEM28.1 #264

Assists per game

AUB13.2 #198

CLEM12.7 #233

Defense

Points allowed

AUB78.8 #287

CLEM66.7 #21

Points allowed per possession

AUB1.13 #281

CLEM1.02 #41

Opponent effective FG%

AUB53.7 #291

CLEM48.8 #59

Opponent 3-point %

AUB36.7 #336

CLEM32.4 #88

Turnovers forced

AUB16.3 #201

CLEM17.4 #124

Defensive rebound rate

AUB69.1 #196

CLEM73.7 #21

Steals per game

AUB7.5 #83

CLEM6.3 #209

Blocks per game

AUB4.1 #63

CLEM2.8 #260

AUB		CLEM
Scoring
83.0 #27	Points per game	73.8 #209
1.19 #19	Points per possession	1.12 #95
69.7 #136	Pace (possessions)	65.6 #326
Shooting
53.0 #104	Effective FG%	52.5 #126
34.4 #147	3-point %	34.1 #165
40.2 #166	3-point attempt rate	43.1 #115
43.2 #19	Free throw rate	36.7 #136
Possessions
14.6 #45	Turnover rate	14.0 #24
37.0 #15	Offensive rebound rate	28.1 #264
13.2 #198	Assists per game	12.7 #233
Defense
78.8 #287	Points allowed	66.7 #21
1.13 #281	Points allowed per possession	1.02 #41
53.7 #291	Opponent effective FG%	48.8 #59
36.7 #336	Opponent 3-point %	32.4 #88
16.3 #201	Turnovers forced	17.4 #124
69.1 #196	Defensive rebound rate	73.7 #21
7.5 #83	Steals per game	6.3 #209
4.1 #63	Blocks per game	2.8 #260

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.

Auburn

22-16 in 2025-26 overall · 8-12 in conference · Southeastern Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Wvs Tulsa92–86
Wvs Illinois St88–66
Wvs Nevada75–69
Wvs Seattle U91–85
Wvs South Alabama78–67

A week or more of rest.

Clemson

24-11 in 2025-26 overall · 14-7 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Iowa61–67
Lvs Duke61–73
Wvs North Carolina80–79
Wvs Wake Forest71–62
Wvs Georgia Tech79–76

A week or more of rest.

Auburn Tigers at Clemson Tigers

What could decide it: CLEM has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Auburn

Clemson

Clemson has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Auburn

Clemson