Moody Coliseum (Dallas) · at SMU
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SMU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SMU 89–64 · win probability SMU 99%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.0
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: SMU has more of the edges
ORU 1, SMU 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
SMU offense vs ORU defense
Offense 45th of 366 against a defense 326th, on the model’s ratings
ORU offense vs SMU defense
Offense 279th of 366 against a defense 69th, on the model’s ratings
Three-pointers
ORU hits 32.0% and allows 37.4%; SMU hits 37.1% and allows 34.1%. Threes are 45.6% and 35.9% of their shots
Context
Schedule so far
ORU has played the 246th-hardest schedule, SMU the 70th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Shooting
Effective FG%: ORU 49.6 and allows 53.6; SMU 55.6 and allows 51.6
Turnovers
Turnover rate: ORU 18.4%, SMU 15.8%. Forced: ORU 14.7%, SMU 16.8%
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: ORU 28.4%, SMU 35.4%. Defensive: ORU 68.2%, SMU 68.4%
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: ORU 54%, SMU 20%. Transfers in: ORU 2, SMU 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
SMU at home. This season: SMU 0-0 at home, ORU 0-0 away
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: ORU 34.8, SMU 30.4. Allowed: ORU 39.1, SMU 32.1
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: ORU plays 69.7 a game (134th fastest), SMU 71.1 (68th). Faster games mean more points
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 | — | SMU -25.2 | — |
| Total | — | 153.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | ORU 63.9 · SMU 89.1 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SMU -14.9 | — |
| 1H total | 71.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | ORU 28.3 · SMU 43.2 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% | |
| 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Oral Roberts
30 games played
Straight up
7-23
23% wins
Against the spread
14-16
47% covers · avg −1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-17
43% overs · avg −1.4 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 4 | @ | L 71-95 | +20.5 | L −3.5 | 165.5 | O 166 |
| Nov 12 | vs | L 87-88 | +5.5 | W +4.5 | 160.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 60-83 | +7.5 | L −15.5 | 171.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 71-95 | +24.5 | W +0.5 | 166.5 | U 166 |
| Nov 24 | @ | L 88-93 | +11.5 | W +6.5 | 153.5 | O 181 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 91-83 | +8.5 | W +16.5 | 166.5 | O 174 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 62-81 | +5.5 | L −13.5 | 150.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 66-92 | +7.5 | L −18.5 | 157.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 72-68 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | U 140 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 62-63 | +4.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | U 125 |
| Dec 18 | @ | L 53-72 | +23.5 | W +4.5 | 147.5 | U 125 |
| Dec 22 | vs | L 57-69 | +3.5 | L −8.5 | 136.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 61-72 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 148.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 77-79 | +13.5 | W +11.5 | 146.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 71-82 | +8.5 | L −2.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 87-98 | +6.5 | L −4.5 | 156.5 | O 185 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 62-73 | -1.5 | L −12.5 | 149.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 22 | vs | L 62-79 | -1.5 | L −18.5 | 149.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 58-86 | +10.5 | L −17.5 | 151.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 69-77 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 154.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 72-95 | +13.5 | L −9.5 | 150.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 75-92 | +15.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 69-60 | -6.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 69-87 | +5.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 71-80 | +6.5 | L −2.5 | 151.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 67-62 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 151.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 102-80 | +2.5 | W +24.5 | 156.5 | O 182 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 94-70 | -3.5 | W +20.5 | 149.5 | O 164 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 84-62 | -8.5 | W +13.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 65-76 | +12.5 | W +1.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
OKST
L 71-95
−3.5
12
vs
TLSA
L 87-88
+4.5
15
vs
BEL
L 60-83
−15.5
20
@
OU
L 71-95
+0.5
24
@
FGCU
L 88-93
+6.5
25
vs
KENN
W 91-83
+16.5
26
vs
RICE
L 62-81
−13.5
3
@
WEB
L 66-92
−18.5
6
vs
MTST
W 72-68
+10.5
16
@
MOST
L 62-63
+3.5
18
@
TCU
L 53-72
+4.5
22
vs
UTA
L 57-69
−8.5
1
@
UND
L 61-72
−9.5
3
@
NDSU
L 77-79
+11.5
10
vs
STMN
L 71-82
−2.5
14
@
DEN
L 87-98
−4.5
17
vs
OMA
L 62-73
−12.5
22
vs
UND
L 62-79
−18.5
24
vs
NDSU
L 58-86
−17.5
29
@
SDAK
L 69-77
−4.5
31
@
SDST
L 72-95
−9.5
7
@
STMN
L 75-92
−1.5
12
vs
KC
W 69-60
+2.5
14
vs
SDST
L 69-87
−12.5
18
@
OMA
L 71-80
−2.5
21
vs
SDAK
W 67-62
+3.5
26
vs
DEN
W 102-80
+24.5
28
@
KC
W 94-70
+20.5
4
vs
KC
W 84-62
+13.5
5
vs
NDSU
L 65-76
+1.5
covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
OKST
L 71-95
+0.5
12
vs
TLSA
L 87-88
+14.5
15
vs
BEL
L 60-83
−28.5
20
@
OU
L 71-95
−0.5
24
@
FGCU
L 88-93
+27.5
25
vs
KENN
W 91-83
+7.5
26
vs
RICE
L 62-81
−7.5
3
@
WEB
L 66-92
+0.5
6
vs
MTST
W 72-68
−10.5
16
@
MOST
L 62-63
−21.5
18
@
TCU
L 53-72
−22.5
22
vs
UTA
L 57-69
−10.5
1
@
UND
L 61-72
−15.5
3
@
NDSU
L 77-79
+9.5
10
vs
STMN
L 71-82
+0.5
14
@
DEN
L 87-98
+28.5
17
vs
OMA
L 62-73
−14.5
22
vs
UND
L 62-79
−8.5
24
vs
NDSU
L 58-86
−7.5
29
@
SDAK
L 69-77
−8.5
31
@
SDST
L 72-95
+16.5
7
@
STMN
L 75-92
+15.5
12
vs
KC
W 69-60
−21.5
14
vs
SDST
L 69-87
+8.5
18
@
OMA
L 71-80
−0.5
21
vs
SDAK
W 67-62
−22.5
26
vs
DEN
W 102-80
+25.5
28
@
KC
W 94-70
+14.5
4
vs
KC
W 84-62
−3.5
5
vs
NDSU
L 65-76
−6.5
over 13under 17avg −1.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
SMU
34 games played
Straight up
20-14
59% wins
Against the spread
15-19
44% covers · avg +0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-14
59% overs · avg +2.4 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 | W 96-76 | -21.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 69-58 | -23.5 | L −12.5 | 160.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 102-91 | -10.5 | W +0.5 | 164.5 | O 193 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 87-85 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 163.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 106-60 | -35.5 | W +10.5 | 168.5 | U 166 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 100-69 | -14.5 | W +16.5 | 172.5 | U 169 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 89-72 | -23.5 | L −6.5 | 165.5 | U 161 |
| Nov 28 | @ | W 87-81 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 69-88 | +10.5 | L −8.5 | 165.5 | U 157 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 93-80 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 164.5 | O 173 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 77-89 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 158.5 | O 166 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 99-82 | -24.5 | L −7.5 | 156.5 | O 181 |
| Dec 28 | vs | W 110-63 | -21.5 | W +25.5 | 170.5 | O 173 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 97-83 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 155.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 70-74 | +3.5 | L −0.5 | 149.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 75-82 | +15.5 | W +8.5 | 155.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 77-76 | -8.5 | L −7.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 68-72 | +2.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 20 | @ | W 91-79 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 157.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 83-80 | -11.5 | L −8.5 | 163.5 | U 163 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 74-88 | +9.5 | L −4.5 | 163.5 | U 162 |
| Feb 3 | vs | L 83-84 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 159.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 86-67 | -4.5 | W +14.5 | 147.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 10 | vs | W 89-81 | -10.5 | L −2.5 | 154.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 78-79 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 157.5 | U 157 |
| Feb 17 | vs | W 95-85 | +4.5 | W +14.5 | 168.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 94-70 | -15.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 69-73 | -4.5 | L −8.5 | 163.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 75-95 | -1.5 | L −21.5 | 155.5 | O 170 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 69-77 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 156.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 78-91 | +1.5 | L −11.5 | 158.5 | O 169 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 86-69 | -3.5 | W +13.5 | 154.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 58-62 | +7.5 | W +3.5 | 164.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 18 | vs | L 79-89 | -6.5 | L −16.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
TAR
W 96-76
−1.5
6
vs
AMCC
W 69-58
−12.5
11
vs
MUR
W 102-91
+0.5
15
vs
BTLR
W 87-85
−5.5
18
vs
UAPB
W 106-60
+10.5
21
vs
ARST
W 100-69
+16.5
24
vs
RAD
W 89-72
−6.5
28
@
MSST
W 87-81
+7.5
3
@
VAN
L 69-88
−8.5
7
vs
TA&M
W 93-80
+14.5
13
vs
LSU
L 77-89
−10.5
21
vs
CARK
W 99-82
−7.5
28
vs
CSUF
W 110-63
+25.5
3
vs
UNC
W 97-83
+12.5
7
@
CLEM
L 70-74
−0.5
10
@
DUKE
L 75-82
+8.5
14
vs
VT
W 77-76
−7.5
17
vs
UVA
L 68-72
−1.5
20
@
WAKE
W 91-79
+13.5
24
vs
FSU
W 83-80
−8.5
31
@
LOU
L 74-88
−4.5
3
vs
NCSU
L 83-84
+0.5
7
@
PITT
W 86-67
+14.5
10
vs
ND
W 89-81
−2.5
14
@
SYR
L 78-79
−2.5
17
vs
LOU
W 95-85
+14.5
21
vs
BC
W 94-70
+8.5
25
@
CAL
L 69-73
−8.5
28
@
STAN
L 75-95
−21.5
4
vs
MIA
L 69-77
−9.5
7
@
FSU
L 78-91
−11.5
10
vs
SYR
W 86-69
+13.5
11
vs
LOU
L 58-62
+3.5
18
vs
M-OH
L 79-89
−16.5
covered 15didn’t cover 19avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
TAR
W 96-76
+27.5
6
vs
AMCC
W 69-58
−33.5
11
vs
MUR
W 102-91
+28.5
15
vs
BTLR
W 87-85
+8.5
18
vs
UAPB
W 106-60
−2.5
21
vs
ARST
W 100-69
−3.5
24
vs
RAD
W 89-72
−4.5
28
@
MSST
W 87-81
+5.5
3
@
VAN
L 69-88
−8.5
7
vs
TA&M
W 93-80
+8.5
13
vs
LSU
L 77-89
+7.5
21
vs
CARK
W 99-82
+24.5
28
vs
CSUF
W 110-63
+2.5
3
vs
UNC
W 97-83
+24.5
7
@
CLEM
L 70-74
−5.5
10
@
DUKE
L 75-82
+1.5
14
vs
VT
W 77-76
−2.5
17
vs
UVA
L 68-72
−13.5
20
@
WAKE
W 91-79
+12.5
24
vs
FSU
W 83-80
−0.5
31
@
LOU
L 74-88
−1.5
3
vs
NCSU
L 83-84
+7.5
7
@
PITT
W 86-67
+5.5
10
vs
ND
W 89-81
+15.5
14
@
SYR
L 78-79
−0.5
17
vs
LOU
W 95-85
+11.5
21
vs
BC
W 94-70
+13.5
25
@
CAL
L 69-73
−21.5
28
@
STAN
L 75-95
+14.5
4
vs
MIA
L 69-77
−10.5
7
@
FSU
L 78-91
+10.5
10
vs
SYR
W 86-69
+0.5
11
vs
LOU
L 58-62
−44.5
18
vs
M-OH
L 79-89
+5.5
over 20under 14avg +2.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
SMU has the better starters
Position by position: Oral Roberts 0, SMU 4, even 1
Oral RobertsBetterSMU
G C. Dow12.9 pts · 4.1 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 50
→SMUBig
G R. Brumbaugh TR19.1 pts · 4.8 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 95
G C. Furnish3.7 pts · 2.4 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 10
→SMUBig
G D. Terrell TR13.6 pts · 3.8 reb · 4.9 ast
Score 89
G C. Martin2.7 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 8
→SMUBig
G O. Sellers TR10.3 pts · 2.7 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 78
G M. Kilups3.9 pts · 2.2 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 9
→SMUBig
G J. Patrick TR7.2 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 59
F L. Gray7.7 pts · 3.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 57
=Even
F J. Munch TR7.9 pts · 5.1 reb · 1 ast
Score 69
Oral RobertsBetterSMU
ORU offense279th of 366 · -8.5
→SMUBig
SMU defense69th of 366 · +0.8
ORU defense326th of 366 · -8.4
→SMUBig
SMU offense45th of 366 · +4.2
Backcourt-7.9 · 4 players
→SMUBig
Backcourt+8.2 · 4 players
Frontcourt0.0 · 1 player
=Even
Frontcourt+0.7 · 1 player
Bench-1.5 · 2 players
→SMUSmall
Bench+0.3 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestORU betterSMU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
C. Dow33 minC. Furnish21 minC. Martin20 minM. Kilups18 minC. Haffner13 min · TRA. Robinson9 min · TR
Forwards
L. Gray17 minT. ZorbasNewM. PavlovicNewM. GavazovNewA. BlancoNew
Guards
R. Brumbaugh36 min · TRD. Terrell33 min · TRO. Sellers29 min · TRJ. Patrick20 min · TRN. Kalischer-Stork1 minG. NormandNew
Forwards
J. Munch21 min · TRJ. Toombs20 minJ. Stewart16 min · TRN. Codie16 min · TRJ. O'Neal15 minN. Walls3 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 71.8 #250 | Points per game | 84.1 #19 |
| 1.03 #291 | Points per possession | 1.19 #26 |
| 69.7 #134 | Pace (possessions) | 71.1 #68 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.6 #256 | Effective FG% | 55.6 #27 |
| 32.0 #282 | 3-point % | 37.1 #27 |
| 45.6 #56 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.9 #252 |
| 34.8 #187 | Free throw rate | 30.4 #301 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.4 #293 | Turnover rate | 15.8 #119 |
| 28.4 #249 | Offensive rebound rate | 35.4 #37 |
| 11.5 #312 | Assists per game | 16.9 #27 |
| Defense | ||
| 79.7 #312 | Points allowed | 77.9 #265 |
| 1.15 #319 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #199 |
| 53.6 #289 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.6 #189 |
| 37.4 #348 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.1 #188 |
| 14.7 #310 | Turnovers forced | 16.8 #171 |
| 68.2 #247 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.4 #237 |
| 5.7 #268 | Steals per game | 7.0 #129 |
| 3.4 #154 | Blocks per game | 3.6 #132 |
Oral Roberts
7-23 in 2025-26 overall · 5-13 in conference · Summit League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs N Dakota St65–76
- Wvs Kansas City84–62
- W@ Kansas City94–70
- Wvs Denver102–80
- Wvs South Dakota67–62
A week or more of rest.
SMU
20-14 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Miami OH79–89
- Lvs Louisville58–62
- Wvs Syracuse86–69
- L@ Florida St78–91
- Lvs Miami69–77
A week or more of rest.