Dale E. and Sarah Ann Fowler Events Center · at CA Baptist
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | CBU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 CBU 83–71 · win probability CBU 86%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.3
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: CBU has more of the edges
UNF 1, CBU 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UNF 25.2%, CBU 37.5%. Defensive: UNF 62.4%, CBU 72.8%
CBU offense vs UNF defense
Offense 246th of 366 against a defense 363rd, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UNF 17.8%, CBU 18.0%. Forced: UNF 12.8%, CBU 16.9%
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: UNF plays 72.3 a game (31st fastest), CBU 68.3 (217th). Faster games mean more points
Three-pointers
UNF hits 35.0% and allows 35.1%; CBU hits 33.4% and allows 29.5%. Threes are 51.7% and 32.0% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: UNF 52.9 and allows 56.3; CBU 48.3 and allows 46.3
Home court
CBU at home. This season: CBU 0-0 at home, UNF 0-0 away
UNF offense vs CBU defense
Offense 228th of 366 against a defense 178th, on the model’s ratings
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UNF 45%, CBU 18%. Transfers in: UNF 3, CBU 2. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Schedule so far
UNF has played the 168th-hardest schedule, CBU the 202nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: UNF 28.8, CBU 35.9. Allowed: UNF 31.4, CBU 36.6
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 | — | CBU -12.3 | — |
| Total | — | 153.3 | — |
| Projected score | — | UNF 70.5 · CBU 82.8 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | CBU -7.2 | — |
| 1H total | 71.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | UNF 32.2 · CBU 39.4 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-8 20% | 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% | |
| 7-3 70% | 8-2 80% | 4-6 40% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
North Florida
30 games played
Straight up
5-25
17% wins
Against the spread
18-12
60% covers · avg +1.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-14
53% overs · avg +3.4 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 6 | @ | L 64-104 | +43.5 | W +3.5 | 169.5 | U 168 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 66-99 | +41.5 | W +8.5 | 155.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 78-86 | +10.5 | W +2.5 | 161.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 22 | vs | L 83-92 | +9.5 | W +0.5 | 154.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 23 | vs | L 82-85 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 160.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 2 | vs | L 63-72 | +7.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 58-109 | +42.5 | L −8.5 | 166.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 61-84 | +30.5 | W +7.5 | 159.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 18 | @ | L 90-113 | +10.5 | L −12.5 | 163.5 | O 203 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 67-105 | +37.5 | L −0.5 | 171.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 28 | vs | L 82-90 | +11.5 | W +3.5 | 162.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 83-102 | +15.5 | L −3.5 | 162.5 | O 185 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 74-82 | +18.5 | W +10.5 | 172.5 | U 156 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 73-85 | +2.5 | L −9.5 | 164.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 82-89 | +11.5 | W +4.5 | 173.5 | U 171 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 105-91 | +9.5 | W +23.5 | 157.5 | O 196 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 69-98 | +12.5 | L −16.5 | 164.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 87-85 | +8.5 | W +10.5 | 166.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 117-114 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 164.5 | O 231 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 77-84 | +1.5 | L −5.5 | 165.5 | U 161 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 94-100 | +10.5 | W +4.5 | 165.5 | O 194 |
| Feb 5 | @ | W 81-73 | +5.5 | W +13.5 | 166.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 72-91 | +15.5 | L −3.5 | 178.5 | U 163 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 81-90 | +13.5 | W +4.5 | 163.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 56-63 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 153.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 76-77 | +11.5 | W +10.5 | 166.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 71-76 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 161.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 76-70 | +6.5 | W +12.5 | 160.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 61-85 | +1.5 | L −22.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 85-93 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 160.5 | O 178 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
6
@
FLA
L 64-104
+3.5
12
@
TENN
L 66-99
+8.5
19
@
WOF
L 78-86
+2.5
22
vs
USM
L 83-92
+0.5
23
vs
PV
L 82-85
+0.5
2
vs
SIUE
L 63-72
−1.5
7
@
GONZ
L 58-109
−8.5
13
@
DAY
L 61-84
+7.5
18
@
CHSO
L 90-113
−12.5
21
@
MIA
L 67-105
−0.5
28
vs
COLU
L 82-90
+3.5
1
@
APSU
L 83-102
−3.5
3
@
LIP
L 74-82
+10.5
8
vs
WGA
L 73-85
−9.5
10
vs
QUC
L 82-89
+4.5
15
@
UNA
W 105-91
+23.5
17
@
CARK
L 69-98
−16.5
22
vs
EKU
W 87-85
+10.5
24
vs
BELL
W 117-114
+6.5
29
vs
STET
L 77-84
−5.5
31
vs
LIP
L 94-100
+4.5
5
@
WGA
W 81-73
+13.5
7
@
QUC
L 72-91
−3.5
11
@
FGCU
L 81-90
+4.5
14
@
JAX
L 56-63
+0.5
19
vs
APSU
L 76-77
+10.5
21
@
STET
L 71-76
−3.5
26
vs
FGCU
W 76-70
+12.5
28
vs
JAX
L 61-85
−22.5
4
vs
WGA
L 85-93
−4.5
covered 18didn’t cover 12avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
6
@
FLA
L 64-104
−1.5
12
@
TENN
L 66-99
+9.5
19
@
WOF
L 78-86
+2.5
22
vs
USM
L 83-92
+20.5
23
vs
PV
L 82-85
+6.5
2
vs
SIUE
L 63-72
−18.5
7
@
GONZ
L 58-109
+0.5
13
@
DAY
L 61-84
−14.5
18
@
CHSO
L 90-113
+39.5
21
@
MIA
L 67-105
+0.5
28
vs
COLU
L 82-90
+9.5
1
@
APSU
L 83-102
+22.5
3
@
LIP
L 74-82
−16.5
8
vs
WGA
L 73-85
−6.5
10
vs
QUC
L 82-89
−2.5
15
@
UNA
W 105-91
+38.5
17
@
CARK
L 69-98
+2.5
22
vs
EKU
W 87-85
+5.5
24
vs
BELL
W 117-114
+66.5
29
vs
STET
L 77-84
−4.5
31
vs
LIP
L 94-100
+28.5
5
@
WGA
W 81-73
−12.5
7
@
QUC
L 72-91
−15.5
11
@
FGCU
L 81-90
+7.5
14
@
JAX
L 56-63
−34.5
19
vs
APSU
L 76-77
−13.5
21
@
STET
L 71-76
−14.5
26
vs
FGCU
W 76-70
−14.5
28
vs
JAX
L 61-85
−5.5
4
vs
WGA
L 85-93
+17.5
over 16under 14avg +3.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
CA Baptist
34 games played
Straight up
25-9
74% wins
Against the spread
20-14
59% covers · avg +1.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-22
35% overs · avg −4.3 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 | vs | W 87-75 | -14.5 | L −2.5 | 152.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 7 | @ | W 69-61 | +8.5 | W +16.5 | 147.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 69-59 | -15.5 | L −5.5 | 140.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 80-57 | -12.5 | W +10.5 | 142.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 72-59 | -14.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 76-61 | -7.5 | W +7.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 29 | @ | W 75-69 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 137.5 | O 144 |
| Dec 1 | @ | L 70-78 | +13.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 60-91 | +18.5 | L −12.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 85-91 | +5.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 176 |
| Dec 12 | @ | W 88-83 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 153.5 | O 171 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 75-67 | -12.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 74-67 | -14.5 | L −7.5 | 158.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 66-73 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 51-63 | -2.5 | L −14.5 | 134.5 | U 114 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 76-81 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 84-72 | -7.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 58-55 | -14.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 74-58 | +1.5 | W +17.5 | 140.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 73-64 | -8.5 | W +0.5 | 143.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 78-71 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 87-77 | -1.5 | W +8.5 | 134.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 56-55 | -10.5 | L −9.5 | 138.5 | U 111 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 65-63 | -8.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | U 128 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 83-66 | -5.5 | W +11.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 65-70 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 143.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 46-65 | +8.5 | L −10.5 | 142.5 | U 111 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 68-56 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 134.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 82-67 | -8.5 | W +6.5 | 139.5 | O 149 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 87-48 | -9.5 | W +29.5 | 136.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 82-75 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | O 157 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 86-72 | -8.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | O 158 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 63-61 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | U 124 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 60-68 | +14.5 | W +6.5 | 142.5 | U 128 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
UPST
W 87-75
−2.5
7
@
UCI
W 69-61
+16.5
14
vs
WIU
W 69-59
−5.5
18
vs
UCR
W 80-57
+10.5
21
vs
GRAM
W 72-59
−1.5
25
vs
USD
W 76-61
+7.5
29
@
ORST
W 75-69
+7.5
1
@
COLO
L 70-78
+5.5
3
@
BYU
L 60-91
−12.5
6
@
UTAH
L 85-91
−0.5
12
@
EWU
W 88-83
+1.5
16
vs
SOU
W 75-67
−4.5
20
vs
SAC
W 74-67
−7.5
29
@
UVU
L 66-73
+0.5
1
@
UTA
L 51-63
−14.5
3
@
TAR
L 76-81
−3.5
8
vs
UTU
W 84-72
+4.5
10
vs
SUU
W 58-55
−11.5
15
@
ACU
W 74-58
+17.5
21
vs
UTU
W 73-64
+0.5
24
vs
UVU
W 78-71
+5.5
31
@
UTA
W 87-77
+8.5
5
vs
TAR
W 56-55
−9.5
7
vs
ACU
W 65-63
−6.5
12
@
SUU
W 83-66
+11.5
14
@
UTU
L 65-70
−7.5
19
@
UVU
L 46-65
−10.5
26
vs
UTA
W 68-56
+5.5
28
vs
TAR
W 82-67
+6.5
5
vs
ACU
W 87-48
+29.5
7
@
SUU
W 82-75
+0.5
13
vs
UTU
W 86-72
+5.5
14
vs
UVU
W 63-61
+4.5
20
vs
KU
L 60-68
+6.5
covered 20didn’t cover 14avg +1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
UPST
W 87-75
+9.5
7
@
UCI
W 69-61
−17.5
14
vs
WIU
W 69-59
−12.5
18
vs
UCR
W 80-57
−5.5
21
vs
GRAM
W 72-59
−13.5
25
vs
USD
W 76-61
−9.5
29
@
ORST
W 75-69
+6.5
1
@
COLO
L 70-78
−2.5
3
@
BYU
L 60-91
−2.5
6
@
UTAH
L 85-91
+30.5
12
@
EWU
W 88-83
+17.5
16
vs
SOU
W 75-67
−13.5
20
vs
SAC
W 74-67
−17.5
29
@
UVU
L 66-73
−9.5
1
@
UTA
L 51-63
−20.5
3
@
TAR
L 76-81
+9.5
8
vs
UTU
W 84-72
+11.5
10
vs
SUU
W 58-55
−37.5
15
@
ACU
W 74-58
−8.5
21
vs
UTU
W 73-64
−6.5
24
vs
UVU
W 78-71
+1.5
31
@
UTA
W 87-77
+29.5
5
vs
TAR
W 56-55
−27.5
7
vs
ACU
W 65-63
−7.5
12
@
SUU
W 83-66
+1.5
14
@
UTU
L 65-70
−8.5
19
@
UVU
L 46-65
−31.5
26
vs
UTA
W 68-56
−10.5
28
vs
TAR
W 82-67
+9.5
5
vs
ACU
W 87-48
−1.5
7
@
SUU
W 82-75
+8.5
13
vs
UTU
W 86-72
+13.5
14
vs
UVU
W 63-61
−15.5
20
vs
KU
L 60-68
−14.5
over 12under 22avg −4.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
CA Baptist has the better starters
Position by position: North Florida 0, CA Baptist 1, even 4
North FloridaBetterCA Baptist
G K. Jackson14.8 pts · 3.4 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 38
→CBUSmall
G E. Duncan TR10.8 pts · 1.9 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 67
G B. Plummer7.2 pts · 3.3 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 3
=Even
G J. Muller4.4 pts · 1 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 7
G M. Lee7.8 pts · 5.6 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 29
=No call
G J. Dollar1.9 pts · 0.3 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
G E. Placer TR8.3 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 21
=No call
F R. D'Amelio2.6 pts · 3 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
G E. Elliott TR4.2 pts · 2.8 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 8
=No call
F N. Richart TR0.3 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
North FloridaBetterCA Baptist
UNF offense228th of 366 · -7.0
=Even
CBU defense178th of 366 · -4.0
UNF defense363rd of 366 · -12.0
→CBUSmall
CBU offense246th of 366 · -7.5
Backcourt-12.6 · 5 players
→CBUBig
Backcourt-2.2 · 3 players
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
=No call
Frontcourt-0.8 · 2 players
Bench-0.7 · 2 players
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestUNF betterCBU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
K. Jackson33 minB. Plummer27 minM. Lee26 minE. Placer26 min · TRE. Elliott22 min · TRG. Jacobs3 min
Forwards
A. Bryant8 min · TRA. BegajNewI. BrownNew
Guards
E. Duncan21 min · TRJ. Muller21 minJ. Dollar5 minT. ConerNewJ. StonkusNewO. BlanksonNew
Forwards
R. D'Amelio11 minN. Richart7 min · TRA. MilenkovicNewJ. ZilinskasNewA. SafinNew
Centers
M. KovacNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 77.1 #112 | Points per game | 72.7 #230 |
| 1.06 #218 | Points per possession | 1.07 #209 |
| 72.3 #31 | Pace (possessions) | 68.3 #217 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.9 #106 | Effective FG% | 48.3 #308 |
| 35.0 #117 | 3-point % | 33.4 #200 |
| 51.7 #7 | 3-point attempt rate | 32.0 #330 |
| 28.8 #333 | Free throw rate | 35.9 #154 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.8 #261 | Turnover rate | 18.0 #270 |
| 25.2 #335 | Offensive rebound rate | 37.5 #13 |
| 13.4 #185 | Assists per game | 10.2 #355 |
| Defense | ||
| 89.6 #365 | Points allowed | 67.6 #28 |
| 1.24 #364 | Points allowed per possession | 0.99 #18 |
| 56.3 #349 | Opponent effective FG% | 46.3 #16 |
| 35.1 #253 | Opponent 3-point % | 29.5 #5 |
| 12.8 #360 | Turnovers forced | 16.9 #159 |
| 62.4 #361 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.8 #41 |
| 4.6 #352 | Steals per game | 5.5 #296 |
| 1.4 #364 | Blocks per game | 2.9 #253 |
North Florida
5-25 in 2025-26 overall · 5-14 in conference · Atlantic Sun Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs West Georgia85–93
- Lvs Jacksonville61–85
- Wvs FGCU76–70
- L@ Stetson71–76
- Lvs Austin Peay76–77
A week or more of rest.
CA Baptist
25-9 in 2025-26 overall · 15-5 in conference · Big West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Kansas60–68
- Wvs Utah Valley63–61
- Wvs Utah Tech86–72
- W@ Southern Utah82–75
- Wvs Abilene Chrstn87–48
A week or more of rest.