Joan Perry Brock Center · at Longwood
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | LONG | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 LONG 79–75 · win probability LONG 62%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.4
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: LONG has more of the edges
CAM 1, LONG 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
CAM has played the 134th-hardest schedule, LONG the 330th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: CAM 33.5%, LONG 34.6%. Defensive: CAM 68.0%, LONG 72.3%
LONG offense vs CAM defense
Offense 182nd of 366 against a defense 275th, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: CAM 43.5, LONG 41.4. Allowed: CAM 37.0, LONG 42.1
Home court
LONG at home. This season: LONG 0-0 at home, CAM 0-0 away
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: CAM 0%, LONG 28%. Transfers in: CAM 2, LONG 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Three-pointers
CAM hits 32.3% and allows 35.5%; LONG hits 31.4% and allows 33.8%. Threes are 36.9% and 34.8% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: CAM plays 70.0 a game (118th fastest), LONG 71.5 (54th). Faster games mean more points
Even
CAM offense vs LONG defense
Offense 217th of 366 against a defense 242nd, on the model’s ratings
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: CAM 17.6%, LONG 19.2%. Forced: CAM 17.0%, LONG 19.7%
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: CAM 50.1 and allows 53.9; LONG 49.7 and allows 53.8
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 | — | LONG -3.6 | — |
| Total | — | 153.4 | — |
| Projected score | — | CAM 74.9 · LONG 78.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | LONG -2.0 | — |
| 1H total | 71.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | CAM 34.8 · LONG 36.9 | — |
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% | 3-7 30% | |
| 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% |
Recent meetings
Last 5 of 6 since 2021-22
CAM 1–5 LONGLONG leads · 6 games since 2021-22 · CAM 1-5 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2024-25 | LONG 77 @ CAM 55 | CAM +3.5 | LONG W |
| Mar 3, 2022-23 | CAM 81 vs LONG 68 | LONG -6.5 | CAM W |
| Feb 4, 2022-23 | CAM 50 @ LONG 74 | LONG -7.5 | LONG W |
| Dec 31, 2022-23 | LONG 67 @ CAM 42 | CAM +1.5 | LONG W |
| Feb 26, 2021-22 | LONG 60 @ CAM 55 | CAM -1 | LONG W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Campbell
32 games played
Straight up
14-18
44% wins
Against the spread
18-14
56% covers · avg +0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-15
53% overs · avg +2.6 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 | @ | L 64-96 | +20.5 | L −11.5 | 151.5 | O 160 |
| Nov 6 | @ | L 65-73 | +15.5 | W +7.5 | 138.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 9 | vs | W 91-82 | -9.5 | L −0.5 | 152.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 85-91 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 159.5 | O 176 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 71-67 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 151.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 25 | @ | L 51-99 | +17.5 | L −30.5 | 159.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 76-87 | +14.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 14 | vs | W 69-64 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 70-98 | +36.5 | W +8.5 | 160.5 | O 168 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 50-78 | +13.5 | L −14.5 | 145.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 23 | vs | W 102-79 | -5.5 | W +17.5 | 145.5 | O 181 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 72-86 | +6.5 | L −7.5 | 149.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 31 | @ | W 68-65 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 152.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 97-82 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 154.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 86-72 | -6.5 | W +7.5 | 145.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 82-83 | +4.5 | W +3.5 | 161.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 75-78 | +6.5 | W +3.5 | 149.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 83-87 | +3.5 | L −0.5 | 160.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 73-88 | -4.5 | L −19.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 69-81 | -4.5 | L −16.5 | 152.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 104-96 | +8.5 | W +16.5 | 168.5 | O 200 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 81-60 | -4.5 | W +16.5 | 141.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 79-71 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 156.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 15 | vs | L 57-62 | -3.5 | L −8.5 | 159.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 84-83 | +1.5 | W +2.5 | 167.5 | U 167 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 68-73 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 60-65 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 67-71 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 90-72 | -8.5 | W +9.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 96-89 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 148.5 | O 185 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 85-70 | +6.5 | W +21.5 | 149.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 9 | vs | L 64-74 | +1.5 | L −8.5 | 151.5 | U 138 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
WIS
L 64-96
−11.5
6
@
WVU
L 65-73
+7.5
9
vs
WMU
W 91-82
−0.5
19
@
WEB
L 85-91
−4.5
21
vs
UTA
W 71-67
+2.5
25
@
WAKE
L 51-99
−30.5
2
@
PSU
L 76-87
+3.5
14
vs
BALL
W 69-64
−3.5
17
@
GONZ
L 70-98
+8.5
21
@
MINN
L 50-78
−14.5
23
vs
GB
W 102-79
+17.5
29
@
HOF
L 72-86
−7.5
31
@
MONM
W 68-65
+4.5
3
vs
NE
W 97-82
+11.5
8
vs
HAMP
W 86-72
+7.5
10
@
ELON
L 82-83
+3.5
17
@
UNCW
L 75-78
+3.5
22
@
COFC
L 83-87
−0.5
24
vs
MONM
L 73-88
−19.5
29
vs
STBK
L 69-81
−16.5
31
@
W&M
W 104-96
+16.5
5
vs
DREX
W 81-60
+16.5
7
@
NCAT
W 79-71
+4.5
15
vs
COFC
L 57-62
−8.5
19
vs
W&M
W 84-83
+2.5
21
vs
UNCW
L 68-73
−1.5
26
@
DREX
L 60-65
−3.5
28
@
TOW
L 67-71
+0.5
3
vs
NCAT
W 90-72
+9.5
7
vs
STBK
W 96-89
+4.5
8
vs
UNCW
W 85-70
+21.5
9
vs
MONM
L 64-74
−8.5
covered 18didn’t cover 14avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
WIS
L 64-96
+8.5
6
@
WVU
L 65-73
−0.5
9
vs
WMU
W 91-82
+20.5
19
@
WEB
L 85-91
+16.5
21
vs
UTA
W 71-67
−13.5
25
@
WAKE
L 51-99
−9.5
2
@
PSU
L 76-87
+8.5
14
vs
BALL
W 69-64
−12.5
17
@
GONZ
L 70-98
+7.5
21
@
MINN
L 50-78
−17.5
23
vs
GB
W 102-79
+35.5
29
@
HOF
L 72-86
+8.5
31
@
MONM
W 68-65
−19.5
3
vs
NE
W 97-82
+24.5
8
vs
HAMP
W 86-72
+12.5
10
@
ELON
L 82-83
+3.5
17
@
UNCW
L 75-78
+3.5
22
@
COFC
L 83-87
+9.5
24
vs
MONM
L 73-88
+12.5
29
vs
STBK
L 69-81
−2.5
31
@
W&M
W 104-96
+31.5
5
vs
DREX
W 81-60
−0.5
7
@
NCAT
W 79-71
−6.5
15
vs
COFC
L 57-62
−40.5
19
vs
W&M
W 84-83
−0.5
21
vs
UNCW
L 68-73
−9.5
26
@
DREX
L 60-65
−18.5
28
@
TOW
L 67-71
−4.5
3
vs
NCAT
W 90-72
+7.5
7
vs
STBK
W 96-89
+36.5
8
vs
UNCW
W 85-70
+5.5
9
vs
MONM
L 64-74
−13.5
over 17under 15avg +2.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Longwood
29 games played
Straight up
13-16
45% wins
Against the spread
13-16
45% covers · avg −0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-13
55% overs · avg +2.7 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 7 | @ | L 60-78 | +14.5 | L −3.5 | 145.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 82-72 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 149.5 | O 154 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 90-82 | -15.5 | L −7.5 | 147.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 18 | vs | L 82-83 | -17.5 | L −18.5 | 138.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 70-95 | +3.5 | L −21.5 | 153.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 63-70 | +5.5 | L −1.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 65-61 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 138.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 30 | @ | L 66-92 | +5.5 | L −20.5 | 148.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 84-80 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 154.5 | O 164 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 76-81 | -13.5 | L −18.5 | 139.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 68-71 | +24.5 | W +21.5 | 163.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 74-72 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | U 146 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 82-70 | +7.5 | W +19.5 | 161.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 67-80 | +16.5 | W +3.5 | 160.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 61-72 | +2.5 | L −8.5 | 148.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 77-70 | -3.5 | W +3.5 | 139.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 83-85 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 91-56 | -16.5 | W +18.5 | 155.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 23 | vs | W 81-79 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 156.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 60-65 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 59-71 | +9.5 | L −2.5 | 156.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 86-66 | -12.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 74-79 | +10.5 | W +5.5 | 153.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 74-79 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 141.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 82-75 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 65-72 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 139.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 107-96 | +2.5 | W +13.5 | 154.5 | O 203 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 90-74 | -1.5 | W +14.5 | 154.5 | O 164 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 82-85 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 140.5 | O 167 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
@
PITT
L 60-78
−3.5
12
vs
JMU
W 82-72
+11.5
15
vs
BING
W 90-82
−7.5
18
vs
UMES
L 82-83
−18.5
23
@
COLU
L 70-95
−21.5
28
vs
SIE
L 63-70
−1.5
29
vs
ME
W 65-61
−1.5
30
@
AMER
L 66-92
−20.5
6
@
MORG
W 84-80
−1.5
13
vs
DSU
L 76-81
−18.5
17
@
WAKE
L 68-71
+21.5
20
@
NCCU
W 74-72
−1.5
31
vs
WIN
W 82-70
+19.5
3
@
HPU
L 67-80
+3.5
7
@
UNCA
L 61-72
−8.5
10
vs
PRES
W 77-70
+3.5
17
@
RAD
L 83-85
+2.5
21
vs
GWEB
W 91-56
+18.5
23
vs
CHSO
W 81-79
+0.5
29
@
UPST
L 60-65
−6.5
31
vs
HPU
L 59-71
−2.5
4
@
GWEB
W 86-66
+7.5
7
@
WIN
L 74-79
+5.5
12
vs
UNCA
L 74-79
−7.5
14
vs
UPST
W 82-75
+0.5
19
@
PRES
L 65-72
−4.5
21
@
CHSO
W 107-96
+13.5
28
vs
RAD
W 90-74
+14.5
6
vs
UNCA
L 82-85
−4.5
covered 13didn’t cover 16avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
@
PITT
L 60-78
−7.5
12
vs
JMU
W 82-72
+4.5
15
vs
BING
W 90-82
+24.5
18
vs
UMES
L 82-83
+26.5
23
@
COLU
L 70-95
+11.5
28
vs
SIE
L 63-70
−12.5
29
vs
ME
W 65-61
−12.5
30
@
AMER
L 66-92
+9.5
6
@
MORG
W 84-80
+9.5
13
vs
DSU
L 76-81
+17.5
17
@
WAKE
L 68-71
−24.5
20
@
NCCU
W 74-72
−0.5
31
vs
WIN
W 82-70
−9.5
3
@
HPU
L 67-80
−13.5
7
@
UNCA
L 61-72
−15.5
10
vs
PRES
W 77-70
+7.5
17
@
RAD
L 83-85
+10.5
21
vs
GWEB
W 91-56
−8.5
23
vs
CHSO
W 81-79
+3.5
29
@
UPST
L 60-65
−22.5
31
vs
HPU
L 59-71
−26.5
4
@
GWEB
W 86-66
+4.5
7
@
WIN
L 74-79
−0.5
12
vs
UNCA
L 74-79
+11.5
14
vs
UPST
W 82-75
+9.5
19
@
PRES
L 65-72
−2.5
21
@
CHSO
W 107-96
+48.5
28
vs
RAD
W 90-74
+9.5
6
vs
UNCA
L 82-85
+26.5
over 16under 13avg +2.7 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: Campbell 1, Longwood 1, even 3
CampbellBetterLongwood
G L. Waddles TR11.7 pts · 4.7 reb · 2 ast
Score 48
→LONGSmall
G M. Williams TR9.9 pts · 3.6 reb · 4.1 ast
Score 65
G E. Butkus NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
G A. Billups7.8 pts · 2.6 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 47
G A. Wright NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
G J. Benard7.3 pts · 3.6 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 44
G J. Browder NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
G T. Robinson TR9.5 pts · 1.9 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 64
F N. Kapic TR3.9 pts · 2 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 55
←CAMSmall
G E. Kelly2.1 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 28
CampbellBetterLongwood
CAM offense217th of 366 · -6.7
=Even
LONG defense242nd of 366 · -6.4
CAM defense275th of 366 · -6.9
→LONGSmall
LONG offense182nd of 366 · -5.7
Backcourt-0.7 · 4 players
=Even
Backcourt-1.7 · 5 players
Frontcourt-0.0 · 1 player
=No call
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-1.7 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestCAM betterLONG betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
L. Waddles29 min · TRE. ButkusNewA. WrightNewJ. BrowderNewB. RitgerNewC. McAbeeNew
Forwards
N. Kapic11 min · TRK. RogersNewS. MooreNewB. ThetNew
Guards
M. Williams24 min · TRA. Billups23 minJ. Benard20 minT. Robinson19 min · TRE. Kelly11 minB. Wesson2 min · TR
Forwards
D. Kauzonas10 min · TRL. Milosevic8 min · TRK. Musungay4 min · TRI. Kalala3 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 76.1 #140 | Points per game | 75.9 #143 |
| 1.08 #175 | Points per possession | 1.07 #215 |
| 70.0 #118 | Pace (possessions) | 71.5 #54 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.1 #230 | Effective FG% | 49.7 #254 |
| 32.3 #267 | 3-point % | 31.4 #309 |
| 36.9 #232 | 3-point attempt rate | 34.8 #279 |
| 43.5 #16 | Free throw rate | 41.4 #40 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.6 #240 | Turnover rate | 19.2 #327 |
| 33.5 #77 | Offensive rebound rate | 34.6 #57 |
| 11.4 #315 | Assists per game | 12.2 #270 |
| Defense | ||
| 78.8 #289 | Points allowed | 76.2 #223 |
| 1.13 #282 | Points allowed per possession | 1.06 #113 |
| 53.9 #295 | Opponent effective FG% | 53.8 #293 |
| 35.5 #277 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.8 #171 |
| 17.0 #153 | Turnovers forced | 19.7 #31 |
| 68.0 #254 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.3 #58 |
| 6.5 #179 | Steals per game | 8.3 #28 |
| 1.5 #361 | Blocks per game | 2.0 #347 |
Campbell
14-18 in 2025-26 overall · 10-11 in conference · Coastal Athletic Association
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Monmouth64–74
- Wvs UNC Wilmington85–70
- Wvs Stony Brook96–89
- Wvs NC A&T90–72
- L@ Towson67–71
A week or more of rest.
Longwood
13-16 in 2025-26 overall · 8-9 in conference · Big South Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UNC Asheville82–85
- Wvs Radford90–74
- W@ Charleston So107–96
- L@ Presbyterian65–72
- Wvs SC Upstate82–75
A week or more of rest.