Kohl Center · at Wisconsin
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | WIS | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 WIS 89–62 · win probability WIS 99%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 150.3
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: WIS has more of the edges
CCU 0, WIS 8 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
CCU has played the 301st-hardest schedule, WIS the 24th. A record against a soft schedule means less
CCU offense vs WIS defense
Offense 295th of 366 against a defense 40th, on the model’s ratings
WIS offense vs CCU defense
Offense 44th of 366 against a defense 246th, on the model’s ratings
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: CCU 21%, WIS 54%. Transfers in: CCU 6, WIS 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Turnovers
Turnover rate: CCU 15.3%, WIS 12.8%. Forced: CCU 12.3%, WIS 14.3%
Free throws
Free throw rate: CCU 32.3, WIS 31.5. Allowed: CCU 34.9, WIS 29.9
Home court
WIS at home. This season: WIS 0-0 at home, CCU 0-0 away
Shooting
Effective FG%: CCU 47.9 and allows 46.8; WIS 54.5 and allows 51.4
Three-pointers
CCU hits 33.5% and allows 32.8%; WIS hits 36.2% and allows 33.5%. Threes are 43.1% and 52.1% of their shots
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: CCU 26.9%, WIS 29.1%. Defensive: CCU 72.4%, WIS 71.8%
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: CCU plays 69.9 a game (121st fastest), WIS 70.0 (119th). 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 | — | WIS -27.1 | — |
| Total | — | 150.3 | — |
| Projected score | — | CCU 61.6 · WIS 88.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | WIS -16.0 | — |
| 1H total | 70.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | CCU 27.2 · WIS 43.1 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | |
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Coastal
31 games played
Straight up
18-13
58% wins
Against the spread
18-13
58% covers · avg +0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-14
55% overs · avg −0.6 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 71-76 | +2.5 | L −2.5 | 146.5 | O 147 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 72-66 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 165.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 67-74 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 139.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 21 | @ | W 84-64 | -3.5 | W +16.5 | 138.5 | O 148 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 75-58 | -3.5 | W +13.5 | 147.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 42-94 | +12.5 | L −39.5 | 146.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 67-60 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | U 127 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 78-85 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 144.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 88-84 | +16.5 | W +20.5 | 153.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 61-82 | +17.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 18 | @ | L 49-67 | +4.5 | L −13.5 | 137.5 | U 116 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 76-74 | +3.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 22 | @ | W 68-62 | +7.5 | W +13.5 | 144.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 1 | vs | L 81-82 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 157.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 71-89 | -6.5 | L −24.5 | 148.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 66-70 | -4.5 | L −8.5 | 151.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 67-62 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 133.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 85-83 | +9.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 79-75 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 157.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 72-70 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | O 142 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 85-67 | -2.5 | W +15.5 | 141.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 48-53 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 139.5 | U 101 |
| Feb 1 | @ | W 83-79 | -10.5 | L −6.5 | 146.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 66-70 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 94-91 | +2.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | O 185 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 69-65 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 132.5 | O 134 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 65-67 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 79-75 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 153.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 24 | @ | W 76-71 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 141.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 27 | @ | W 69-68 | +6.5 | W +7.5 | 141.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 72-96 | -1.5 | L −25.5 | 151.5 | O 168 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
WMU
L 71-76
−2.5
11
vs
WIN
W 72-66
+8.5
14
@
JXST
L 67-74
+0.5
21
@
WIU
W 84-64
+16.5
22
vs
UND
W 75-58
+13.5
23
@
ILST
L 42-94
−39.5
30
vs
AAMU
W 67-60
−0.5
3
@
UPST
L 78-85
−4.5
6
@
WIN
W 88-84
+20.5
13
@
GCU
L 61-82
−3.5
18
@
APP
L 49-67
−13.5
20
@
ODU
W 76-74
+5.5
22
@
JOES
W 68-62
+13.5
1
vs
GASO
L 81-82
−2.5
3
vs
GAST
L 71-89
−24.5
8
vs
ODU
L 66-70
−8.5
10
vs
APP
W 67-62
+6.5
14
@
MRSH
W 85-83
+11.5
17
@
GASO
W 79-75
+10.5
22
vs
TXST
W 72-70
+0.5
24
vs
USM
W 85-67
+15.5
29
@
USA
L 48-53
−1.5
1
@
ULM
W 83-79
−6.5
4
vs
ARST
L 66-70
+0.5
7
vs
MASS
W 94-91
+5.5
12
@
UL
W 69-65
+2.5
18
vs
JMU
L 65-67
−0.5
21
vs
MRSH
W 79-75
+6.5
24
@
GAST
W 76-71
+3.5
27
@
JMU
W 69-68
+7.5
7
vs
GASO
L 72-96
−25.5
covered 18didn’t cover 13avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
WMU
L 71-76
+0.5
11
vs
WIN
W 72-66
−27.5
14
@
JXST
L 67-74
+1.5
21
@
WIU
W 84-64
+9.5
22
vs
UND
W 75-58
−14.5
23
@
ILST
L 42-94
−10.5
30
vs
AAMU
W 67-60
−13.5
3
@
UPST
L 78-85
+18.5
6
@
WIN
W 88-84
+18.5
13
@
GCU
L 61-82
−0.5
18
@
APP
L 49-67
−21.5
20
@
ODU
W 76-74
+2.5
22
@
JOES
W 68-62
−14.5
1
vs
GASO
L 81-82
+5.5
3
vs
GAST
L 71-89
+11.5
8
vs
ODU
L 66-70
−15.5
10
vs
APP
W 67-62
−4.5
14
@
MRSH
W 85-83
+16.5
17
@
GASO
W 79-75
−3.5
22
vs
TXST
W 72-70
+1.5
24
vs
USM
W 85-67
+10.5
29
@
USA
L 48-53
−38.5
1
@
ULM
W 83-79
+15.5
4
vs
ARST
L 66-70
−15.5
7
vs
MASS
W 94-91
+37.5
12
@
UL
W 69-65
+1.5
18
vs
JMU
L 65-67
−8.5
21
vs
MRSH
W 79-75
+0.5
24
@
GAST
W 76-71
+5.5
27
@
JMU
W 69-68
−4.5
7
vs
GASO
L 72-96
+16.5
over 17under 14avg −0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Wisconsin
35 games played
Straight up
24-11
69% wins
Against the spread
21-14
60% covers · avg +1.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
22-13
63% overs · avg +3.5 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 96-64 | -20.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | O 160 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 97-72 | -28.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 86-55 | -26.5 | W +4.5 | 156.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 17 | vs | W 94-69 | -25.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 70-98 | +4.5 | L −23.5 | 165.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 104-83 | -6.5 | W +14.5 | 166.5 | O 187 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 63-74 | -5.5 | L −16.5 | 157.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 85-73 | -10.5 | W +1.5 | 155.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 96-76 | -11.5 | W +8.5 | 160.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 60-90 | +1.5 | L −28.5 | 158.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 19 | vs | L 66-76 | -3.5 | L −13.5 | 152.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 88-61 | -26.5 | W +0.5 | 152.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 80-60 | -19.5 | W +0.5 | 157.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 73-89 | +5.5 | L −10.5 | 153.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 6 | vs | W 80-72 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 152.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 91-88 | +19.5 | W +22.5 | 169.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 13 | @ | W 78-75 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 96-87 | -15.5 | L −6.5 | 149.5 | O 183 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 98-71 | -5.5 | W +21.5 | 157.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 25 | vs | L 71-73 | -7.5 | L −9.5 | 158.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 67-63 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 146.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 92-82 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 77-78 | +3.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 10 | @ | W 92-90 | +9.5 | W +11.5 | 153.5 | O 182 |
| Feb 13 | vs | W 92-71 | +1.5 | W +22.5 | 149.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 69-86 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 157.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 84-71 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 71-85 | -5.5 | L −19.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 90-73 | -1.5 | W +15.5 | 153.5 | O 163 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 78-45 | -14.5 | W +18.5 | 153.5 | U 123 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 97-93 | +9.5 | W +13.5 | 154.5 | O 190 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 85-82 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | O 167 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 91-88 | +8.5 | W +11.5 | 158.5 | O 179 |
| Mar 14 | vs | L 65-68 | +12.5 | W +9.5 | 161.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 19 | vs | L 82-83 | -10.5 | L −11.5 | 161.5 | O 165 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
CAM
W 96-64
+11.5
7
vs
NIU
W 97-72
−3.5
11
vs
BALL
W 86-55
+4.5
17
vs
SIUE
W 94-69
−0.5
21
@
BYU
L 70-98
−23.5
27
vs
PROV
W 104-83
+14.5
28
vs
TCU
L 63-74
−16.5
3
vs
NU
W 85-73
+1.5
6
vs
MARQ
W 96-76
+8.5
10
@
NEB
L 60-90
−28.5
19
vs
VILL
L 66-76
−13.5
22
vs
CMU
W 88-61
+0.5
30
vs
MILW
W 80-60
+0.5
3
vs
PUR
L 73-89
−10.5
6
vs
UCLA
W 80-72
+4.5
10
@
MICH
W 91-88
+22.5
13
@
MINN
W 78-75
+1.5
17
vs
RUTG
W 96-87
−6.5
22
@
PSU
W 98-71
+21.5
25
vs
USC
L 71-73
−9.5
28
vs
MINN
W 67-63
−5.5
31
vs
OSU
W 92-82
+5.5
7
@
IU
L 77-78
+2.5
10
@
ILL
W 92-90
+11.5
13
vs
MSU
W 92-71
+22.5
17
@
OSU
L 69-86
−15.5
22
vs
IOWA
W 84-71
+10.5
25
@
ORE
L 71-85
−19.5
28
@
WASH
W 90-73
+15.5
4
vs
MD
W 78-45
+18.5
7
@
PUR
W 97-93
+13.5
12
vs
WASH
W 85-82
−3.5
13
vs
ILL
W 91-88
+11.5
14
vs
MICH
L 65-68
+9.5
19
vs
HPU
L 82-83
−11.5
covered 21didn’t cover 14avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
CAM
W 96-64
+8.5
7
vs
NIU
W 97-72
+11.5
11
vs
BALL
W 86-55
−15.5
17
vs
SIUE
W 94-69
+16.5
21
@
BYU
L 70-98
+2.5
27
vs
PROV
W 104-83
+20.5
28
vs
TCU
L 63-74
−20.5
3
vs
NU
W 85-73
+2.5
6
vs
MARQ
W 96-76
+11.5
10
@
NEB
L 60-90
−8.5
19
vs
VILL
L 66-76
−10.5
22
vs
CMU
W 88-61
−3.5
30
vs
MILW
W 80-60
−17.5
3
vs
PUR
L 73-89
+8.5
6
vs
UCLA
W 80-72
−0.5
10
@
MICH
W 91-88
+9.5
13
@
MINN
W 78-75
+6.5
17
vs
RUTG
W 96-87
+33.5
22
@
PSU
W 98-71
+11.5
25
vs
USC
L 71-73
−14.5
28
vs
MINN
W 67-63
−16.5
31
vs
OSU
W 92-82
+18.5
7
@
IU
L 77-78
−2.5
10
@
ILL
W 92-90
+28.5
13
vs
MSU
W 92-71
+13.5
17
@
OSU
L 69-86
−2.5
22
vs
IOWA
W 84-71
+7.5
25
@
ORE
L 71-85
+3.5
28
@
WASH
W 90-73
+9.5
4
vs
MD
W 78-45
−30.5
7
@
PUR
W 97-93
+35.5
12
vs
WASH
W 85-82
+9.5
13
vs
ILL
W 91-88
+20.5
14
vs
MICH
L 65-68
−28.5
19
vs
HPU
L 82-83
+3.5
over 22under 13avg +3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Wisconsin has the better starters
Position by position: Coastal 0, Wisconsin 5, even 0
CoastalBetterWisconsin
G T. Thompson3.7 pts · 4 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 15
→WISBig
G E. Elmer TR12.8 pts · 6.1 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 68
G D. Washington TR4.5 pts · 2 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 25
→WISBig
G T. Autry TR10.9 pts · 3.6 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 61
G T. Perry TR4.7 pts · 1.5 reb · 1 ast
Score 38
→WISBig
G B. Carrington8.3 pts · 2.4 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 90
G D. Craig4.4 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 31
→WISBig
F N. Winter13.1 pts · 8.5 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 96
F A. Hardaway TR5.6 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 44
→WISBig
F A. Rapp9.7 pts · 4 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 83
CoastalBetterWisconsin
CCU offense295th of 366 · -9.1
→WISBig
WIS defense40th of 366 · +2.9
CCU defense246th of 366 · -6.5
→WISBig
WIS offense44th of 366 · +4.5
Backcourt-4.7 · 4 players
→WISBig
Backcourt+2.0 · 3 players
Frontcourt-0.4 · 1 player
→WISBig
Frontcourt+6.7 · 2 players
Bench-1.9 · 4 players
=Even
Bench-2.6 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestCCU betterWIS betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
T. Thompson20 minD. Washington15 min · TRT. Perry13 min · TRD. Craig12 minJ. Cross6 min · TRJ. AlstonNew
Forwards
A. Hardaway20 min · TRD. Green11 minD. Fuquay8 min · TRF. BighamNewJ. BuzzardNew
Centers
C. Middleton10 min · TR
Guards
E. Elmer31 min · TRT. Autry29 min · TRB. Carrington18 minJ. Janicki17 minH. Jones7 minZ. Kinziger6 min
Forwards
N. Winter31 minA. Rapp23 minV. Onuetu18 min · TRW. Garlock7 minI. RiddleNew
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 #251 | Points per game | 83.0 #28 |
| 1.03 #290 | Points per possession | 1.18 #27 |
| 69.9 #121 | Pace (possessions) | 70.0 #119 |
| Shooting | ||
| 47.9 #314 | Effective FG% | 54.5 #52 |
| 33.5 #196 | 3-point % | 36.2 #50 |
| 43.1 #113 | 3-point attempt rate | 52.1 #6 |
| 32.3 #254 | Free throw rate | 31.5 #267 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.3 #84 | Turnover rate | 12.8 #4 |
| 26.9 #296 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.1 #232 |
| 9.9 #359 | Assists per game | 16.0 #48 |
| Defense | ||
| 73.5 #143 | Points allowed | 76.1 #221 |
| 1.05 #88 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #193 |
| 46.8 #18 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.4 #178 |
| 32.8 #105 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.5 #152 |
| 12.3 #364 | Turnovers forced | 14.3 #327 |
| 72.4 #52 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.8 #74 |
| 4.3 #360 | Steals per game | 5.6 #287 |
| 3.2 #187 | Blocks per game | 3.1 #198 |
Coastal
18-13 in 2025-26 overall · 11-8 in conference · Sun Belt Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs GA Southern72–96
- W@ James Madison69–68
- W@ Georgia St76–71
- Wvs Marshall79–75
- Lvs James Madison65–67
A week or more of rest.
Wisconsin
24-11 in 2025-26 overall · 16-7 in conference · Big Ten Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs High Point82–83
- Lvs Michigan65–68
- Wvs Illinois91–88
- Wvs Washington85–82
- W@ Purdue97–93
A week or more of rest.