Chesapeake Employers Insurance Arena · at UMBC
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | UMBC | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UMBC 81–71 · win probability UMBC 81%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 151.5
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: UMBC has more of the edges
MORG 1, UMBC 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Shooting
Effective FG%: MORG 45.8 and allows 51.7; UMBC 54.1 and allows 49.4
UMBC offense vs MORG defense
Offense 255th of 366 against a defense 360th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: MORG plays 71.1 a game (73rd fastest), UMBC 67.0 (278th). Faster games mean more points
Three-pointers
MORG hits 31.7% and allows 31.5%; UMBC hits 36.1% and allows 32.7%. Threes are 35.2% and 38.8% of their shots
Free throws
Free throw rate: MORG 42.7, UMBC 34.1. Allowed: MORG 50.9, UMBC 25.7
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: MORG 30.7%, UMBC 24.9%. Defensive: MORG 64.8%, UMBC 74.2%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: MORG 17.8%, UMBC 14.1%. Forced: MORG 16.5%, UMBC 15.1%
Home court
UMBC at home. This season: UMBC 0-0 at home, MORG 0-0 away
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: MORG 36%, UMBC 11%. Transfers in: MORG 3, UMBC 2. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Schedule so far
MORG has played the 360th-hardest schedule, UMBC the 342nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
MORG offense vs UMBC defense
Offense 293rd of 366 against a defense 279th, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | UMBC -9.9 | — |
| Total | — | 151.5 | — |
| Projected score | — | MORG 70.8 · UMBC 80.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UMBC -5.8 | — |
| 1H total | 70.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | MORG 32.5 · UMBC 38.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 7-3 70% | 8-2 80% | |
| 9-1 90% | 8-2 80% | 4-6 40% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
MORG 1–3 UMBCUMBC leads · 4 games since 2021-22 · UMBC has won the last 2 meetings · MORG 2-2 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 11, 2025-26 | UMBC 81 @ MORG 79 | MORG +4.5 | MORG W |
| Nov 27, 2024-25 | MORG 69 @ UMBC 92 | UMBC -7.5 | UMBC W |
| Dec 6, 2023-24 | UMBC 80 @ MORG 92 | MORG +4.5 | MORG W |
| Dec 10, 2022-23 | MORG 63 @ UMBC 75 | UMBC -8.5 | UMBC W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Morgan St
27 games played
Straight up
11-16
41% wins
Against the spread
15-12
56% covers · avg −1.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-11
59% overs · avg +2.8 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 70-87 | +27.5 | W +10.5 | 154.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 79-81 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 162.5 | U 160 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 72-86 | +6.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | O 158 |
| Nov 18 | vs | L 73-79 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 161.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 56-88 | +11.5 | L −20.5 | 156.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 66-71 | +5.5 | W +0.5 | 143.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 80-84 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 154.5 | O 164 |
| Dec 9 | @ | L 49-92 | +21.5 | L −21.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 81-73 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 140.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 19 | @ | L 50-97 | +26.5 | L −20.5 | 151.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 64-94 | +25.5 | L −4.5 | 145.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 23 | @ | L 56-83 | +23.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 49-66 | +6.5 | L −10.5 | 138.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 72-67 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 12 | vs | L 78-89 | +3.5 | L −7.5 | 141.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 80-79 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 136.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 78-77 | +14.5 | W +15.5 | 148.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 26 | @ | W 79-78 | +7.5 | W +8.5 | 152.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 89-80 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 79-71 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 140.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 76-80 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 82-68 | -5.5 | W +8.5 | 143.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 90-83 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 153.5 | O 173 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 59-84 | +8.5 | L −16.5 | 158.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 2 | vs | W 90-84 | +3.5 | W +9.5 | 156.5 | O 174 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 70-66 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 149.5 | U 136 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 70-75 | -3.5 | L −8.5 | 142.5 | O 145 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
GTWN
L 70-87
+10.5
11
vs
UMBC
L 79-81
+2.5
15
@
MERC
L 72-86
−7.5
18
vs
NCAT
L 73-79
−3.5
21
@
ODU
L 56-88
−20.5
25
vs
DREX
L 66-71
+0.5
6
vs
LONG
L 80-84
+1.5
9
@
DEP
L 49-92
−21.5
13
vs
NIA
W 81-73
+6.5
19
@
CAL
L 50-97
−20.5
21
@
SF
L 64-94
−4.5
23
@
LMU
L 56-83
−3.5
3
@
UMES
L 49-66
−10.5
10
vs
SCST
W 72-67
+0.5
12
vs
NCCU
L 78-89
−7.5
17
@
DSU
W 80-79
+4.5
24
@
HOW
W 78-77
+15.5
26
@
NORF
W 79-78
+8.5
31
@
COPP
W 89-80
+5.5
7
vs
UMES
W 79-71
+9.5
16
@
NCCU
L 76-80
+1.5
21
vs
DSU
W 82-68
+8.5
25
@
SCST
W 90-83
+5.5
28
vs
HOW
L 59-84
−16.5
2
vs
NORF
W 90-84
+9.5
5
vs
COPP
W 70-66
−1.5
11
vs
DSU
L 70-75
−8.5
covered 15didn’t cover 12avg −1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
GTWN
L 70-87
+2.5
11
vs
UMBC
L 79-81
−2.5
15
@
MERC
L 72-86
+11.5
18
vs
NCAT
L 73-79
−9.5
21
@
ODU
L 56-88
−12.5
25
vs
DREX
L 66-71
−6.5
6
vs
LONG
L 80-84
+9.5
9
@
DEP
L 49-92
−9.5
13
vs
NIA
W 81-73
+13.5
19
@
CAL
L 50-97
−4.5
21
@
SF
L 64-94
+12.5
23
@
LMU
L 56-83
−5.5
3
@
UMES
L 49-66
−23.5
10
vs
SCST
W 72-67
−8.5
12
vs
NCCU
L 78-89
+25.5
17
@
DSU
W 80-79
+22.5
24
@
HOW
W 78-77
+6.5
26
@
NORF
W 79-78
+4.5
31
@
COPP
W 89-80
+13.5
7
vs
UMES
W 79-71
+9.5
16
@
NCCU
L 76-80
+9.5
21
vs
DSU
W 82-68
+6.5
25
@
SCST
W 90-83
+19.5
28
vs
HOW
L 59-84
−15.5
2
vs
NORF
W 90-84
+17.5
5
vs
COPP
W 70-66
−13.5
11
vs
DSU
L 70-75
+2.5
over 16under 11avg +2.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
UMBC
31 games played
Straight up
22-9
71% wins
Against the spread
19-12
61% covers · avg +6.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-17
45% 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 8 | @ | L 71-77 | +25.5 | W +19.5 | 154.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 11 | @ | W 81-79 | -4.5 | L −2.5 | 162.5 | U 160 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 71-70 | -6.5 | L −5.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 52-89 | +22.5 | L −14.5 | 160.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 71-57 | -13.5 | W +0.5 | 138.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 81-90 | +19.5 | W +10.5 | 149.5 | O 171 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 73-66 | +1.5 | W +8.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 9 | vs | L 79-83 | +3.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 12 | vs | L 60-63 | -7.5 | L −10.5 | 146.5 | U 123 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 69-94 | +22.5 | L −2.5 | 160.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 29 | @ | W 93-59 | -10.5 | W +23.5 | 148.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 69-62 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 133.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 75-74 | -6.5 | L −5.5 | 143.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 74-79 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 19 | @ | W 78-60 | -4.5 | W +13.5 | 140.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 87-74 | -6.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 79-56 | -2.5 | W +20.5 | 151.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 55-64 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 141.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 68-65 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 79-62 | -11.5 | W +5.5 | 138.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 78-62 | -3.5 | W +12.5 | 135.5 | O 140 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 85-63 | -2.5 | W +19.5 | 146.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 75-62 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 142.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 66-62 | -7.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | U 128 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 70-58 | -11.5 | W +0.5 | 138.5 | U 128 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 84-60 | -2.5 | W +21.5 | 150.5 | U 144 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 91-52 | -4.5 | W +34.5 | 143.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 84-69 | -12.5 | W +2.5 | 142.5 | O 153 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 91-69 | -7.5 | W +14.5 | 147.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 74-59 | -1.5 | W +13.5 | 134.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 17 | vs | L 83-86 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 143.5 | O 169 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
DAY
L 71-77
+19.5
11
@
MORG
W 81-79
−2.5
16
vs
WAG
W 71-70
−5.5
19
@
GW
L 52-89
−14.5
29
vs
DSU
W 71-57
+0.5
3
@
GTWN
L 81-90
+10.5
6
@
BUCK
W 73-66
+8.5
9
vs
BUF
L 79-83
−0.5
12
vs
ARMY
L 60-63
−10.5
21
@
USF
L 69-94
−2.5
29
@
COPP
W 93-59
+23.5
8
vs
ME
W 69-62
−0.5
10
vs
UNH
W 75-74
−5.5
15
@
BRY
L 74-79
−6.5
19
@
BING
W 78-60
+13.5
22
vs
NJIT
W 87-74
+6.5
24
vs
UML
W 79-56
+20.5
29
@
UVM
L 55-64
−0.5
31
@
UALB
W 68-65
+1.5
5
vs
BING
W 79-62
+5.5
12
@
ME
W 78-62
+12.5
14
@
UNH
W 85-63
+19.5
19
vs
UVM
W 75-62
+14.5
21
vs
UALB
W 66-62
−3.5
26
vs
BRY
W 70-58
+0.5
28
@
UML
W 84-60
+21.5
3
@
NJIT
W 91-52
+34.5
7
vs
UNH
W 84-69
+2.5
10
vs
UML
W 91-69
+14.5
14
vs
UVM
W 74-59
+13.5
17
vs
HOW
L 83-86
−1.5
covered 19didn’t cover 12avg +6.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
DAY
L 71-77
−6.5
11
@
MORG
W 81-79
−2.5
16
vs
WAG
W 71-70
+0.5
19
@
GW
L 52-89
−19.5
29
vs
DSU
W 71-57
−10.5
3
@
GTWN
L 81-90
+21.5
6
@
BUCK
W 73-66
−4.5
9
vs
BUF
L 79-83
+16.5
12
vs
ARMY
L 60-63
−23.5
21
@
USF
L 69-94
+2.5
29
@
COPP
W 93-59
+3.5
8
vs
ME
W 69-62
−2.5
10
vs
UNH
W 75-74
+5.5
15
@
BRY
L 74-79
+17.5
19
@
BING
W 78-60
−2.5
22
vs
NJIT
W 87-74
+17.5
24
vs
UML
W 79-56
−16.5
29
@
UVM
L 55-64
−22.5
31
@
UALB
W 68-65
−8.5
5
vs
BING
W 79-62
+2.5
12
@
ME
W 78-62
+4.5
14
@
UNH
W 85-63
+1.5
19
vs
UVM
W 75-62
−5.5
21
vs
UALB
W 66-62
−16.5
26
vs
BRY
W 70-58
−10.5
28
@
UML
W 84-60
−6.5
3
@
NJIT
W 91-52
−0.5
7
vs
UNH
W 84-69
+10.5
10
vs
UML
W 91-69
+12.5
14
vs
UVM
W 74-59
−1.5
17
vs
HOW
L 83-86
+25.5
over 14under 17avg −0.6 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: Morgan St 0, UMBC 0, even 5
Morgan StBetterUMBC
G A. Worrell16.7 pts · 3.8 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 70
=Even
G F. Burton TR14.9 pts · 3.1 reb · 2.9 ast
Score 63
G J. Awoke TR6.8 pts · 2.8 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 12
=Even
G A. Cross TR3.2 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 1
G D. Bumpass2.7 pts · 1.1 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G D. Ceaser4.3 pts · 1 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
F K. Horton TR7.2 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 19
=Even
F R. Jacobs4.2 pts · 3.6 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 24
F T. Edwards3.5 pts · 3.5 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F R. Ciunys NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
Morgan StBetterUMBC
MORG offense293rd of 366 · -9.1
=Even
UMBC defense279th of 366 · -7.0
MORG defense360th of 366 · -11.0
→UMBCSmall
UMBC offense255th of 366 · -7.8
Backcourt-3.4 · 3 players
=Even
Backcourt-2.9 · 3 players
Frontcourt-2.7 · 2 players
→UMBCSmall
Frontcourt-1.0 · 2 players
Bench-2.4 · 4 players
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestMORG betterUMBC betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
A. Worrell30 minJ. Awoke25 min · TRD. Bumpass9 minB. Barnett2 minJ. KwartengNewK. RichardNew
Forwards
K. Horton20 min · TRT. Edwards17 minM. Wade8 minM. Lual7 minI. Traore6 min · TRT. PettigrewNew
Guards
F. Burton32 min · TRA. Cross16 min · TRD. Ceaser8 minJ. RisticNewJ. ReynoldsNewT. SlatingNew
Forwards
R. Jacobs15 minR. CiunysNewA. BarryNewJ. NdongNewS. HuanNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 71.7 #252 | Points per game | 75.7 #149 |
| 1.01 #316 | Points per possession | 1.13 #85 |
| 71.1 #73 | Pace (possessions) | 67.0 #278 |
| Shooting | ||
| 45.8 #351 | Effective FG% | 54.1 #64 |
| 31.7 #295 | 3-point % | 36.1 #55 |
| 35.2 #274 | 3-point attempt rate | 38.8 #195 |
| 42.7 #22 | Free throw rate | 34.1 #205 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.8 #262 | Turnover rate | 14.1 #25 |
| 30.7 #172 | Offensive rebound rate | 24.9 #342 |
| 12.2 #269 | Assists per game | 11.9 #291 |
| Defense | ||
| 80.1 #321 | Points allowed | 68.5 #41 |
| 1.13 #288 | Points allowed per possession | 1.02 #46 |
| 51.7 #194 | Opponent effective FG% | 49.4 #79 |
| 31.5 #43 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.7 #98 |
| 16.5 #186 | Turnovers forced | 15.1 #283 |
| 64.8 #341 | Defensive rebound rate | 74.2 #18 |
| 4.3 #359 | Steals per game | 4.9 #338 |
| 3.3 #172 | Blocks per game | 2.4 #314 |
Morgan St
11-16 in 2025-26 overall · 10-5 in conference · Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Delaware St70–75
- Wvs Coppin St70–66
- Wvs Norfolk St90–84
- Lvs Howard59–84
- W@ SC State90–83
A week or more of rest.
UMBC
22-9 in 2025-26 overall · 17-2 in conference · America East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Howard83–86
- Wvs Vermont74–59
- Wvs UMass Lowell91–69
- Wvs New Hampshire84–69
- W@ NJIT91–52
A week or more of rest.