Knights Hall · at Bellarmine
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | BELL | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 BELL 78–69 · win probability BELL 78%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 147.1
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: BELL has more of the edges
EIU 0, BELL 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
BELL offense vs EIU defense
Offense 239th of 366 against a defense 332nd, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
EIU has played the 314th-hardest schedule, BELL the 229th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Shooting
Effective FG%: EIU 45.7 and allows 50.8; BELL 59.4 and allows 59.4
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: EIU 22%, BELL 56%. Transfers in: EIU 0, BELL 1. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
BELL at home. This season: BELL 0-0 at home, EIU 0-0 away
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: EIU 33.5, BELL 35.0. Allowed: EIU 35.3, BELL 34.3
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: EIU 28.2%, BELL 22.4%. Defensive: EIU 64.8%, BELL 65.8%
Even
Three-pointers
EIU hits 31.7% and allows 31.7%; BELL hits 38.1% and allows 40.4%. Threes are 29.9% and 41.2% of their shots
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: EIU 18.6%, BELL 15.4%. Forced: EIU 19.3%, BELL 15.1%
Even
EIU offense vs BELL defense
Offense 360th of 366 against a defense 345th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: EIU plays 67.0 a game (280th fastest), BELL 66.7 (288th). 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 | — | BELL -9.0 | — |
| Total | — | 147.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | EIU 69 · BELL 78 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | BELL -5.2 | — |
| 1H total | 68.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | EIU 31.8 · BELL 37 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | |
| 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
E Illinois
30 games played
Straight up
10-20
33% wins
Against the spread
17-13
57% covers · avg +0.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-16
47% overs · avg −1.6 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 4 | @ | L 63-66 | +5.5 | W +2.5 | 144.5 | U 129 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 65-57 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 135.5 | U 122 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 58-78 | +23.5 | W +3.5 | 143.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 53-99 | +35.5 | L −10.5 | 147.5 | O 152 |
| Nov 25 | @ | L 60-81 | +5.5 | L −15.5 | 139.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 62-109 | +40.5 | L −6.5 | 141.5 | O 171 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 74-82 | +8.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 10 | vs | L 59-68 | +6.5 | L −2.5 | 149.5 | U 127 |
| Dec 14 | @ | L 53-78 | +43.5 | W +18.5 | 144.5 | U 131 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 76-72 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 134.5 | O 148 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 59-68 | +12.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 61-65 | +10.5 | W +6.5 | 133.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 71-61 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 140.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 74-70 | +3.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 13 | vs | W 57-55 | -6.5 | L −4.5 | 132.5 | U 112 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 63-74 | +6.5 | L −4.5 | 133.5 | O 137 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 59-51 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 135.5 | U 110 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 68-73 | +4.5 | L −0.5 | 134.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 68-76 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 129.5 | O 144 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 59-77 | +4.5 | L −13.5 | 138.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 68-77 | +9.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 60-54 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 140.5 | U 114 |
| Feb 10 | @ | L 70-79 | -4.5 | L −13.5 | 133.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 78-72 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 134.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 70-73 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 137.5 | O 143 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 68-70 | -4.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | O 138 |
| Feb 26 | @ | W 71-67 | +7.5 | W +11.5 | 144.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 50-77 | +5.5 | L −21.5 | 129.5 | U 127 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 77-71 | +3.5 | W +9.5 | 128.5 | O 148 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 63-66 | +7.5 | W +4.5 | 126.5 | O 129 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
VAL
L 63-66
+2.5
7
vs
NICH
W 65-57
+10.5
11
@
ND
L 58-78
+3.5
14
@
UK
L 53-99
−10.5
25
@
CARK
L 60-81
−15.5
28
@
PUR
L 62-109
−6.5
6
vs
LIN
L 74-82
+0.5
10
vs
EKU
L 59-68
−2.5
14
@
ISU
L 53-78
+18.5
18
vs
SIUE
W 76-72
+10.5
1
@
SEMO
L 59-68
+3.5
3
@
UTM
L 61-65
+6.5
8
vs
TNTC
W 71-61
+11.5
10
vs
TNST
W 74-70
+7.5
13
vs
WIU
W 57-55
−4.5
15
@
LR
L 63-74
−4.5
22
@
USI
W 59-51
+10.5
24
@
MORE
L 68-73
−0.5
29
vs
UTM
L 68-76
−4.5
31
vs
SEMO
L 59-77
−13.5
5
@
TNST
L 68-77
+0.5
7
@
TNTC
W 60-54
+10.5
10
@
WIU
L 70-79
−13.5
14
vs
LR
W 78-72
+8.5
19
vs
MORE
L 70-73
−1.5
21
vs
USI
L 68-70
−6.5
26
@
LIN
W 71-67
+11.5
28
@
SIUE
L 50-77
−21.5
4
vs
SIUE
W 77-71
+9.5
5
vs
UTM
L 63-66
+4.5
covered 17didn’t cover 13avg +0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
VAL
L 63-66
−15.5
7
vs
NICH
W 65-57
−13.5
11
@
ND
L 58-78
−7.5
14
@
UK
L 53-99
+4.5
25
@
CARK
L 60-81
+1.5
28
@
PUR
L 62-109
+29.5
6
vs
LIN
L 74-82
+10.5
10
vs
EKU
L 59-68
−22.5
14
@
ISU
L 53-78
−13.5
18
vs
SIUE
W 76-72
+13.5
1
@
SEMO
L 59-68
−19.5
3
@
UTM
L 61-65
−7.5
8
vs
TNTC
W 71-61
−8.5
10
vs
TNST
W 74-70
−0.5
13
vs
WIU
W 57-55
−20.5
15
@
LR
L 63-74
+3.5
22
@
USI
W 59-51
−25.5
24
@
MORE
L 68-73
+6.5
29
vs
UTM
L 68-76
+14.5
31
vs
SEMO
L 59-77
−2.5
5
@
TNST
L 68-77
−0.5
7
@
TNTC
W 60-54
−26.5
10
@
WIU
L 70-79
+15.5
14
vs
LR
W 78-72
+15.5
19
vs
MORE
L 70-73
+5.5
21
vs
USI
L 68-70
+2.5
26
@
LIN
W 71-67
−6.5
28
@
SIUE
L 50-77
−2.5
4
vs
SIUE
W 77-71
+19.5
5
vs
UTM
L 63-66
+2.5
over 14under 16avg −1.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Bellarmine
30 games played
Straight up
11-19
37% wins
Against the spread
19-11
63% covers · avg +2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-10
67% overs · avg +9.2 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 59-104 | +23.5 | L −21.5 | 150.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 71-98 | +28.5 | W +1.5 | 168.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 86-94 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 156.5 | O 180 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 79-86 | +24.5 | W +17.5 | 150.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 24 | @ | W 70-58 | -3.5 | W +8.5 | 156.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 74-69 | +2.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 68-81 | +16.5 | W +3.5 | 157.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 76-80 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 146.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 79-64 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 146.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 23 | @ | L 85-99 | +34.5 | W +20.5 | 152.5 | O 184 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 85-87 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 151.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 76-98 | +7.5 | L −14.5 | 169.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 84-78 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 73-82 | -4.5 | L −13.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 71-81 | +11.5 | W +1.5 | 154.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 69-89 | +5.5 | L −14.5 | 156.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 77-70 | +4.5 | W +11.5 | 138.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 114-117 | -3.5 | L −6.5 | 164.5 | O 231 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 77-74 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 78-75 | +5.5 | W +8.5 | 163.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 92-71 | -4.5 | W +16.5 | 148.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 81-65 | +2.5 | W +18.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 76-84 | +8.5 | W +0.5 | 150.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 70-90 | +9.5 | L −10.5 | 153.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 72-75 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 154.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 92-95 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | O 187 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 68-73 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 111-97 | +5.5 | W +19.5 | 153.5 | O 208 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 82-79 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | O 161 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 73-86 | +6.5 | L −6.5 | 154.5 | O 159 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
UGA
L 59-104
−21.5
8
@
KSU
L 71-98
+1.5
15
vs
WOF
L 86-94
−4.5
19
@
ND
L 79-86
+17.5
24
@
CIT
W 70-58
+8.5
25
vs
HCU
W 74-69
+7.5
6
@
MUR
L 68-81
+3.5
13
vs
NKU
L 76-80
+0.5
17
vs
UTC
W 79-64
+16.5
23
@
UK
L 85-99
+20.5
1
@
WGA
L 85-87
−3.5
3
@
QUC
L 76-98
−14.5
8
vs
CARK
W 84-78
+8.5
10
vs
UNA
L 73-82
−13.5
15
@
LIP
L 71-81
+1.5
17
@
EKU
L 69-89
−14.5
22
@
JAX
W 77-70
+11.5
24
@
UNF
L 114-117
−6.5
28
vs
WGA
W 77-74
+0.5
31
vs
QUC
W 78-75
+8.5
5
vs
STET
W 92-71
+16.5
7
vs
FGCU
W 81-65
+18.5
11
@
CARK
L 76-84
+0.5
14
@
APSU
L 70-90
−10.5
18
vs
LIP
L 72-75
+0.5
21
vs
EKU
L 92-95
−1.5
25
@
UNA
L 68-73
−7.5
28
vs
APSU
W 111-97
+19.5
4
vs
JAX
W 82-79
+1.5
6
vs
CARK
L 73-86
−6.5
covered 19didn’t cover 11avg +2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
UGA
L 59-104
+12.5
8
@
KSU
L 71-98
+0.5
15
vs
WOF
L 86-94
+23.5
19
@
ND
L 79-86
+14.5
24
@
CIT
W 70-58
−28.5
25
vs
HCU
W 74-69
−1.5
6
@
MUR
L 68-81
−8.5
13
vs
NKU
L 76-80
+9.5
17
vs
UTC
W 79-64
−3.5
23
@
UK
L 85-99
+31.5
1
@
WGA
L 85-87
+20.5
3
@
QUC
L 76-98
+4.5
8
vs
CARK
W 84-78
+7.5
10
vs
UNA
L 73-82
+8.5
15
@
LIP
L 71-81
−2.5
17
@
EKU
L 69-89
+1.5
22
@
JAX
W 77-70
+8.5
24
@
UNF
L 114-117
+66.5
28
vs
WGA
W 77-74
−0.5
31
vs
QUC
W 78-75
−10.5
5
vs
STET
W 92-71
+14.5
7
vs
FGCU
W 81-65
−5.5
11
@
CARK
L 76-84
+9.5
14
@
APSU
L 70-90
+6.5
18
vs
LIP
L 72-75
−7.5
21
vs
EKU
L 92-95
+33.5
25
@
UNA
L 68-73
−5.5
28
vs
APSU
W 111-97
+54.5
4
vs
JAX
W 82-79
+16.5
6
vs
CARK
L 73-86
+4.5
over 20under 10avg +9.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Bellarmine has the better starters
Position by position: E Illinois 0, Bellarmine 1, even 4
E IllinoisBetterBellarmine
G J. Elder8 pts · 0 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G K. Goodin11.7 pts · 2.8 reb · 2 ast
Score 31
G M. Blackwell4.4 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 7
→BELLSmall
G T. Doyle10 pts · 2.9 reb · 4 ast
Score 35
F A. Austin2 pts · 0.7 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 1
=Even
F S. Donald6.5 pts · 3.3 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 12
F D. Burton NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
F J. Wassler3.4 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 4
C T. Vogel NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
F T. Tornatta TR3 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 26
E IllinoisBetterBellarmine
EIU offense360th of 366 · -14.1
=Even
BELL defense345th of 366 · -9.2
EIU defense332nd of 366 · -8.7
→BELLSmall
BELL offense239th of 366 · -7.3
Backcourt-2.2 · 2 players
←EIUSmall
Backcourt-3.8 · 2 players
Frontcourt-1.8 · 3 players
←EIUBig
Frontcourt-4.9 · 3 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-1.5 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestEIU betterBELL betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Elder17 minM. Blackwell16 minD. DavenportNewJ. MillerNewJ. CallowayNewS. SimsNew
Forwards
A. Austin10 minD. BurtonNewG. WelchNewD. NtambweNewE. HillsmanNew
Centers
T. VogelNew
Guards
K. Goodin33 minT. Doyle28 minG. Whitaker7 minG. Neal3 minT. Clark2 minJ. GizziNew
Forwards
S. Donald27 minJ. Wassler12 minT. Tornatta9 min · TRA. McAfeeNewB. KlopfensteinNewE. HarrellNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 64.6 #351 | Points per game | 78.9 #80 |
| 0.96 #350 | Points per possession | 1.18 #34 |
| 67.0 #280 | Pace (possessions) | 66.7 #288 |
| Shooting | ||
| 45.7 #353 | Effective FG% | 59.4 #3 |
| 31.7 #292 | 3-point % | 38.1 #17 |
| 29.9 #352 | 3-point attempt rate | 41.2 #145 |
| 33.5 #224 | Free throw rate | 35.0 #178 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.6 #301 | Turnover rate | 15.4 #100 |
| 28.2 #256 | Offensive rebound rate | 22.4 #354 |
| 11.1 #336 | Assists per game | 14.8 #98 |
| Defense | ||
| 72.2 #111 | Points allowed | 83.3 #350 |
| 1.08 #152 | Points allowed per possession | 1.25 #365 |
| 50.8 #146 | Opponent effective FG% | 59.4 #365 |
| 31.7 #50 | Opponent 3-point % | 40.4 #364 |
| 19.3 #37 | Turnovers forced | 15.1 #277 |
| 64.8 #343 | Defensive rebound rate | 65.8 #320 |
| 7.5 #78 | Steals per game | 5.8 #255 |
| 2.9 #251 | Blocks per game | 1.7 #356 |
E Illinois
10-20 in 2025-26 overall · 9-13 in conference · Ohio Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UT Martin63–66
- Wvs SIUE77–71
- L@ SIUE50–77
- W@ Lindenwood Lions71–67
- Lvs Southern Indiana Screaming Eagles68–70
A week or more of rest.
Bellarmine
11-19 in 2025-26 overall · 8-12 in conference · Atlantic Sun Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs C Arkansas73–86
- Wvs Jacksonville82–79
- Wvs Austin Peay111–97
- L@ North Alabama68–73
- Lvs E Kentucky92–95
A week or more of rest.