Jon M. Huntsman Center · at Utah
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | UTAH | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UTAH 78–64 · win probability UTAH 89%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 141.6
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
TOW 2, UTAH 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
TOW offense vs UTAH defense
Offense 266th of 366 against a defense 68th, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: TOW 36.0%, UTAH 29.3%. Defensive: TOW 70.9%, UTAH 68.4%
Context
Schedule so far
TOW has played the 140th-hardest schedule, UTAH the 53rd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Context
Tempo
About 66 possessions: TOW plays 64.0 a game (360th fastest), UTAH 68.3 (211th). Faster games mean more points
Turnovers
Turnover rate: TOW 15.8%, UTAH 16.7%. Forced: TOW 15.1%, UTAH 13.3%
Home court
UTAH at home. This season: UTAH 0-0 at home, TOW 0-0 away
Even
UTAH offense vs TOW defense
Offense 79th of 366 against a defense 113th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: TOW 27%, UTAH 14%. Transfers in: TOW 3, UTAH 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: TOW 46.5 and allows 48.5; UTAH 52.0 and allows 53.9
Even
Three-pointers
TOW hits 29.4% and allows 30.9%; UTAH hits 35.3% and allows 35.1%. Threes are 34.9% and 37.5% of their shots
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: TOW 30.4, UTAH 31.7. Allowed: TOW 29.3, UTAH 29.9
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 | — | UTAH -14.1 | — |
| Total | — | 141.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | TOW 63.8 · UTAH 77.8 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UTAH -8.2 | — |
| 1H total | 66.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | TOW 29 · UTAH 37.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% | 3-7 30% | |
| 1-9 10% | 5-5 50% | 3-7 30% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Towson
32 games played
Straight up
17-15
53% wins
Against the spread
15-17
47% covers · avg −0.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-20
38% overs · avg −5.6 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 | vs | W 67-56 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 141.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 48-65 | +26.5 | W +9.5 | 130.5 | U 113 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 51-41 | -13.5 | L −3.5 | 138.5 | U 92 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 75-81 | -3.5 | L −9.5 | 140.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 62-55 | +2.5 | W +9.5 | 140.5 | U 117 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 72-69 | +6.5 | W +9.5 | 137.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 73-87 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 138.5 | O 160 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 93-80 | -6.5 | W +6.5 | 154.5 | O 173 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 61-86 | +9.5 | L −15.5 | 148.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 49-73 | +14.5 | L −9.5 | 137.5 | U 122 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 72-47 | -13.5 | W +11.5 | 145.5 | U 119 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 70-84 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 157.5 | U 154 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 62-63 | -6.5 | L −7.5 | 136.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 48-62 | -8.5 | L −22.5 | 136.5 | U 110 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 67-78 | -1.5 | L −12.5 | 134.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 87-78 | -2.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 61-52 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 143.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 19 | vs | W 59-58 | -7.5 | L −6.5 | 124.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 72-59 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 145.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 73-80 | -7.5 | L −14.5 | 139.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 73-82 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 135.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 82-50 | -8.5 | W +23.5 | 131.5 | O 132 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 49-71 | +4.5 | L −17.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 69-57 | -7.5 | W +4.5 | 135.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 71-72 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 138.5 | O 143 |
| Feb 22 | @ | L 62-68 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 130.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 58-56 | -5.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | U 114 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 71-67 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 69-57 | -1.5 | W +10.5 | 137.5 | U 126 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 74-68 | -7.5 | L −1.5 | 132.5 | O 142 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 81-56 | +3.5 | W +28.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 9 | vs | L 65-68 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 132.5 | O 133 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
L-MD
W 67-56
+2.5
8
@
HOU
L 48-65
+9.5
14
vs
NORF
W 51-41
−3.5
18
@
JMU
L 75-81
−9.5
24
vs
URI
W 62-55
+9.5
25
vs
LIB
W 72-69
+9.5
26
vs
UCSD
L 73-87
−12.5
3
vs
COR
W 93-80
+6.5
7
@
UCF
L 61-86
−15.5
16
@
KU
L 49-73
−9.5
22
vs
SHU
W 72-47
+11.5
29
@
W&M
L 70-84
−12.5
31
@
HAMP
L 62-63
−7.5
3
vs
MONM
L 48-62
−22.5
8
vs
HOF
L 67-78
−12.5
10
@
NE
W 87-78
+6.5
15
vs
COFC
W 61-52
+5.5
19
vs
DREX
W 59-58
−6.5
22
@
ELON
W 72-59
+14.5
24
@
NCAT
L 73-80
−14.5
29
vs
UNCW
L 73-82
−10.5
31
vs
HAMP
W 82-50
+23.5
7
@
HOF
L 49-71
−17.5
12
vs
STBK
W 69-57
+4.5
15
@
MONM
L 71-72
+0.5
22
@
DREX
L 62-68
−8.5
26
vs
ELON
W 58-56
−3.5
28
vs
CAM
W 71-67
−0.5
3
@
STBK
W 69-57
+10.5
7
vs
HAMP
W 74-68
−1.5
8
vs
COFC
W 81-56
+28.5
9
vs
HOF
L 65-68
+1.5
covered 15didn’t cover 17avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
L-MD
W 67-56
−18.5
8
@
HOU
L 48-65
−17.5
14
vs
NORF
W 51-41
−46.5
18
@
JMU
L 75-81
+15.5
24
vs
URI
W 62-55
−23.5
25
vs
LIB
W 72-69
+3.5
26
vs
UCSD
L 73-87
+21.5
3
vs
COR
W 93-80
+18.5
7
@
UCF
L 61-86
−1.5
16
@
KU
L 49-73
−15.5
22
vs
SHU
W 72-47
−26.5
29
@
W&M
L 70-84
−3.5
31
@
HAMP
L 62-63
−11.5
3
vs
MONM
L 48-62
−26.5
8
vs
HOF
L 67-78
+10.5
10
@
NE
W 87-78
+21.5
15
vs
COFC
W 61-52
−30.5
19
vs
DREX
W 59-58
−7.5
22
@
ELON
W 72-59
−14.5
24
@
NCAT
L 73-80
+13.5
29
vs
UNCW
L 73-82
+19.5
31
vs
HAMP
W 82-50
+0.5
7
@
HOF
L 49-71
−17.5
12
vs
STBK
W 69-57
−9.5
15
@
MONM
L 71-72
+4.5
22
@
DREX
L 62-68
−0.5
26
vs
ELON
W 58-56
−30.5
28
vs
CAM
W 71-67
−4.5
3
@
STBK
W 69-57
−11.5
7
vs
HAMP
W 74-68
+9.5
8
vs
COFC
W 81-56
−1.5
9
vs
HOF
L 65-68
+0.5
over 12under 20avg −5.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Utah
32 games played
Straight up
10-22
31% wins
Against the spread
15-17
47% covers · avg −0.6 pts vs the line
Over / Under
18-14
56% 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 | vs | W 84-75 | -11.5 | L −2.5 | 146.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 92-89 | -15.5 | L −12.5 | 148.5 | O 181 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 87-69 | -21.5 | L −3.5 | 155.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 85-79 | -12.5 | L −6.5 | 159.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 85-77 | -13.5 | L −5.5 | 161.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 20 | vs | L 85-92 | -14.5 | L −21.5 | 167.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 58-68 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 153.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 75-74 | +10.5 | W +11.5 | 144.5 | O 149 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 72-79 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 152.5 | U 151 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 91-85 | -5.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | O 176 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 74-82 | +1.5 | L −6.5 | 153.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 101-77 | -10.5 | W +13.5 | 160.5 | O 178 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 65-74 | +12.5 | W +3.5 | 157.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 78-97 | +17.5 | L −1.5 | 162.5 | O 175 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 73-85 | +9.5 | L −2.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 84-89 | +14.5 | W +9.5 | 168.5 | O 173 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 74-88 | +17.5 | W +3.5 | 159.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 82-79 | +4.5 | W +7.5 | 154.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 78-81 | +10.5 | W +7.5 | 168.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 78-91 | +19.5 | W +6.5 | 168.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 69-81 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 166.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 63-71 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 161.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 59-71 | +18.5 | W +6.5 | 150.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 10 | vs | L 52-66 | +16.5 | W +2.5 | 142.5 | U 118 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 65-69 | +12.5 | W +8.5 | 139.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 61-56 | +10.5 | W +15.5 | 133.5 | U 117 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 71-73 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 154.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 24 | vs | L 59-75 | +14.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 60-73 | +6.5 | L −6.5 | 150.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 3 | vs | L 78-92 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 148.5 | O 170 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 75-101 | +13.5 | L −12.5 | 148.5 | O 176 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 66-73 | +12.5 | W +5.5 | 138.5 | O 139 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
SJSU
W 84-75
−2.5
8
vs
WEB
W 92-89
−12.5
10
vs
HC
W 87-69
−3.5
15
vs
SHSU
W 85-79
−6.5
18
vs
PFW
W 85-77
−5.5
20
vs
CP
L 85-92
−21.5
25
vs
GCU
L 58-68
−4.5
26
vs
MISS
W 75-74
+11.5
2
@
CAL
L 72-79
+0.5
6
vs
CBU
W 91-85
+0.5
13
vs
MSST
L 74-82
−6.5
20
vs
EWU
W 101-77
+13.5
29
@
WASH
L 65-74
+3.5
3
vs
ARIZ
L 78-97
−1.5
7
@
COLO
L 73-85
−2.5
10
vs
BYU
L 84-89
+9.5
14
@
TTU
L 74-88
+3.5
17
vs
TCU
W 82-79
+7.5
20
@
KSU
L 78-81
+7.5
24
@
BYU
L 78-91
+6.5
31
vs
OKST
L 69-81
−10.5
4
vs
ASU
L 63-71
−9.5
7
@
KU
L 59-71
+6.5
10
vs
HOU
L 52-66
+2.5
15
@
CIN
L 65-69
+8.5
18
@
WVU
W 61-56
+15.5
21
vs
UCF
L 71-73
−0.5
24
vs
ISU
L 59-75
−1.5
28
@
ASU
L 60-73
−6.5
3
vs
COLO
L 78-92
−12.5
7
@
BAY
L 75-101
−12.5
10
vs
CIN
L 66-73
+5.5
covered 15didn’t cover 17avg −0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
SJSU
W 84-75
+12.5
8
vs
WEB
W 92-89
+32.5
10
vs
HC
W 87-69
+0.5
15
vs
SHSU
W 85-79
+4.5
18
vs
PFW
W 85-77
+0.5
20
vs
CP
L 85-92
+9.5
25
vs
GCU
L 58-68
−27.5
26
vs
MISS
W 75-74
+4.5
2
@
CAL
L 72-79
−1.5
6
vs
CBU
W 91-85
+30.5
13
vs
MSST
L 74-82
+2.5
20
vs
EWU
W 101-77
+17.5
29
@
WASH
L 65-74
−18.5
3
vs
ARIZ
L 78-97
+12.5
7
@
COLO
L 73-85
−4.5
10
vs
BYU
L 84-89
+4.5
14
@
TTU
L 74-88
+2.5
17
vs
TCU
W 82-79
+6.5
20
@
KSU
L 78-81
−9.5
24
@
BYU
L 78-91
+0.5
31
vs
OKST
L 69-81
−16.5
4
vs
ASU
L 63-71
−27.5
7
@
KU
L 59-71
−20.5
10
vs
HOU
L 52-66
−24.5
15
@
CIN
L 65-69
−5.5
18
@
WVU
W 61-56
−16.5
21
vs
UCF
L 71-73
−10.5
24
vs
ISU
L 59-75
−10.5
28
@
ASU
L 60-73
−17.5
3
vs
COLO
L 78-92
+21.5
7
@
BAY
L 75-101
+27.5
10
vs
CIN
L 66-73
+0.5
over 18under 14avg −0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Utah has the better starters
Position by position: Towson 1, Utah 3, even 1
TowsonBetterUtah
G B. Roseborough TR11.7 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 50
→UTAHBig
G T. Campbell TR13.7 pts · 3.8 reb · 3.9 ast
Score 85
G J. Womack6.8 pts · 3.9 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 61
→UTAHBig
G J. Holcombe TR15.9 pts · 6.5 reb · 3.6 ast
Score 97
G C. Ndefo2.5 pts · 2.7 reb · 0.1 ast
Score 32
→UTAHBig
G T. Burch TR12.8 pts · 2.5 reb · 3.4 ast
Score 88
F C. Embeya3.5 pts · 5.9 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 37
←TOWSmall
G O. Abbey2.5 pts · 1.6 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 12
F D. Badalau TR3.1 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 32
=Even
C M. Gomma TR8 pts · 6.8 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 28
TowsonBetterUtah
TOW offense266th of 366 · -8.1
→UTAHBig
UTAH defense68th of 366 · +0.9
TOW defense113th of 366 · -1.4
=Even
UTAH offense79th of 366 · +0.7
Backcourt-1.4 · 3 players
→UTAHBig
Backcourt+6.8 · 4 players
Frontcourt-1.5 · 2 players
=Even
Frontcourt-1.4 · 1 player
Bench-0.1 · 2 players
=Even
Bench-0.7 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestTOW betterUTAH betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
B. Roseborough28 min · TRJ. Womack19 minC. Ndefo12 minZ. Stanford5 min · TRR. Skerry2 minC. DoerrNew
Forwards
C. Embeya21 minD. Badalau13 min · TRA. AtkinsonNewB. HolmesNewD. KirkNew
Guards
T. Campbell34 min · TRJ. Holcombe31 min · TRT. Burch25 min · TRO. Abbey15 minT. Chatman13 min · TRL. Langarita12 min
Forwards
G. Gaddis1 min · TRB. FayeNewZ. LoubakiNewJ. JohnsonNewA. AnigbataNew
Centers
M. Gomma26 min · TRF. SchottNewL. McCannaNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 67.1 #332 | Points per game | 74.3 #185 |
| 1.05 #256 | Points per possession | 1.08 #173 |
| 64.0 #360 | Pace (possessions) | 68.3 #211 |
| Shooting | ||
| 46.5 #345 | Effective FG% | 52.0 #142 |
| 29.4 #349 | 3-point % | 35.3 #98 |
| 34.9 #277 | 3-point attempt rate | 37.5 #222 |
| 30.4 #299 | Free throw rate | 31.7 #262 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.8 #128 | Turnover rate | 16.7 #175 |
| 36.0 #24 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.3 #224 |
| 9.5 #364 | Assists per game | 13.7 #169 |
| Defense | ||
| 66.4 #18 | Points allowed | 79.1 #302 |
| 1.04 #73 | Points allowed per possession | 1.16 #337 |
| 48.5 #49 | Opponent effective FG% | 53.9 #298 |
| 30.9 #33 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.1 #254 |
| 15.1 #271 | Turnovers forced | 13.3 #348 |
| 70.9 #117 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.4 #233 |
| 5.8 #253 | Steals per game | 5.3 #315 |
| 3.3 #175 | Blocks per game | 3.4 #160 |
Towson
17-15 in 2025-26 overall · 11-10 in conference · Coastal Athletic Association
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Hofstra65–68
- Wvs Charleston81–56
- Wvs Hampton74–68
- W@ Stony Brook69–57
- Wvs Campbell71–67
A week or more of rest.
Utah
10-22 in 2025-26 overall · 2-17 in conference · Big 12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Cincinnati66–73
- L@ Baylor75–101
- Lvs Colorado78–92
- L@ Arizona St60–73
- Lvs Iowa State59–75
A week or more of rest.