Watsco Center · at Miami
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | MIA | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 MIA 90–57 · win probability MIA 100%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 147.4
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: MIA has more of the edges
UNA 0, MIA 8 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
UNA offense vs MIA defense
Offense 308th of 366 against a defense 26th, on the model’s ratings
MIA offense vs UNA defense
Offense 30th of 366 against a defense 251st, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
UNA has played the 294th-hardest schedule, MIA the 75th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Shooting
Effective FG%: UNA 48.0 and allows 55.2; MIA 55.3 and allows 51.8
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UNA 31.2%, MIA 37.2%. Defensive: UNA 67.8%, MIA 74.1%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UNA 17.5%, MIA 16.1%. Forced: UNA 14.6%, MIA 18.3%
Three-pointers
UNA hits 30.7% and allows 35.7%; MIA hits 34.9% and allows 35.8%. Threes are 33.6% and 31.9% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: UNA plays 66.2 a game (304th fastest), MIA 69.2 (170th). Faster games mean more points
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UNA 16%, MIA 52%. Transfers in: UNA 5, MIA 8. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
MIA at home. This season: MIA 0-0 at home, UNA 0-0 away
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: UNA 37.6, MIA 37.1. Allowed: UNA 30.3, MIA 29.5
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 | — | MIA -33.0 | — |
| Total | — | 147.4 | — |
| Projected score | — | UNA 57.2 · MIA 90.2 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | MIA -19.5 | — |
| 1H total | 69.0 | — |
| 1H projected score | UNA 24.7 · MIA 44.2 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-8 20% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | |
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
North Alabama
28 games played
Straight up
7-21
25% wins
Against the spread
10-18
36% covers · avg −4.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-16
43% overs · avg −0.5 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 5 | @ | L 62-86 | +24.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 87-83 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 74-78 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Nov 17 | @ | L 61-81 | +25.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | U 142 |
| Nov 22 | @ | L 57-71 | +9.5 | L −4.5 | 149.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 1 | @ | W 73-66 | +6.5 | W +13.5 | 134.5 | O 139 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 65-63 | +16.5 | W +18.5 | 145.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 15 | @ | L 60-68 | -4.5 | L −12.5 | 140.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 19 | @ | L 57-91 | +10.5 | L −23.5 | 140.5 | O 148 |
| Jan 1 | vs | L 67-70 | -9.5 | L −12.5 | 142.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 55-72 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 147.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 80-88 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 148.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 82-73 | +4.5 | W +13.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 15 | vs | L 91-105 | -9.5 | L −23.5 | 157.5 | O 196 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 68-90 | -1.5 | L −23.5 | 133.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 62-87 | +12.5 | L −12.5 | 162.5 | U 149 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 64-72 | +9.5 | W +1.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 68-66 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 144.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 60-81 | +10.5 | L −10.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 62-91 | +12.5 | L −16.5 | 145.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 9 | vs | L 65-72 | +6.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 73-82 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 145.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 15 | vs | W 84-78 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 78-85 | +8.5 | W +1.5 | 156.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 51-73 | +12.5 | L −9.5 | 149.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 73-68 | +2.5 | W +7.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 63-75 | +4.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 58-69 | +8.5 | L −2.5 | 139.5 | U 127 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
@
MSST
L 62-86
+0.5
11
vs
NWST
W 87-83
−2.5
15
vs
ETSU
L 74-78
−5.5
17
@
CLEM
L 61-81
+5.5
22
@
UTC
L 57-71
−4.5
1
@
JXST
W 73-66
+13.5
3
@
SF
W 65-63
+18.5
15
@
AAMU
L 60-68
−12.5
19
@
LMU
L 57-91
−23.5
1
vs
STET
L 67-70
−12.5
3
vs
FGCU
L 55-72
−14.5
8
@
EKU
L 80-88
−2.5
10
@
BELL
W 82-73
+13.5
15
vs
UNF
L 91-105
−23.5
17
vs
JAX
L 68-90
−23.5
21
@
QUC
L 62-87
−12.5
29
@
FGCU
L 64-72
+1.5
31
@
STET
W 68-66
+3.5
4
@
CARK
L 60-81
−10.5
7
@
APSU
L 62-91
−16.5
9
vs
CARK
L 65-72
−0.5
11
vs
WGA
L 73-82
−10.5
15
vs
EKU
W 84-78
+10.5
18
vs
QUC
L 78-85
+1.5
21
@
LIP
L 51-73
−9.5
25
vs
BELL
W 73-68
+7.5
28
@
WGA
L 63-75
−7.5
4
vs
FGCU
L 58-69
−2.5
covered 10didn’t cover 18avg −4.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
@
MSST
L 62-86
−3.5
11
vs
NWST
W 87-83
+27.5
15
vs
ETSU
L 74-78
+6.5
17
@
CLEM
L 61-81
−2.5
22
@
UTC
L 57-71
−21.5
1
@
JXST
W 73-66
+4.5
3
@
SF
W 65-63
−17.5
15
@
AAMU
L 60-68
−12.5
19
@
LMU
L 57-91
+7.5
1
vs
STET
L 67-70
−5.5
3
vs
FGCU
L 55-72
−20.5
8
@
EKU
L 80-88
+19.5
10
@
BELL
W 82-73
+8.5
15
vs
UNF
L 91-105
+38.5
17
vs
JAX
L 68-90
+24.5
21
@
QUC
L 62-87
−13.5
29
@
FGCU
L 64-72
−11.5
31
@
STET
W 68-66
−10.5
4
@
CARK
L 60-81
−6.5
7
@
APSU
L 62-91
+7.5
9
vs
CARK
L 65-72
−8.5
11
vs
WGA
L 73-82
+9.5
15
vs
EKU
W 84-78
+11.5
18
vs
QUC
L 78-85
+6.5
21
@
LIP
L 51-73
−25.5
25
vs
BELL
W 73-68
−5.5
28
@
WGA
L 63-75
−8.5
4
vs
FGCU
L 58-69
−12.5
over 12under 16avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Miami
35 games played
Straight up
26-9
74% wins
Against the spread
19-16
54% covers · avg +1.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
21-14
60% overs · avg +0.1 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 86-69 | -18.5 | L −1.5 | 142.5 | O 155 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 101-61 | -16.5 | W +23.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 102-61 | -34.5 | W +6.5 | 161.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 16 | vs | L 68-82 | +10.5 | L −3.5 | 171.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 99-72 | -19.5 | W +7.5 | 164.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 97-41 | -34.5 | W +21.5 | 151.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 27 | vs | L 62-72 | +7.5 | L −2.5 | 165.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 78-65 | -5.5 | W +7.5 | 151.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 2 | @ | W 75-66 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 145.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 88-64 | -19.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 104-79 | -35.5 | L −10.5 | 153.5 | O 183 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 98-81 | -22.5 | L −5.5 | 161.5 | O 179 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 105-67 | -37.5 | W +0.5 | 171.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 76-69 | -9.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 81-77 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 157.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 91-81 | -15.5 | L −5.5 | 156.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 13 | @ | W 81-69 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 59-69 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 143.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 20 | vs | L 63-65 | -10.5 | L −12.5 | 163.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 85-76 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 149.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 79-70 | -9.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 85-86 | -11.5 | L −12.5 | 148.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 74-68 | -8.5 | L −2.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Feb 10 | vs | W 75-66 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 156.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 77-76 | +5.5 | W +6.5 | 157.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 17 | vs | W 67-66 | -8.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 83-86 | +7.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 24 | @ | W 83-73 | -2.5 | W +7.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 76-54 | -15.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 4 | @ | W 77-69 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 156.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 89-92 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | O 181 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 78-73 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 62-84 | +3.5 | L −18.5 | 146.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 20 | vs | W 80-66 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 144.5 | O 146 |
| Mar 22 | vs | L 69-79 | +8.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | O 148 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
JAX
W 86-69
−1.5
6
vs
BCU
W 101-61
+23.5
10
vs
STET
W 102-61
+6.5
16
vs
FLA
L 68-82
−3.5
20
vs
ELON
W 99-72
+7.5
23
vs
DSU
W 97-41
+21.5
27
vs
BYU
L 62-72
−2.5
28
vs
GTWN
W 78-65
+7.5
2
@
MISS
W 75-66
+10.5
6
vs
USM
W 88-64
+4.5
13
vs
ULM
W 104-79
−10.5
16
vs
FIU
W 98-81
−5.5
21
vs
UNF
W 105-67
+0.5
30
vs
PITT
W 76-69
−2.5
7
@
WAKE
W 81-77
+5.5
10
vs
GT
W 91-81
−5.5
13
@
ND
W 81-69
+6.5
17
@
CLEM
L 59-69
−5.5
20
vs
FSU
L 63-65
−12.5
24
@
SYR
W 85-76
+7.5
28
vs
STAN
W 79-70
−0.5
31
vs
CAL
L 85-86
−12.5
7
@
BC
W 74-68
−2.5
10
vs
UNC
W 75-66
+7.5
14
@
NCSU
W 77-76
+6.5
17
vs
VT
W 67-66
−7.5
21
@
UVA
L 83-86
+4.5
24
@
FSU
W 83-73
+7.5
28
vs
BC
W 76-54
+6.5
4
@
SMU
W 77-69
+9.5
7
vs
LOU
L 89-92
−4.5
12
vs
LOU
W 78-73
+6.5
13
vs
UVA
L 62-84
−18.5
20
vs
MIZ
W 80-66
+12.5
22
vs
PUR
L 69-79
−1.5
covered 19didn’t cover 16avg +1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
JAX
W 86-69
+12.5
6
vs
BCU
W 101-61
+7.5
10
vs
STET
W 102-61
+1.5
16
vs
FLA
L 68-82
−21.5
20
vs
ELON
W 99-72
+6.5
23
vs
DSU
W 97-41
−13.5
27
vs
BYU
L 62-72
−31.5
28
vs
GTWN
W 78-65
−8.5
2
@
MISS
W 75-66
−4.5
6
vs
USM
W 88-64
+6.5
13
vs
ULM
W 104-79
+29.5
16
vs
FIU
W 98-81
+17.5
21
vs
UNF
W 105-67
+0.5
30
vs
PITT
W 76-69
+0.5
7
@
WAKE
W 81-77
+0.5
10
vs
GT
W 91-81
+15.5
13
@
ND
W 81-69
+6.5
17
@
CLEM
L 59-69
−15.5
20
vs
FSU
L 63-65
−35.5
24
@
SYR
W 85-76
+11.5
28
vs
STAN
W 79-70
+1.5
31
vs
CAL
L 85-86
+22.5
7
@
BC
W 74-68
+0.5
10
vs
UNC
W 75-66
−15.5
14
@
NCSU
W 77-76
−4.5
17
vs
VT
W 67-66
−15.5
21
@
UVA
L 83-86
+23.5
24
@
FSU
W 83-73
+3.5
28
vs
BC
W 76-54
−13.5
4
@
SMU
W 77-69
−10.5
7
vs
LOU
L 89-92
+25.5
12
vs
LOU
W 78-73
−2.5
13
vs
UVA
L 62-84
−0.5
20
vs
MIZ
W 80-66
+1.5
22
vs
PUR
L 69-79
+1.5
over 21under 14avg +0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Miami has the better starters
Position by position: North Alabama 0, Miami 4, even 1
North AlabamaBetterMiami
G M. Evbagharu TR9.2 pts · 7 reb · 3.1 ast
Score 43
→MIASmall
G B. Bland TR13.6 pts · 5.1 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 74
G B. Patton6 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 17
→MIABig
G A. Lewis TR12.2 pts · 3 reb · 5.3 ast
Score 92
G J. Clark TR6.1 pts · 1.9 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F D. Goode TR15.7 pts · 8.6 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 94
F D. Yates TR6.5 pts · 3.6 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 59
→MIASmall
F S. Henderson13.8 pts · 4.9 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 81
F J. Whitted TR2.8 pts · 3.5 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 9
→MIABig
F M. Reneau18.9 pts · 6.5 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 98
North AlabamaBetterMiami
UNA offense308th of 366 · -9.6
→MIABig
MIA defense26th of 366 · +4.3
UNA defense251st of 366 · -6.6
→MIABig
MIA offense30th of 366 · +6.0
Backcourt-3.3 · 3 players
→MIABig
Backcourt+4.0 · 2 players
Frontcourt-1.6 · 2 players
→MIABig
Frontcourt+12.3 · 3 players
Bench-3.8 · 2 players
→MIABig
Bench+3.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestUNA betterMIA betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
M. Evbagharu34 min · TRB. Patton18 minJ. Clark15 min · TRQ. Lax15 min · TRC. Graham-Howard14 minC. HarrisNew
Forwards
D. Yates17 min · TRJ. Whitted15 min · TRD. CarterNewA. OsmanNewJ. GulleyNew
Centers
M. ChaffeeNew
Guards
B. Bland34 min · TRA. Lewis31 min · TRD. Allen24 minN. Dorn23 min · TRL. Cason19 min · TRQ. Berger17 min · TR
Forwards
D. Goode31 min · TRS. Henderson31 minM. Reneau29 minR. Miller19 min · TRM. Allen19 minC. GaskinsNew
Centers
S. Cyril21 min · TRE. RyzhovNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 67.9 #317 | Points per game | 81.5 #39 |
| 1.02 #300 | Points per possession | 1.18 #38 |
| 66.2 #304 | Pace (possessions) | 69.2 #170 |
| Shooting | ||
| 48.0 #312 | Effective FG% | 55.3 #32 |
| 30.7 #327 | 3-point % | 34.9 #127 |
| 33.6 #306 | 3-point attempt rate | 31.9 #331 |
| 37.6 #111 | Free throw rate | 37.1 #125 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.5 #238 | Turnover rate | 16.1 #147 |
| 31.2 #160 | Offensive rebound rate | 37.2 #14 |
| 9.7 #363 | Assists per game | 16.2 #42 |
| Defense | ||
| 78.0 #267 | Points allowed | 71.2 #79 |
| 1.18 #350 | Points allowed per possession | 1.03 #60 |
| 55.2 #337 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.8 #198 |
| 35.7 #292 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.8 #296 |
| 14.6 #319 | Turnovers forced | 18.3 #87 |
| 67.8 #268 | Defensive rebound rate | 74.1 #19 |
| 6.3 #202 | Steals per game | 7.9 #48 |
| 3.7 #112 | Blocks per game | 3.3 #174 |
North Alabama
7-21 in 2025-26 overall · 4-15 in conference · United Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs FGCU58–69
- L@ West Georgia63–75
- Wvs Bellarmine73–68
- L@ Lipscomb51–73
- Lvs Queens University Royals78–85
A week or more of rest.
Miami
26-9 in 2025-26 overall · 14-6 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Purdue69–79
- Wvs Missouri80–66
- Lvs Virginia62–84
- Wvs Louisville78–73
- Lvs Louisville89–92
A week or more of rest.