Marriott Center · at BYU
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | BYU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 BYU 92–63 · win probability BYU 99%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 154.9
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: BYU has more of the edges
OMA 1, BYU 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
BYU offense vs OMA defense
Offense 24th of 366 against a defense 306th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
OMA has played the 287th-hardest schedule, BYU the 14th. A record against a soft schedule means less
OMA offense vs BYU defense
Offense 247th of 366 against a defense 33rd, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: OMA 25.5%, BYU 34.3%. Defensive: OMA 71.3%, BYU 70.3%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: OMA 16.1%, BYU 15.2%. Forced: OMA 14.1%, BYU 16.4%
Shooting
Effective FG%: OMA 52.2 and allows 52.7; BYU 54.4 and allows 51.2
Three-pointers
OMA hits 34.0% and allows 32.9%; BYU hits 34.5% and allows 35.3%. Threes are 40.9% and 39.8% of their shots
Home court
BYU at home. This season: BYU 0-0 at home, OMA 0-0 away
Free throws
Free throw rate: OMA 34.5, BYU 34.4. Allowed: OMA 33.6, BYU 28.9
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: OMA plays 68.9 a game (184th fastest), BYU 70.6 (90th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: OMA 23%, BYU 35%. Transfers in: OMA 4, BYU 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
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 | — | BYU -29.0 | — |
| Total | — | 154.9 | — |
| Projected score | — | OMA 63 · BYU 92 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | BYU -17.1 | — |
| 1H total | 72.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | OMA 27.6 · BYU 44.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% | |
| 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Omaha
29 games played
Straight up
12-17
41% wins
Against the spread
14-15
48% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% overs · avg −0.7 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 | L 77-85 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 153.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 6 | @ | L 71-73 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 74-97 | +14.5 | L −8.5 | 153.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 90-85 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 153.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 73-99 | +20.5 | L −5.5 | 163.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 77-88 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 152.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 26 | @ | L 61-74 | +4.5 | L −8.5 | 157.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 70-75 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 157.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 60-55 | +12.5 | W +17.5 | 144.5 | U 115 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 85-82 | +5.5 | W +8.5 | 141.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 28 | @ | L 57-80 | +21.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 69-84 | +9.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 66-73 | -8.5 | L −15.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 90-79 | -5.5 | W +5.5 | 146.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 76-78 | +5.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 73-62 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 149.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 21 | vs | L 64-68 | -6.5 | L −10.5 | 160.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 77-60 | -4.5 | W +12.5 | 148.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 80-71 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 84-82 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 158.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 73-76 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 84-92 | +9.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 176 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 98-94 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 156.5 | O 192 |
| Feb 15 | vs | W 83-76 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 160.5 | U 159 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 80-71 | -6.5 | W +2.5 | 151.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 72-89 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 152.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 53-68 | +11.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | U 121 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 76-62 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 150.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 50-74 | +8.5 | L −15.5 | 146.5 | U 124 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
MUR
L 77-85
−2.5
6
@
ACU
L 71-73
+2.5
9
@
CSU
L 74-97
−8.5
15
vs
SUU
W 90-85
−3.5
21
@
LSU
L 73-99
−5.5
25
vs
JMU
L 77-88
−9.5
26
@
FIU
L 61-74
−8.5
3
vs
UNCO
L 70-75
−1.5
6
@
PRST
W 60-55
+17.5
20
@
LAM
W 85-82
+8.5
28
@
ORE
L 57-80
−1.5
1
@
SDST
L 69-84
−5.5
3
vs
KC
L 66-73
−15.5
8
vs
UND
W 90-79
+5.5
10
vs
NDSU
L 76-78
+3.5
17
@
ORU
W 73-62
+12.5
21
vs
SDAK
L 64-68
−10.5
24
@
KC
W 77-60
+12.5
28
vs
SDST
W 80-71
+10.5
31
@
DEN
W 84-82
+3.5
5
@
UND
L 73-76
−1.5
7
@
NDSU
L 84-92
+1.5
12
vs
STMN
W 98-94
+8.5
15
vs
DEN
W 83-76
+4.5
18
vs
ORU
W 80-71
+2.5
25
@
SDAK
L 72-89
−15.5
28
@
STMN
L 53-68
−3.5
6
vs
SDAK
W 76-62
+12.5
7
vs
NDSU
L 50-74
−15.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
MUR
L 77-85
+8.5
6
@
ACU
L 71-73
−6.5
9
@
CSU
L 74-97
+17.5
15
vs
SUU
W 90-85
+21.5
21
@
LSU
L 73-99
+8.5
25
vs
JMU
L 77-88
+12.5
26
@
FIU
L 61-74
−22.5
3
vs
UNCO
L 70-75
−12.5
6
@
PRST
W 60-55
−29.5
20
@
LAM
W 85-82
+25.5
28
@
ORE
L 57-80
−14.5
1
@
SDST
L 69-84
+0.5
3
vs
KC
L 66-73
−9.5
8
vs
UND
W 90-79
+22.5
10
vs
NDSU
L 76-78
+6.5
17
@
ORU
W 73-62
−14.5
21
vs
SDAK
L 64-68
−28.5
24
@
KC
W 77-60
−11.5
28
vs
SDST
W 80-71
+0.5
31
@
DEN
W 84-82
+7.5
5
@
UND
L 73-76
−1.5
7
@
NDSU
L 84-92
+29.5
12
vs
STMN
W 98-94
+35.5
15
vs
DEN
W 83-76
−1.5
18
vs
ORU
W 80-71
−0.5
25
@
SDAK
L 72-89
+8.5
28
@
STMN
L 53-68
−37.5
6
vs
SDAK
W 76-62
−12.5
7
vs
NDSU
L 50-74
−22.5
over 14under 15avg −0.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
BYU
35 games played
Straight up
23-12
66% wins
Against the spread
16-19
46% covers · avg −1.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
18-17
51% 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 71-66 | -9.5 | L −4.5 | 153.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 98-53 | -38.5 | W +6.5 | 165.5 | U 151 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 85-68 | -35.5 | L −18.5 | 164.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 84-86 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 156.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 98-70 | -4.5 | W +23.5 | 165.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 72-62 | -7.5 | W +2.5 | 165.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 83-79 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 91-60 | -18.5 | W +12.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Dec 9 | vs | W 67-64 | -4.5 | L −1.5 | 152.5 | U 131 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 100-53 | -33.5 | W +13.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 93-57 | -23.5 | W +12.5 | 149.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 19 | vs | W 85-67 | -33.5 | L −15.5 | 146.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 109-81 | -34.5 | L −6.5 | 168.5 | O 190 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 83-73 | -7.5 | W +2.5 | 174.5 | U 156 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 104-76 | -17.5 | W +10.5 | 168.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 89-84 | -14.5 | L −9.5 | 168.5 | O 173 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 76-70 | -13.5 | L −7.5 | 162.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 71-84 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 165.5 | U 155 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 91-78 | -19.5 | L −6.5 | 168.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 26 | vs | L 83-86 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 166.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 82-90 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 159.5 | O 172 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 92-99 | -8.5 | L −15.5 | 167.5 | O 191 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 66-77 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 151.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 10 | @ | W 99-94 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 158.5 | O 193 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 90-86 | -15.5 | L −11.5 | 161.5 | O 176 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 68-75 | +11.5 | W +4.5 | 165.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 79-69 | +2.5 | W +12.5 | 154.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 24 | vs | L 84-97 | -14.5 | L −27.5 | 162.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 71-79 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 68-90 | +1.5 | L −20.5 | 151.5 | O 158 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 82-76 | -2.5 | W +3.5 | 159.5 | U 158 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 105-91 | -11.5 | W +2.5 | 168.5 | O 196 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 68-48 | -3.5 | W +16.5 | 141.5 | U 116 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 66-73 | +9.5 | W +2.5 | 146.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 19 | vs | L 71-79 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 156.5 | U 150 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
VILL
W 71-66
−4.5
8
vs
HC
W 98-53
+6.5
11
vs
DEL
W 85-68
−18.5
15
vs
CONN
L 84-86
+4.5
21
vs
WIS
W 98-70
+23.5
27
vs
MIA
W 72-62
+2.5
28
vs
DAY
W 83-79
−5.5
3
vs
CBU
W 91-60
+12.5
9
vs
CLEM
W 67-64
−1.5
13
vs
UCR
W 100-53
+13.5
16
vs
PAC
W 93-57
+12.5
19
vs
ACU
W 85-67
−15.5
22
vs
EWU
W 109-81
−6.5
3
@
KSU
W 83-73
+2.5
7
vs
ASU
W 104-76
+10.5
10
@
UTAH
W 89-84
−9.5
14
vs
TCU
W 76-70
−7.5
17
@
TTU
L 71-84
−10.5
24
vs
UTAH
W 91-78
−6.5
26
vs
ARIZ
L 83-86
−1.5
31
@
KU
L 82-90
−5.5
4
@
OKST
L 92-99
−15.5
7
vs
HOU
L 66-77
−9.5
10
@
BAY
W 99-94
+1.5
14
vs
COLO
W 90-86
−11.5
18
@
ARIZ
L 68-75
+4.5
21
vs
ISU
W 79-69
+12.5
24
vs
UCF
L 84-97
−27.5
28
@
WVU
L 71-79
−10.5
3
@
CIN
L 68-90
−20.5
7
vs
TTU
W 82-76
+3.5
10
vs
KSU
W 105-91
+2.5
11
vs
WVU
W 68-48
+16.5
12
vs
HOU
L 66-73
+2.5
19
vs
TEX
L 71-79
−10.5
covered 16didn’t cover 19avg −1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
VILL
W 71-66
−16.5
8
vs
HC
W 98-53
−14.5
11
vs
DEL
W 85-68
−11.5
15
vs
CONN
L 84-86
+13.5
21
vs
WIS
W 98-70
+2.5
27
vs
MIA
W 72-62
−31.5
28
vs
DAY
W 83-79
+11.5
3
vs
CBU
W 91-60
−2.5
9
vs
CLEM
W 67-64
−21.5
13
vs
UCR
W 100-53
−2.5
16
vs
PAC
W 93-57
+0.5
19
vs
ACU
W 85-67
+5.5
22
vs
EWU
W 109-81
+21.5
3
@
KSU
W 83-73
−18.5
7
vs
ASU
W 104-76
+11.5
10
@
UTAH
W 89-84
+4.5
14
vs
TCU
W 76-70
−16.5
17
@
TTU
L 71-84
−10.5
24
vs
UTAH
W 91-78
+0.5
26
vs
ARIZ
L 83-86
+2.5
31
@
KU
L 82-90
+12.5
4
@
OKST
L 92-99
+23.5
7
vs
HOU
L 66-77
−8.5
10
@
BAY
W 99-94
+34.5
14
vs
COLO
W 90-86
+14.5
18
@
ARIZ
L 68-75
−22.5
21
vs
ISU
W 79-69
−6.5
24
vs
UCF
L 84-97
+18.5
28
@
WVU
L 71-79
+8.5
3
@
CIN
L 68-90
+6.5
7
vs
TTU
W 82-76
−1.5
10
vs
KSU
W 105-91
+27.5
11
vs
WVU
W 68-48
−25.5
12
vs
HOU
L 66-73
−7.5
19
vs
TEX
L 71-79
−6.5
over 18under 17avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
BYU has the better starters
Position by position: Omaha 0, BYU 2, even 3
OmahaBetterBYU
G G. Stubblefield9.3 pts · 3.1 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 64
→BYUSmall
G R. Wright18.1 pts · 3.5 reb · 4.6 ast
Score 97
G C. Crosby TR2.5 pts · 0.9 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 24
→BYUBig
G C. Chandler TR9.7 pts · 2.8 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 84
G A. Skradis0.4 pts · 0.3 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F J. Kohler TR12.5 pts · 8.9 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 96
F C. Dockery TR7.3 pts · 5.7 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 41
=Even
F J. Wahlin TR5.3 pts · 3.9 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 44
F B. Scholl3.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 26
=No call
F D. Baker7.5 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.5 ast
Not ranked
OmahaBetterBYU
OMA offense247th of 366 · -7.5
→BYUBig
BYU defense33rd of 366 · +3.5
OMA defense306th of 366 · -7.8
→BYUBig
BYU offense24th of 366 · +7.2
Backcourt-0.7 · 3 players
→BYUBig
Backcourt+6.9 · 2 players
Frontcourt-1.6 · 2 players
→BYUBig
Frontcourt+4.5 · 3 players
Bench-0.0 · 2 players
=Even
Bench-0.8 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestOMA betterBYU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
G. Stubblefield29 minC. Crosby9 min · TRA. Skradis2 minD. Thompson1 min · TRB. OrgilboldNewC. CurtisNew
Forwards
C. Dockery22 min · TRB. Scholl14 minJ. Bolis2 min · TRD. PleasantNewE. SheatsNewG. BakerNew
Centers
I. OndekaneNewH. BukingaNew
Guards
R. Wright35 minC. Chandler27 min · TRN. PickensNew
Forwards
J. Kohler28 min · TRJ. Wahlin21 min · TRD. Baker20 minT. Betsey18 min · TRK. Mboup16 minB. KozlowskiNew
Centers
A. Stewart1 min · TRP. OstojicNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 73.9 #202 | Points per game | 83.5 #22 |
| 1.07 #201 | Points per possession | 1.18 #32 |
| 68.9 #184 | Pace (possessions) | 70.6 #90 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.2 #139 | Effective FG% | 54.4 #54 |
| 34.0 #169 | 3-point % | 34.5 #145 |
| 40.9 #150 | 3-point attempt rate | 39.8 #177 |
| 34.5 #196 | Free throw rate | 34.4 #198 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.1 #146 | Turnover rate | 15.2 #78 |
| 25.5 #331 | Offensive rebound rate | 34.3 #61 |
| 12.1 #276 | Assists per game | 13.3 #192 |
| Defense | ||
| 77.7 #259 | Points allowed | 75.4 #202 |
| 1.13 #278 | Points allowed per possession | 1.07 #133 |
| 52.7 #258 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.2 #174 |
| 32.9 #114 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.3 #269 |
| 14.1 #333 | Turnovers forced | 16.4 #194 |
| 71.3 #90 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.3 #145 |
| 5.7 #277 | Steals per game | 7.2 #109 |
| 3.0 #234 | Blocks per game | 4.4 #40 |
Omaha
12-17 in 2025-26 overall · 9-9 in conference · Summit League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs N Dakota St50–74
- Wvs South Dakota76–62
- L@ St Thomas53–68
- L@ South Dakota72–89
- Wvs Oral Roberts80–71
A week or more of rest.
BYU
23-12 in 2025-26 overall · 11-10 in conference · Big 12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Texas71–79
- Lvs Houston66–73
- Wvs West Virginia68–48
- Wvs Kansas St105–91
- Wvs Texas Tech82–76
A week or more of rest.