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 94–71 · win probability BYU 98%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 164.4
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: BYU has more of the edges
QUC 0, BYU 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
BYU offense vs QUC defense
Offense 24th of 366 against a defense 331st, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
QUC has played the 194th-hardest schedule, BYU the 14th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: QUC 30.2%, BYU 34.3%. Defensive: QUC 66.4%, BYU 70.3%
Free throws
Free throw rate: QUC 35.4, BYU 34.4. Allowed: QUC 38.1, BYU 28.9
QUC offense vs BYU defense
Offense 102nd of 366 against a defense 33rd, on the model’s ratings
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: QUC 0%, BYU 35%. Transfers in: QUC 0, BYU 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Shooting
Effective FG%: QUC 56.4 and allows 54.6; BYU 54.4 and allows 51.2
Home court
BYU at home. This season: BYU 0-0 at home, QUC 0-0 away
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: QUC 14.8%, BYU 15.2%. Forced: QUC 15.1%, BYU 16.4%
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: QUC plays 71.2 a game (65th fastest), BYU 70.6 (90th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Three-pointers
QUC hits 35.7% and allows 36.5%; BYU hits 34.5% and allows 35.3%. Threes are 46.5% and 39.8% of their shots
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 -22.8 | — |
| Total | — | 164.4 | — |
| Projected score | — | QUC 70.8 · BYU 93.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | BYU -13.4 | — |
| 1H total | 76.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | QUC 31.7 · BYU 45.1 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 4-6 40% | 8-2 80% | |
| 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
QUC 0–1 BYUBYU leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · QUC 0-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 13, 2024-25 | QUC 55 @ BYU 99 | BYU -31.5 | BYU W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Queens University Royals
34 games played
Straight up
20-14
59% wins
Against the spread
15-19
44% covers · avg +0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
22-12
65% overs · avg +6.1 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 | L 74-81 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 163.5 | U 155 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 74-94 | +17.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 81-87 | +12.5 | W +6.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 81-64 | -5.5 | W +11.5 | 165.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 101-94 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 150.5 | O 195 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 79-90 | +8.5 | L −2.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 69-94 | +25.5 | W +0.5 | 160.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 107-74 | -14.5 | W +18.5 | 161.5 | O 181 |
| Dec 12 | vs | W 102-78 | -18.5 | W +5.5 | 157.5 | O 180 |
| Dec 14 | @ | L 73-111 | +18.5 | L −19.5 | 165.5 | O 184 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 80-108 | +23.5 | L −4.5 | 169.5 | O 188 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 65-106 | +25.5 | L −15.5 | 171.5 | U 171 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 91-89 | -4.5 | L −2.5 | 164.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 98-76 | -7.5 | W +14.5 | 169.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 77-51 | -4.5 | W +21.5 | 154.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 89-82 | -11.5 | L −4.5 | 173.5 | U 171 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 85-74 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 166.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 87-81 | -10.5 | L −4.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 87-62 | -12.5 | W +12.5 | 162.5 | U 149 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 66-74 | -7.5 | L −15.5 | 162.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 28 | vs | L 90-100 | -5.5 | L −15.5 | 158.5 | O 190 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 75-78 | -5.5 | L −8.5 | 163.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 93-84 | -8.5 | W +0.5 | 146.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 91-72 | -15.5 | W +3.5 | 178.5 | U 163 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 87-95 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 161.5 | O 182 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 87-81 | -3.5 | W +2.5 | 165.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 85-78 | -8.5 | L −1.5 | 156.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 91-84 | -11.5 | L −4.5 | 161.5 | O 175 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 96-79 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 165.5 | O 175 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 79-84 | +2.5 | L −2.5 | 163.5 | U 163 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 71-63 | -8.5 | L −0.5 | 164.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 90-83 | +2.5 | W +9.5 | 161.5 | O 173 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 98-93 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 157.5 | O 191 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 71-104 | +25.5 | L −7.5 | 159.5 | O 175 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
WIN
L 74-81
−3.5
8
@
VILL
L 74-94
−2.5
11
@
DUQ
L 81-87
+6.5
15
vs
SHU
W 81-64
+11.5
20
vs
UNCG
W 101-94
−0.5
23
@
FUR
L 79-90
−2.5
28
@
UVA
L 69-94
+0.5
3
vs
GWEB
W 107-74
+18.5
12
vs
SCST
W 102-78
+5.5
14
@
WAKE
L 73-111
−19.5
16
@
ARK
L 80-108
−4.5
29
@
AUB
L 65-106
−15.5
1
vs
EKU
W 91-89
−2.5
3
vs
BELL
W 98-76
+14.5
8
@
JAX
W 77-51
+21.5
10
@
UNF
W 89-82
−4.5
15
@
FGCU
W 85-74
+12.5
17
@
STET
W 87-81
−4.5
21
vs
UNA
W 87-62
+12.5
24
@
WGA
L 66-74
−15.5
28
vs
CARK
L 90-100
−15.5
31
@
BELL
L 75-78
−8.5
5
vs
JAX
W 93-84
+0.5
7
vs
UNF
W 91-72
+3.5
11
vs
APSU
L 87-95
−10.5
14
vs
LIP
W 87-81
+2.5
18
@
UNA
W 85-78
−1.5
21
vs
WGA
W 91-84
−4.5
25
@
EKU
W 96-79
+14.5
28
@
CARK
L 79-84
−2.5
6
vs
WGA
W 71-63
−0.5
7
vs
APSU
W 90-83
+9.5
8
vs
CARK
W 98-93
+6.5
20
vs
PUR
L 71-104
−7.5
covered 15didn’t cover 19avg +0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
WIN
L 74-81
−8.5
8
@
VILL
L 74-94
+17.5
11
@
DUQ
L 81-87
+5.5
15
vs
SHU
W 81-64
−20.5
20
vs
UNCG
W 101-94
+44.5
23
@
FUR
L 79-90
+15.5
28
@
UVA
L 69-94
+2.5
3
vs
GWEB
W 107-74
+19.5
12
vs
SCST
W 102-78
+22.5
14
@
WAKE
L 73-111
+18.5
16
@
ARK
L 80-108
+18.5
29
@
AUB
L 65-106
−0.5
1
vs
EKU
W 91-89
+15.5
3
vs
BELL
W 98-76
+4.5
8
@
JAX
W 77-51
−26.5
10
@
UNF
W 89-82
−2.5
15
@
FGCU
W 85-74
−7.5
17
@
STET
W 87-81
+5.5
21
vs
UNA
W 87-62
−13.5
24
@
WGA
L 66-74
−22.5
28
vs
CARK
L 90-100
+31.5
31
@
BELL
L 75-78
−10.5
5
vs
JAX
W 93-84
+30.5
7
vs
UNF
W 91-72
−15.5
11
vs
APSU
L 87-95
+20.5
14
vs
LIP
W 87-81
+2.5
18
@
UNA
W 85-78
+6.5
21
vs
WGA
W 91-84
+13.5
25
@
EKU
W 96-79
+9.5
28
@
CARK
L 79-84
−0.5
6
vs
WGA
W 71-63
−30.5
7
vs
APSU
W 90-83
+11.5
8
vs
CARK
W 98-93
+33.5
20
vs
PUR
L 71-104
+15.5
over 22under 12avg +6.1 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.
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 84.4 #16 | Points per game | 83.5 #22 |
| 1.19 #25 | Points per possession | 1.18 #32 |
| 71.2 #65 | Pace (possessions) | 70.6 #90 |
| Shooting | ||
| 56.4 #15 | Effective FG% | 54.4 #54 |
| 35.7 #74 | 3-point % | 34.5 #145 |
| 46.5 #38 | 3-point attempt rate | 39.8 #177 |
| 35.4 #167 | Free throw rate | 34.4 #198 |
| Possessions | ||
| 14.8 #54 | Turnover rate | 15.2 #78 |
| 30.2 #190 | Offensive rebound rate | 34.3 #61 |
| 16.0 #49 | Assists per game | 13.3 #192 |
| Defense | ||
| 83.8 #355 | Points allowed | 75.4 #202 |
| 1.17 #346 | Points allowed per possession | 1.07 #133 |
| 54.6 #319 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.2 #174 |
| 36.5 #325 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.3 #269 |
| 15.1 #276 | Turnovers forced | 16.4 #194 |
| 66.4 #308 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.3 #145 |
| 6.0 #238 | Steals per game | 7.2 #109 |
| 2.9 #236 | Blocks per game | 4.4 #40 |
Queens University Royals
20-14 in 2025-26 overall · 16-5 in conference · Atlantic Sun Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Purdue71–104
- Wvs C Arkansas98–93
- Wvs Austin Peay90–83
- Wvs West Georgia71–63
- L@ C Arkansas79–84
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.