Ford Center · at Evansville
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | EVAN | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 EVAN 74–68 · win probability EVAN 70%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 142.6
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: EVAN has more of the edges
USI 2, EVAN 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
USI has played the 362nd-hardest schedule, EVAN the 127th. A record against a soft schedule means less
USI offense vs EVAN defense
Offense 320th of 366 against a defense 220th, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: USI 17.1%, EVAN 19.1%. Forced: USI 16.5%, EVAN 15.4%
Shooting
Effective FG%: USI 43.7 and allows 49.4; EVAN 49.3 and allows 55.1
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: USI 0%, EVAN 35%. Transfers in: USI 0, EVAN 2. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
EVAN at home. This season: EVAN 0-0 at home, USI 0-0 away
Even
Three-pointers
USI hits 29.9% and allows 34.1%; EVAN hits 32.3% and allows 37.6%. Threes are 39.8% and 43.1% of their shots
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: USI 37.2, EVAN 29.8. Allowed: USI 36.2, EVAN 31.4
Even
EVAN offense vs USI defense
Offense 277th of 366 against a defense 243rd, on the model’s ratings
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: USI 31.4%, EVAN 22.0%. Defensive: USI 66.2%, EVAN 69.8%
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: USI plays 69.0 a game (177th fastest), EVAN 67.9 (232nd). 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 | — | EVAN -6.0 | — |
| Total | — | 142.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | USI 68.3 · EVAN 74.3 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | EVAN -3.5 | — |
| 1H total | 66.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | USI 31.6 · EVAN 35.1 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-8 20% | 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | |
| 2-8 20% | 5-5 50% | 7-3 70% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Southern Indiana Screaming Eagles
28 games played
Straight up
5-23
18% wins
Against the spread
12-16
43% covers · avg −1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
11-17
39% overs · avg −3.4 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 58-88 | +22.5 | L −7.5 | 156.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 7 | vs | L 74-78 | +2.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 74-89 | +7.5 | L −7.5 | 164.5 | U 163 |
| Nov 20 | vs | L 81-87 | +9.5 | W +3.5 | 145.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 22 | vs | L 73-84 | +11.5 | W +0.5 | 153.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 26 | @ | W 64-56 | +9.5 | W +17.5 | 150.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 74-88 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 150.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 55-77 | +11.5 | L −10.5 | 158.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 18 | vs | L 62-77 | +2.5 | L −12.5 | 140.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 60-64 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 145.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 55-59 | +10.5 | W +6.5 | 136.5 | U 114 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 80-83 | +9.5 | W +6.5 | 147.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 76-84 | +7.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 56-73 | +5.5 | L −11.5 | 137.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 71-54 | +5.5 | W +22.5 | 142.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 67-73 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 22 | vs | L 51-59 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 135.5 | U 110 |
| Jan 23 | vs | W 96-64 | -6.5 | W +25.5 | 136.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 60-73 | +4.5 | L −8.5 | 150.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 46-58 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 130.5 | U 104 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 54-76 | +10.5 | L −11.5 | 132.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 65-90 | +11.5 | L −13.5 | 141.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 71-73 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 147.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 74-82 | +1.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 77-70 | -3.5 | W +3.5 | 140.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 70-68 | +4.5 | W +6.5 | 135.5 | O 138 |
| Feb 24 | @ | L 63-64 | +7.5 | W +6.5 | 142.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 70-89 | +5.5 | L −13.5 | 139.5 | O 159 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
@
BTLR
L 58-88
−7.5
7
vs
VMI
L 74-78
−1.5
12
@
SDAK
L 74-89
−7.5
20
vs
UIW
L 81-87
+3.5
22
vs
UIC
L 73-84
+0.5
26
@
VAL
W 64-56
+17.5
3
@
WMU
L 74-88
−8.5
7
@
INST
L 55-77
−10.5
18
vs
LR
L 62-77
−12.5
20
vs
MORE
L 60-64
−2.5
1
@
SIUE
L 55-59
+6.5
3
@
LIN
L 80-83
+6.5
8
vs
SEMO
L 76-84
−0.5
10
vs
UTM
L 56-73
−11.5
15
@
TNTC
W 71-54
+22.5
17
@
TNST
L 67-73
+2.5
22
vs
EIU
L 51-59
−10.5
23
vs
WIU
W 96-64
+25.5
29
vs
LIN
L 60-73
−8.5
31
vs
SIUE
L 46-58
−10.5
5
@
UTM
L 54-76
−11.5
7
@
SEMO
L 65-90
−13.5
12
vs
TNST
L 71-73
+4.5
14
vs
TNTC
L 74-82
−6.5
19
@
WIU
W 77-70
+3.5
21
@
EIU
W 70-68
+6.5
24
@
MORE
L 63-64
+6.5
28
@
LR
L 70-89
−13.5
covered 12didn’t cover 16avg −1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
@
BTLR
L 58-88
−10.5
7
vs
VMI
L 74-78
−1.5
12
@
SDAK
L 74-89
−1.5
20
vs
UIW
L 81-87
+22.5
22
vs
UIC
L 73-84
+3.5
26
@
VAL
W 64-56
−30.5
3
@
WMU
L 74-88
+11.5
7
@
INST
L 55-77
−26.5
18
vs
LR
L 62-77
−1.5
20
vs
MORE
L 60-64
−21.5
1
@
SIUE
L 55-59
−22.5
3
@
LIN
L 80-83
+15.5
8
vs
SEMO
L 76-84
+13.5
10
vs
UTM
L 56-73
−8.5
15
@
TNTC
W 71-54
−17.5
17
@
TNST
L 67-73
−10.5
22
vs
EIU
L 51-59
−25.5
23
vs
WIU
W 96-64
+23.5
29
vs
LIN
L 60-73
−17.5
31
vs
SIUE
L 46-58
−26.5
5
@
UTM
L 54-76
−2.5
7
@
SEMO
L 65-90
+13.5
12
vs
TNST
L 71-73
−3.5
14
vs
TNTC
L 74-82
+15.5
19
@
WIU
W 77-70
+6.5
21
@
EIU
W 70-68
+2.5
24
@
MORE
L 63-64
−15.5
28
@
LR
L 70-89
+19.5
over 11under 17avg −3.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Evansville
30 games played
Straight up
5-25
17% wins
Against the spread
14-16
47% covers · avg −3.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-15
50% overs · avg +2.2 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 4 | @ | L 51-82 | +33.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 12 | vs | L 72-77 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 140.5 | O 149 |
| Nov 18 | vs | L 76-84 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 138.5 | O 160 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 73-69 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 136.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 23 | vs | L 59-97 | +11.5 | L −26.5 | 156.5 | U 156 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 59-78 | +4.5 | L −14.5 | 141.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 64-52 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 136.5 | U 116 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 79-80 | +11.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 58-82 | +14.5 | L −9.5 | 136.5 | O 140 |
| Dec 16 | vs | L 78-83 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 21 | vs | L 65-66 | -2.5 | L −3.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 68-76 | +11.5 | W +3.5 | 144.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 47-73 | +12.5 | L −13.5 | 144.5 | U 120 |
| Jan 4 | vs | L 48-62 | +4.5 | L −9.5 | 131.5 | U 110 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 69-79 | +8.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 148 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 72-69 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 145.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 13 | vs | L 90-94 | +7.5 | W +3.5 | 142.5 | O 184 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 49-76 | +8.5 | L −18.5 | 139.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 28 | @ | L 78-82 | +8.5 | W +4.5 | 143.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 55-71 | +11.5 | L −4.5 | 128.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 3 | vs | L 63-84 | +1.5 | L −19.5 | 145.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 6 | @ | L 63-70 | +8.5 | W +1.5 | 136.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 9 | vs | W 88-80 | +10.5 | W +18.5 | 137.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 60-86 | +12.5 | L −13.5 | 142.5 | O 146 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 46-84 | +8.5 | L −29.5 | 140.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 75-88 | +15.5 | W +2.5 | 153.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 64-98 | +18.5 | L −15.5 | 152.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 80-79 | +5.5 | W +6.5 | 137.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 1 | vs | L 67-81 | +9.5 | L −4.5 | 139.5 | O 148 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 59-68 | +13.5 | W +4.5 | 127.5 | U 127 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
PUR
L 51-82
+2.5
12
vs
MTSU
L 72-77
−7.5
18
vs
UTA
L 76-84
−10.5
21
vs
ORST
W 73-69
+10.5
23
vs
AKR
L 59-97
−26.5
24
vs
COFC
L 59-78
−14.5
3
vs
BALL
W 64-52
+5.5
6
@
WKU
L 79-80
+10.5
13
@
ND
L 58-82
−9.5
16
vs
BEL
L 78-83
+3.5
21
vs
DRKE
L 65-66
−3.5
29
@
BRAD
L 68-76
+3.5
1
@
ILST
L 47-73
−13.5
4
vs
UNI
L 48-62
−9.5
7
vs
MUR
L 69-79
−1.5
10
@
INST
W 72-69
+10.5
13
vs
BRAD
L 90-94
+3.5
20
@
UIC
L 49-76
−18.5
28
@
DRKE
L 78-82
+4.5
31
@
UNI
L 55-71
−4.5
3
vs
INST
L 63-84
−19.5
6
@
VAL
L 63-70
+1.5
9
vs
ILST
W 88-80
+18.5
12
@
SIU
L 60-86
−13.5
18
vs
UIC
L 46-84
−29.5
21
@
MUR
L 75-88
+2.5
25
@
BEL
L 64-98
−15.5
28
vs
VAL
W 80-79
+6.5
1
vs
SIU
L 67-81
−4.5
5
vs
UNI
L 59-68
+4.5
covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −3.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
PUR
L 51-82
−17.5
12
vs
MTSU
L 72-77
+8.5
18
vs
UTA
L 76-84
+21.5
21
vs
ORST
W 73-69
+5.5
23
vs
AKR
L 59-97
−0.5
24
vs
COFC
L 59-78
−4.5
3
vs
BALL
W 64-52
−20.5
6
@
WKU
L 79-80
+11.5
13
@
ND
L 58-82
+3.5
16
vs
BEL
L 78-83
+13.5
21
vs
DRKE
L 65-66
−10.5
29
@
BRAD
L 68-76
−0.5
1
@
ILST
L 47-73
−24.5
4
vs
UNI
L 48-62
−21.5
7
vs
MUR
L 69-79
−5.5
10
@
INST
W 72-69
−4.5
13
vs
BRAD
L 90-94
+41.5
20
@
UIC
L 49-76
−14.5
28
@
DRKE
L 78-82
+16.5
31
@
UNI
L 55-71
−2.5
3
vs
INST
L 63-84
+1.5
6
@
VAL
L 63-70
−3.5
9
vs
ILST
W 88-80
+30.5
12
@
SIU
L 60-86
+3.5
18
vs
UIC
L 46-84
−10.5
21
@
MUR
L 75-88
+9.5
25
@
BEL
L 64-98
+9.5
28
vs
VAL
W 80-79
+21.5
1
vs
SIU
L 67-81
+8.5
5
vs
UNI
L 59-68
−0.5
over 15under 15avg +2.2 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 67.0 #333 | Points per game | 65.8 #347 |
| 0.97 #346 | Points per possession | 0.97 #344 |
| 69.0 #177 | Pace (possessions) | 67.9 #232 |
| Shooting | ||
| 43.7 #363 | Effective FG% | 49.3 #280 |
| 29.9 #345 | 3-point % | 32.3 #268 |
| 39.8 #178 | 3-point attempt rate | 43.1 #109 |
| 37.2 #123 | Free throw rate | 29.8 #315 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.1 #212 | Turnover rate | 19.1 #324 |
| 31.4 #145 | Offensive rebound rate | 22.0 #355 |
| 9.7 #360 | Assists per game | 12.6 #245 |
| Defense | ||
| 74.3 #165 | Points allowed | 78.3 #275 |
| 1.08 #165 | Points allowed per possession | 1.15 #329 |
| 49.4 #80 | Opponent effective FG% | 55.1 #332 |
| 34.1 #193 | Opponent 3-point % | 37.6 #351 |
| 16.5 #183 | Turnovers forced | 15.4 #258 |
| 66.2 #315 | Defensive rebound rate | 69.8 #170 |
| 6.2 #210 | Steals per game | 5.0 #335 |
| 4.2 #56 | Blocks per game | 3.3 #171 |
Southern Indiana Screaming Eagles
5-23 in 2025-26 overall · 4-16 in conference · Ohio Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Little Rock70–89
- L@ Morehead St63–64
- W@ E Illinois70–68
- W@ W Illinois77–70
- Lvs Tennessee Tech74–82
A week or more of rest.
Evansville
5-25 in 2025-26 overall · 3-18 in conference · Missouri Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Northern Iowa59–68
- Lvs S Illinois67–81
- Wvs Valparaiso80–79
- L@ Belmont64–98
- L@ Murray St75–88
A week or more of rest.