Ocean Bank Convocation Center · at FIU
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | FIU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 FIU 81–72 · win probability FIU 78%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 152.0
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: FIU has more of the edges
LBSU 0, FIU 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Free throws
Free throw rate: LBSU 30.7, FIU 38.6. Allowed: LBSU 42.3, FIU 35.9
FIU offense vs LBSU defense
Offense 144th of 366 against a defense 300th, on the model’s ratings
LBSU offense vs FIU defense
Offense 285th of 366 against a defense 217th, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: LBSU 18.0%, FIU 17.8%. Forced: LBSU 17.5%, FIU 20.0%
Home court
FIU at home. This season: FIU 0-0 at home, LBSU 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: LBSU 8%, FIU 0%. Transfers in: LBSU 5, FIU 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: LBSU 26.2%, FIU 33.9%. Defensive: LBSU 72.2%, FIU 65.2%
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: LBSU 50.6 and allows 53.7; FIU 50.6 and allows 52.9
Context
Tempo
About 72 possessions: LBSU plays 71.7 a game (46th fastest), FIU 72.4 (26th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Three-pointers
LBSU hits 32.7% and allows 34.4%; FIU hits 34.7% and allows 36.2%. Threes are 34.8% and 32.8% of their shots
Context
Schedule so far
LBSU has played the 152nd-hardest schedule, FIU the 151st. A record against a soft schedule means less
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 | — | FIU -9.0 | — |
| Total | — | 152.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | LBSU 71.5 · FIU 80.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | FIU -5.2 | — |
| 1H total | 71.0 | — |
| 1H projected score | LBSU 32.9 · FIU 38.1 | — |
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% | 6-4 60% | |
| 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | 3-7 30% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Long Beach St
30 games played
Straight up
8-22
27% wins
Against the spread
16-14
53% covers · avg +0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-10
67% overs · avg +4.6 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 4 | @ | L 45-77 | +25.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | U 122 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 62-82 | +6.5 | L −13.5 | 142.5 | O 144 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 66-69 | +12.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 16 | vs | L 80-82 | +8.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 72-78 | +3.5 | L −2.5 | 140.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 26 | @ | L 73-93 | +5.5 | L −14.5 | 148.5 | O 166 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 76-72 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 147.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 4 | @ | L 77-84 | +13.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 74-80 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 145.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 9 | @ | L 83-89 | +7.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 81-78 | -4.5 | L −1.5 | 141.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 60-91 | +37.5 | W +6.5 | 149.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 74-66 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 162.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 64-74 | +10.5 | W +0.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 81-75 | -6.5 | L −0.5 | 142.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 88-73 | -5.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 87-80 | +7.5 | W +14.5 | 158.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 61-71 | +3.5 | L −6.5 | 160.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 71-74 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 61-71 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 144.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 82-89 | +8.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 74-77 | +10.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 82-86 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 156.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 54-71 | +4.5 | L −12.5 | 149.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 58-69 | +5.5 | L −5.5 | 144.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 76-78 | +2.5 | W +0.5 | 157.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 92-102 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 162.5 | O 194 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 88-87 | -3.5 | L −2.5 | 152.5 | O 175 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 70-76 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 84-75 | +14.5 | W +23.5 | 150.5 | O 159 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
SDSU
L 45-77
−6.5
8
@
FRES
L 62-82
−13.5
12
@
PAC
L 66-69
+9.5
16
vs
ILST
L 80-82
+6.5
21
vs
MTST
L 72-78
−2.5
26
@
PORT
L 73-93
−14.5
30
vs
USD
W 76-72
+6.5
4
@
UCSB
L 77-84
+6.5
6
vs
UCSD
L 74-80
+2.5
9
@
SJSU
L 83-89
+1.5
18
vs
PEPP
W 81-78
−1.5
21
@
ISU
L 60-91
+6.5
3
vs
CP
W 74-66
+5.5
8
@
UCI
L 64-74
+0.5
10
vs
CSUB
W 81-75
−0.5
15
vs
UCR
W 88-73
+9.5
17
@
CSUN
W 87-80
+14.5
22
@
CSUF
L 61-71
−6.5
24
vs
UCSB
L 71-74
+1.5
29
@
UCR
L 61-71
−11.5
31
vs
HAW
L 82-89
+1.5
5
@
UCSD
L 74-77
+7.5
12
vs
CSUF
L 82-86
−6.5
14
@
UCD
L 54-71
−12.5
19
vs
UCI
L 58-69
−5.5
21
vs
CSUN
L 76-78
+0.5
26
@
CP
L 92-102
−4.5
28
@
CSUB
W 88-87
−2.5
5
vs
UCD
L 70-76
−4.5
7
@
HAW
W 84-75
+23.5
covered 16didn’t cover 14avg +0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
SDSU
L 45-77
−13.5
8
@
FRES
L 62-82
+1.5
12
@
PAC
L 66-69
−6.5
16
vs
ILST
L 80-82
+20.5
21
vs
MTST
L 72-78
+9.5
26
@
PORT
L 73-93
+17.5
30
vs
USD
W 76-72
+0.5
4
@
UCSB
L 77-84
+19.5
6
vs
UCSD
L 74-80
+8.5
9
@
SJSU
L 83-89
+30.5
18
vs
PEPP
W 81-78
+17.5
21
@
ISU
L 60-91
+1.5
3
vs
CP
W 74-66
−22.5
8
@
UCI
L 64-74
−4.5
10
vs
CSUB
W 81-75
+13.5
15
vs
UCR
W 88-73
+19.5
17
@
CSUN
W 87-80
+8.5
22
@
CSUF
L 61-71
−28.5
24
vs
UCSB
L 71-74
+0.5
29
@
UCR
L 61-71
−12.5
31
vs
HAW
L 82-89
+26.5
5
@
UCSD
L 74-77
+6.5
12
vs
CSUF
L 82-86
+11.5
14
@
UCD
L 54-71
−24.5
19
vs
UCI
L 58-69
−17.5
21
vs
CSUN
L 76-78
−3.5
26
@
CP
L 92-102
+31.5
28
@
CSUB
W 88-87
+22.5
5
vs
UCD
L 70-76
−3.5
7
@
HAW
W 84-75
+8.5
over 20under 10avg +4.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
FIU
29 games played
Straight up
12-17
41% wins
Against the spread
16-13
55% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% overs · avg +1.3 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 8 | @ | L 66-96 | +21.5 | L −8.5 | 156.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 13 | @ | L 81-98 | +21.5 | W +4.5 | 158.5 | O 179 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 72-80 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 74-61 | -4.5 | W +8.5 | 157.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 89-83 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 154.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 88-65 | -5.5 | W +17.5 | 145.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 81-98 | +22.5 | W +5.5 | 161.5 | O 179 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 86-79 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 161.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 28 | vs | L 94-97 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 152.5 | O 191 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 89-74 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 157.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 76-64 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 64-71 | +1.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 71-79 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 153.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 86-89 | +5.5 | W +2.5 | 175.5 | U 175 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 63-76 | -2.5 | L −15.5 | 168.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 77-83 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 151.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 81-78 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 28 | vs | L 74-78 | -3.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 88-84 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 154.5 | O 172 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 70-80 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 159.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 66-68 | -8.5 | L −10.5 | 147.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 77-64 | -3.5 | W +9.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 89-90 | +9.5 | W +8.5 | 152.5 | O 179 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 70-67 | -3.5 | L −0.5 | 154.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 67-100 | +6.5 | L −26.5 | 161.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 84-76 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 145.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 67-73 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 153.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 92-67 | +1.5 | W +26.5 | 160.5 | U 159 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 72-75 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 152.5 | U 147 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
NEB
L 66-96
−8.5
13
@
LSU
L 81-98
+4.5
24
vs
JMU
L 72-80
−10.5
26
vs
OMA
W 74-61
+8.5
3
vs
FGCU
W 89-83
+7.5
6
vs
JAX
W 88-65
+17.5
16
@
MIA
L 81-98
+5.5
20
vs
LIU
W 86-79
+0.5
28
vs
LIB
L 94-97
+1.5
2
vs
NMSU
W 89-74
+16.5
4
vs
UTEP
W 76-64
+5.5
7
@
JXST
L 64-71
−5.5
10
@
MOST
L 71-79
−5.5
14
@
KENN
L 86-89
+2.5
17
vs
SHSU
L 63-76
−15.5
22
@
UTEP
L 77-83
−7.5
24
@
NMSU
W 81-78
+10.5
28
vs
JXST
L 74-78
−7.5
4
@
MTSU
W 88-84
+9.5
7
@
WKU
L 70-80
−5.5
12
vs
DEL
L 66-68
−10.5
14
vs
LT
W 77-64
+9.5
19
@
LIB
L 89-90
+8.5
21
vs
MOST
W 70-67
−0.5
26
@
SHSU
L 67-100
−26.5
28
@
LT
W 84-76
+10.5
5
vs
MTSU
L 67-73
−7.5
7
vs
WKU
W 92-67
+26.5
10
vs
MOST
L 72-75
−1.5
covered 16didn’t cover 13avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
NEB
L 66-96
+5.5
13
@
LSU
L 81-98
+20.5
24
vs
JMU
L 72-80
−3.5
26
vs
OMA
W 74-61
−22.5
3
vs
FGCU
W 89-83
+17.5
6
vs
JAX
W 88-65
+7.5
16
@
MIA
L 81-98
+17.5
20
vs
LIU
W 86-79
+3.5
28
vs
LIB
L 94-97
+38.5
2
vs
NMSU
W 89-74
+5.5
4
vs
UTEP
W 76-64
−12.5
7
@
JXST
L 64-71
−15.5
10
@
MOST
L 71-79
−3.5
14
@
KENN
L 86-89
−0.5
17
vs
SHSU
L 63-76
−29.5
22
@
UTEP
L 77-83
+8.5
24
@
NMSU
W 81-78
−0.5
28
vs
JXST
L 74-78
+3.5
4
@
MTSU
W 88-84
+17.5
7
@
WKU
L 70-80
−9.5
12
vs
DEL
L 66-68
−13.5
14
vs
LT
W 77-64
−5.5
19
@
LIB
L 89-90
+26.5
21
vs
MOST
W 70-67
−17.5
26
@
SHSU
L 67-100
+5.5
28
@
LT
W 84-76
+14.5
5
vs
MTSU
L 67-73
−13.5
7
vs
WKU
W 92-67
−1.5
10
vs
MOST
L 72-75
−5.5
over 14under 15avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
FIU has the better starters
Position by position: Long Beach St 0, FIU 1, even 4
Long Beach StBetterFIU
G J. Payne TR6.9 pts · 3.7 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 40
→FIUBig
G T. Saine TR18.1 pts · 2.3 reb · 4.4 ast
Score 91
G Y. Sissoko TR2.7 pts · 1.8 reb · 1 ast
Score 32
=Even
G C. Caulker TR7.9 pts · 2.4 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 22
G C. Jones3.1 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G H. Cuevas TR2.6 pts · 1 reb · 0.6 ast
Not ranked
F G. Brcic TR4.3 pts · 4.8 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 39
=Even
F J. Colonel TR4.6 pts · 7.3 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 52
C N. Amenhauser TR5.1 pts · 2.2 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 57
=Even
F R. Seals TR7.5 pts · 4 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 61
Long Beach StBetterFIU
LBSU offense285th of 366 · -8.8
→FIUSmall
FIU defense217th of 366 · -5.7
LBSU defense300th of 366 · -7.7
→FIUBig
FIU offense144th of 366 · -4.3
Backcourt-2.0 · 3 players
→FIUSmall
Backcourt-0.8 · 3 players
Frontcourt-0.3 · 2 players
=Even
Frontcourt-0.0 · 2 players
Bench-1.9 · 2 players
→FIUSmall
Bench-0.9 · 1 player
Score, worst to bestLBSU betterFIU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Payne22 min · TRY. Sissoko11 min · TRC. Jones10 minJ. TenganNewJ. GrayNewM. AdamsNew
Forwards
G. Brcic17 min · TRK. Smith8 min · TRJ. Chaikovsky6 minB. WrightNewH. LauNewM. VanlaninghamNew
Centers
N. Amenhauser12 min · TR
Guards
T. Saine34 min · TRC. Caulker31 min · TRH. Cuevas13 min · TRN. MendyNewM. BlazerNewC. HallNew
Forwards
J. Colonel26 min · TRR. Seals18 min · TRJ. Payne7 min · TRG. GiceviciusNewC. RingNewS. N'DiayeNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 73.2 #219 | Points per game | 77.7 #100 |
| 1.02 #303 | Points per possession | 1.08 #197 |
| 71.7 #46 | Pace (possessions) | 72.4 #26 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.6 #207 | Effective FG% | 50.6 #210 |
| 32.7 #245 | 3-point % | 34.7 #137 |
| 34.8 #280 | 3-point attempt rate | 32.8 #321 |
| 30.7 #287 | Free throw rate | 38.6 #87 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.0 #271 | Turnover rate | 17.8 #258 |
| 26.2 #315 | Offensive rebound rate | 33.9 #69 |
| 12.3 #264 | Assists per game | 13.6 #173 |
| Defense | ||
| 79.0 #297 | Points allowed | 79.1 #301 |
| 1.10 #220 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #194 |
| 53.7 #290 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.9 #264 |
| 34.4 #212 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.2 #313 |
| 17.5 #119 | Turnovers forced | 20.0 #22 |
| 72.2 #60 | Defensive rebound rate | 65.2 #335 |
| 6.5 #173 | Steals per game | 8.8 #12 |
| 2.9 #250 | Blocks per game | 4.4 #43 |
Long Beach St
8-22 in 2025-26 overall · 6-14 in conference · Big West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- W@ Hawai'i84–75
- Lvs UC Davis70–76
- W@ Bakersfield88–87
- L@ Cal Poly92–102
- Lvs CSU Northridge76–78
A week or more of rest.
FIU
12-17 in 2025-26 overall · 8-13 in conference · Conference USA
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Missouri St72–75
- Wvs Western KY92–67
- Lvs MTSU67–73
- W@ Louisiana Tech84–76
- L@ Sam Houston67–100
A week or more of rest.