ExtraMile Arena · at Boise St
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | BOIS | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 BOIS 80–63 · win probability BOIS 93%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 143.0
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: BOIS has more of the edges
AMCC 2, BOIS 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
AMCC offense vs BOIS defense
Offense 303rd of 366 against a defense 74th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
AMCC has played the 245th-hardest schedule, BOIS the 82nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Free throws
Free throw rate: AMCC 41.1, BOIS 42.7. Allowed: AMCC 46.3, BOIS 32.1
Three-pointers
AMCC hits 35.0% and allows 31.6%; BOIS hits 34.3% and allows 34.4%. Threes are 31.4% and 43.1% of their shots
BOIS offense vs AMCC defense
Offense 94th of 366 against a defense 176th, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: AMCC 31.7%, BOIS 33.2%. Defensive: AMCC 71.2%, BOIS 76.4%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: AMCC 19.4%, BOIS 16.9%. Forced: AMCC 19.0%, BOIS 14.6%
Home court
BOIS at home. This season: BOIS 0-0 at home, AMCC 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: AMCC plays 66.9 a game (284th fastest), BOIS 68.3 (215th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: AMCC 19%, BOIS 34%. Transfers in: AMCC 4, BOIS 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: AMCC 49.5 and allows 50.1; BOIS 52.2 and allows 52.6
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 | — | BOIS -16.6 | — |
| Total | — | 143.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | AMCC 63.2 · BOIS 79.8 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | BOIS -9.8 | — |
| 1H total | 66.9 | — |
| 1H projected score | AMCC 28.6 · BOIS 38.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% | 6-4 60% | |
| 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% | 7-3 70% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
No more games listed yet.
No more games listed yet.
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Texas A&M-CC
29 games played
Straight up
14-15
48% wins
Against the spread
16-13
55% covers · avg +1.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% overs · avg −1.9 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 6 | @ | L 58-69 | +23.5 | W +12.5 | 160.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 77-85 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 46-77 | +25.5 | L −5.5 | 145.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 16 | @ | L 69-85 | +20.5 | W +4.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 67-88 | +13.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 57-49 | +3.5 | W +11.5 | 136.5 | U 106 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 60-69 | +6.5 | L −2.5 | 139.5 | U 129 |
| Dec 29 | vs | L 71-76 | -5.5 | L −10.5 | 137.5 | O 147 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 83-69 | -4.5 | W +9.5 | 142.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 63-59 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 137.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 5 | @ | W 81-65 | -3.5 | W +12.5 | 132.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 78-79 | -5.5 | L −6.5 | 138.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 12 | @ | W 61-50 | -3.5 | W +7.5 | 142.5 | U 111 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 68-56 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 130.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 19 | vs | L 53-69 | +9.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 79-71 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 136.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 26 | vs | L 55-64 | -2.5 | L −11.5 | 135.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 73-71 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 135.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 2 | vs | L 69-71 | -4.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 83-76 | +1.5 | W +8.5 | 137.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 9 | @ | L 78-84 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 76-63 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 135.5 | O 139 |
| Feb 16 | vs | L 68-78 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 135.5 | O 146 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 54-70 | +14.5 | L −1.5 | 139.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 23 | @ | W 73-68 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 130.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 71-59 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 134.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 2 | vs | W 84-71 | -7.5 | W +5.5 | 136.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 74-61 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 58-60 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 135.5 | U 118 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
6
@
SMU
L 58-69
+12.5
8
@
TAR
L 77-85
−4.5
11
@
KU
L 46-77
−5.5
16
@
OKST
L 69-85
+4.5
28
@
XAV
L 67-88
−7.5
6
@
LAM
W 57-49
+11.5
17
@
SFA
L 60-69
−2.5
29
vs
NICH
L 71-76
−10.5
31
vs
NOLA
W 83-69
+9.5
3
@
RGV
W 63-59
+6.5
5
@
HCU
W 81-65
+12.5
10
@
NWST
L 78-79
−6.5
12
@
ETAM
W 61-50
+7.5
17
vs
SELA
W 68-56
+6.5
19
vs
MCN
L 53-69
−6.5
24
@
UIW
W 79-71
+9.5
26
vs
RGV
L 55-64
−11.5
31
vs
HCU
W 73-71
−5.5
2
vs
UIW
L 69-71
−6.5
7
@
NICH
W 83-76
+8.5
9
@
NOLA
L 78-84
−7.5
14
vs
LAM
W 76-63
+10.5
16
vs
SFA
L 68-78
−4.5
21
@
MCN
L 54-70
−1.5
23
@
SELA
W 73-68
+3.5
28
vs
NWST
W 71-59
+6.5
2
vs
ETAM
W 84-71
+5.5
9
vs
NOLA
W 74-61
+10.5
10
vs
SFA
L 58-60
+4.5
covered 16didn’t cover 13avg +1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
6
@
SMU
L 58-69
−33.5
8
@
TAR
L 77-85
+19.5
11
@
KU
L 46-77
−22.5
16
@
OKST
L 69-85
−0.5
28
@
XAV
L 67-88
+8.5
6
@
LAM
W 57-49
−30.5
17
@
SFA
L 60-69
−10.5
29
vs
NICH
L 71-76
+9.5
31
vs
NOLA
W 83-69
+9.5
3
@
RGV
W 63-59
−15.5
5
@
HCU
W 81-65
+13.5
10
@
NWST
L 78-79
+18.5
12
@
ETAM
W 61-50
−31.5
17
vs
SELA
W 68-56
−6.5
19
vs
MCN
L 53-69
−18.5
24
@
UIW
W 79-71
+13.5
26
vs
RGV
L 55-64
−16.5
31
vs
HCU
W 73-71
+8.5
2
vs
UIW
L 69-71
−0.5
7
@
NICH
W 83-76
+21.5
9
@
NOLA
L 78-84
+15.5
14
vs
LAM
W 76-63
+3.5
16
vs
SFA
L 68-78
+10.5
21
@
MCN
L 54-70
−15.5
23
@
SELA
W 73-68
+10.5
28
vs
NWST
W 71-59
−4.5
2
vs
ETAM
W 84-71
+18.5
9
vs
NOLA
W 74-61
−12.5
10
vs
SFA
L 58-60
−17.5
over 14under 15avg −1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Boise St
30 games played
Straight up
19-11
63% wins
Against the spread
17-13
57% covers · avg −1.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-13
57% overs · avg +3.7 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 8 | vs | W 101-77 | -12.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | O 178 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 85-65 | -16.5 | W +3.5 | 161.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 62-58 | -16.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | U 120 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 62-59 | -9.5 | L −6.5 | 150.5 | U 121 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 67-70 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 155.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 70-81 | +6.5 | L −4.5 | 152.5 | U 151 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 77-68 | +2.5 | W +11.5 | 148.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 86-64 | -14.5 | W +7.5 | 150.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 14 | vs | W 68-67 | +2.5 | W +3.5 | 139.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 66-81 | -3.5 | L −18.5 | 141.5 | O 147 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 62-53 | -5.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 107-110 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 138.5 | O 217 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 58-75 | -8.5 | L −25.5 | 140.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 68-93 | +1.5 | L −23.5 | 149.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 13 | @ | L 85-89 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 16 | vs | W 79-73 | -5.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 20 | @ | W 81-65 | -1.5 | W +14.5 | 145.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 96-54 | -23.5 | W +18.5 | 137.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 27 | @ | W 89-58 | -12.5 | W +18.5 | 141.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 30 | @ | L 69-86 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 141.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 3 | vs | W 91-87 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 141.5 | O 178 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 91-90 | +4.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 13 | vs | L 83-86 | -10.5 | L −13.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 56-75 | +9.5 | L −9.5 | 151.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 84-69 | -18.5 | L −3.5 | 146.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 24 | vs | W 72-62 | -8.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 69-53 | -7.5 | W +8.5 | 149.5 | U 122 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 86-77 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 143.5 | O 163 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 78-67 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 143.5 | O 145 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 74-84 | -14.5 | L −24.5 | 146.5 | O 158 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
vs
UVU
W 101-77
+11.5
11
vs
RGV
W 85-65
+3.5
15
vs
MTST
W 62-58
−12.5
18
vs
WICH
W 62-59
−6.5
24
vs
USC
L 67-70
+0.5
25
vs
NCSU
L 70-81
−4.5
6
@
BTLR
W 77-68
+11.5
10
vs
DUQ
W 86-64
+7.5
14
vs
SMC
W 68-67
+3.5
20
@
NEV
L 66-81
−18.5
30
vs
UNM
W 62-53
+3.5
3
@
SDSU
L 107-110
+1.5
7
vs
GCU
L 58-75
−25.5
10
vs
USU
L 68-93
−23.5
13
@
UNLV
L 85-89
−5.5
16
vs
CSU
W 79-73
+0.5
20
@
WYO
W 81-65
+14.5
24
vs
AF
W 96-54
+18.5
27
@
SJSU
W 89-58
+18.5
30
@
GCU
L 69-86
−15.5
3
vs
NEV
W 91-87
−2.5
7
@
UNM
W 91-90
+5.5
13
vs
UNLV
L 83-86
−13.5
18
@
USU
L 56-75
−9.5
21
vs
SJSU
W 84-69
−3.5
24
vs
WYO
W 72-62
+1.5
28
@
FRES
W 69-53
+8.5
3
vs
SDSU
W 86-77
+7.5
7
@
CSU
W 78-67
+12.5
11
vs
SJSU
L 74-84
−24.5
covered 17didn’t cover 13avg −1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
vs
UVU
W 101-77
+26.5
11
vs
RGV
W 85-65
−11.5
15
vs
MTST
W 62-58
−27.5
18
vs
WICH
W 62-59
−29.5
24
vs
USC
L 67-70
−18.5
25
vs
NCSU
L 70-81
−1.5
6
@
BTLR
W 77-68
−3.5
10
vs
DUQ
W 86-64
−0.5
14
vs
SMC
W 68-67
−4.5
20
@
NEV
L 66-81
+5.5
30
vs
UNM
W 62-53
−31.5
3
@
SDSU
L 107-110
+78.5
7
vs
GCU
L 58-75
−7.5
10
vs
USU
L 68-93
+11.5
13
@
UNLV
L 85-89
+23.5
16
vs
CSU
W 79-73
+11.5
20
@
WYO
W 81-65
+0.5
24
vs
AF
W 96-54
+12.5
27
@
SJSU
W 89-58
+5.5
30
@
GCU
L 69-86
+13.5
3
vs
NEV
W 91-87
+36.5
7
@
UNM
W 91-90
+28.5
13
vs
UNLV
L 83-86
+15.5
18
@
USU
L 56-75
−20.5
21
vs
SJSU
W 84-69
+6.5
24
vs
WYO
W 72-62
−12.5
28
@
FRES
W 69-53
−27.5
3
vs
SDSU
W 86-77
+19.5
7
@
CSU
W 78-67
+1.5
11
vs
SJSU
L 74-84
+11.5
over 17under 13avg +3.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Boise St has the better starters
Position by position: Texas A&M-CC 0, Boise St 3, even 2
Texas A&M-CCBetterBoise St
G J. Mizell TR5 pts · 3.3 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 12
→BOISBig
G D. Wheeler-Thomas TR14.9 pts · 3.6 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 67
G S. Robinson TR14.6 pts · 2.8 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 76
=Even
G L. Washington TR9.6 pts · 4.7 reb · 5.1 ast
Score 76
G I. Lewis TR5.9 pts · 2 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 10
→BOISBig
F D. Butka TR13.7 pts · 8.2 reb · 2.6 ast
Score 66
G D. Michelini-Jackson4.3 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 34
→BOISSmall
F J. Stanback TR8.7 pts · 5.9 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 62
F B. Basil TR8.7 pts · 6 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 53
=Even
F P. Carmichael7.8 pts · 3.1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 59
Texas A&M-CCBetterBoise St
AMCC offense303rd of 366 · -9.4
→BOISBig
BOIS defense74th of 366 · +0.7
AMCC defense176th of 366 · -4.0
→BOISSmall
BOIS offense94th of 366 · -0.5
Backcourt-5.9 · 4 players
→BOISBig
Backcourt+1.4 · 2 players
Frontcourt-0.1 · 1 player
→BOISSmall
Frontcourt+1.3 · 3 players
Bench-1.2 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-2.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestAMCC betterBOIS betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Mizell28 min · TRS. Robinson28 min · TRI. Lewis22 min · TRD. Michelini-Jackson17 minB. Wheatfall11 minC. Horton6 min
Forwards
B. Basil23 min · TRD. MukunaNewK. WallaceNewC. WorshamNew
Centers
J. Ambrose5 minL. FoonNew
Guards
D. Wheeler-Thomas31 min · TRL. Washington29 min · TRA. Neto19 minJ. Bowie5 minR. Bergersen2 minB. Ramirez2 min
Forwards
D. Butka34 min · TRJ. Stanback25 min · TRP. Carmichael19 minS. Ahrens13 minB. Buom5 minE. Lathan2 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 68.5 #305 | Points per game | 77.4 #108 |
| 1.03 #296 | Points per possession | 1.13 #82 |
| 66.9 #284 | Pace (possessions) | 68.3 #215 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.5 #270 | Effective FG% | 52.2 #138 |
| 35.0 #122 | 3-point % | 34.3 #151 |
| 31.4 #334 | 3-point attempt rate | 43.1 #114 |
| 41.1 #46 | Free throw rate | 42.7 #23 |
| Possessions | ||
| 19.4 #336 | Turnover rate | 16.9 #195 |
| 31.7 #138 | Offensive rebound rate | 33.2 #85 |
| 12.1 #280 | Assists per game | 12.4 #258 |
| Defense | ||
| 69.4 #52 | Points allowed | 73.2 #137 |
| 1.04 #67 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #145 |
| 50.1 #104 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.6 #250 |
| 31.6 #48 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.4 #213 |
| 19.0 #48 | Turnovers forced | 14.6 #317 |
| 71.2 #95 | Defensive rebound rate | 76.4 #3 |
| 7.0 #125 | Steals per game | 4.6 #350 |
| 2.6 #290 | Blocks per game | 2.1 #339 |
Texas A&M-CC
14-15 in 2025-26 overall · 14-10 in conference · Southland Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs SF Austin58–60
- Wvs LSU N Orleans74–61
- Wvs East Texas A&M84–71
- Wvs N'Western St71–59
- W@ SE Louisiana73–68
A week or more of rest.
Boise St
19-11 in 2025-26 overall · 12-9 in conference · Pac-12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs San José St74–84
- W@ Colorado St78–67
- Wvs San Diego St86–77
- W@ Fresno St69–53
- Wvs Wyoming72–62
A week or more of rest.