Sanford Pentagon · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | NEB | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 NEB 79–69 · win probability NEB 81%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 147.8
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: NEB has more of the edges
BOIS 2, NEB 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Turnovers
Turnover rate: BOIS 16.9%, NEB 14.5%. Forced: BOIS 14.6%, NEB 18.9%
Shooting
Effective FG%: BOIS 52.2 and allows 52.6; NEB 55.5 and allows 48.1
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: BOIS 33.2%, NEB 26.7%. Defensive: BOIS 76.4%, NEB 72.6%
Three-pointers
BOIS hits 34.3% and allows 34.4%; NEB hits 35.5% and allows 30.5%. Threes are 43.1% and 51.1% of their shots
Free throws
Free throw rate: BOIS 42.7, NEB 26.2. Allowed: BOIS 32.1, NEB 25.1
BOIS offense vs NEB defense
Offense 94th of 366 against a defense 23rd, on the model’s ratings
Even
NEB offense vs BOIS defense
Offense 43rd of 366 against a defense 74th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: BOIS plays 68.3 a game (215th fastest), NEB 67.3 (267th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: BOIS 34%, NEB 48%. Transfers in: BOIS 4, NEB 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Schedule so far
BOIS has played the 82nd-hardest schedule, NEB the 59th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Context
Neutral floor
No home court: the model takes it out of the line
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 | — | NEB -10.0 | — |
| Total | — | 147.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | BOIS 68.9 · NEB 78.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | NEB -5.8 | — |
| 1H total | 69.1 | — |
| 1H projected score | BOIS 31.7 · NEB 37.5 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% | 7-3 70% | |
| 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% | 3-7 30% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
BOIS 0–1 NEBNEB leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · BOIS 0-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 5, 2024-25 | BOIS 69 vs NEB 79 | NEB +3.5 | NEB W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
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
Nebraska
35 games played
Straight up
28-7
80% wins
Against the spread
19-16
54% covers · avg +2.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
11-24
31% overs · avg −6.8 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 86-53 | -24.5 | W +8.5 | 153.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 96-66 | -21.5 | W +8.5 | 156.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 69-50 | -35.5 | L −16.5 | 146.5 | U 119 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 105-99 | -1.5 | W +4.5 | 163.5 | O 204 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 84-72 | -8.5 | W +3.5 | 151.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 86-85 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 168.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 80-73 | -14.5 | L −7.5 | 166.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 72-63 | -25.5 | L −16.5 | 157.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 71-50 | -5.5 | W +15.5 | 155.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 90-60 | -1.5 | W +28.5 | 158.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 13 | @ | W 83-80 | +9.5 | W +12.5 | 156.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 78-55 | -29.5 | L −6.5 | 151.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 86-55 | -31.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 58-56 | -2.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | U 114 |
| Jan 5 | @ | W 72-69 | +2.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 83-77 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 13 | vs | W 90-55 | -10.5 | W +24.5 | 146.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 77-58 | -4.5 | W +14.5 | 149.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 76-66 | -10.5 | L −0.5 | 152.5 | U 142 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 76-57 | -4.5 | W +14.5 | 140.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 27 | @ | L 72-75 | +11.5 | W +8.5 | 157.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 1 | vs | L 69-78 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 154.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 80-68 | -12.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 10 | vs | L 77-80 | -2.5 | L −5.5 | 146.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 68-49 | -13.5 | W +5.5 | 146.5 | U 117 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 52-57 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 139.5 | U 109 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 87-64 | -17.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 74-61 | -16.5 | L −3.5 | 142.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 82-67 | -5.5 | W +9.5 | 149.5 | U 149 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 52-72 | +1.5 | L −18.5 | 144.5 | U 124 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 84-75 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 136.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 58-74 | +4.5 | L −11.5 | 145.5 | U 132 |
| Mar 19 | vs | W 76-47 | -13.5 | W +15.5 | 139.5 | U 123 |
| Mar 21 | vs | W 74-72 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 26 | vs | L 71-77 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 131.5 | O 148 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
WGA
W 86-53
+8.5
8
vs
FIU
W 96-66
+8.5
11
vs
UMES
W 69-50
−16.5
15
vs
OU
W 105-99
+4.5
20
vs
UNM
W 84-72
+3.5
21
vs
KSU
W 86-85
−0.5
25
vs
WIN
W 80-73
−7.5
29
vs
UPST
W 72-63
−16.5
7
vs
CREI
W 71-50
+15.5
10
vs
WIS
W 90-60
+28.5
13
@
ILL
W 83-80
+12.5
21
vs
UND
W 78-55
−6.5
30
vs
UNH
W 86-55
−0.5
2
vs
MSU
W 58-56
−0.5
5
@
OSU
W 72-69
+5.5
10
@
IU
W 83-77
+10.5
13
vs
ORE
W 90-55
+24.5
17
@
NU
W 77-58
+14.5
21
vs
WASH
W 76-66
−0.5
24
@
MINN
W 76-57
+14.5
27
@
MICH
L 72-75
+8.5
1
vs
ILL
L 69-78
−10.5
7
@
RUTG
W 80-68
−0.5
10
vs
PUR
L 77-80
−5.5
14
vs
NU
W 68-49
+5.5
17
@
IOWA
L 52-57
−3.5
21
vs
PSU
W 87-64
+5.5
25
vs
MD
W 74-61
−3.5
28
@
USC
W 82-67
+9.5
3
@
UCLA
L 52-72
−18.5
8
vs
IOWA
W 84-75
+4.5
13
vs
PUR
L 58-74
−11.5
19
vs
TROY
W 76-47
+15.5
21
vs
VAN
W 74-72
+3.5
26
vs
IOWA
L 71-77
−7.5
covered 19didn’t cover 16avg +2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
WGA
W 86-53
−14.5
8
vs
FIU
W 96-66
+5.5
11
vs
UMES
W 69-50
−27.5
15
vs
OU
W 105-99
+40.5
20
vs
UNM
W 84-72
+4.5
21
vs
KSU
W 86-85
+2.5
25
vs
WIN
W 80-73
−13.5
29
vs
UPST
W 72-63
−22.5
7
vs
CREI
W 71-50
−34.5
10
vs
WIS
W 90-60
−8.5
13
@
ILL
W 83-80
+6.5
21
vs
UND
W 78-55
−18.5
30
vs
UNH
W 86-55
−5.5
2
vs
MSU
W 58-56
−32.5
5
@
OSU
W 72-69
−14.5
10
@
IU
W 83-77
+9.5
13
vs
ORE
W 90-55
−1.5
17
@
NU
W 77-58
−14.5
21
vs
WASH
W 76-66
−10.5
24
@
MINN
W 76-57
−7.5
27
@
MICH
L 72-75
−10.5
1
vs
ILL
L 69-78
−7.5
7
@
RUTG
W 80-68
+2.5
10
vs
PUR
L 77-80
+10.5
14
vs
NU
W 68-49
−29.5
17
@
IOWA
L 52-57
−30.5
21
vs
PSU
W 87-64
+3.5
25
vs
MD
W 74-61
−7.5
28
@
USC
W 82-67
−0.5
3
@
UCLA
L 52-72
−20.5
8
vs
IOWA
W 84-75
+22.5
13
vs
PUR
L 58-74
−13.5
19
vs
TROY
W 76-47
−16.5
21
vs
VAN
W 74-72
−0.5
26
vs
IOWA
L 71-77
+16.5
over 11under 24avg −6.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Nebraska has the better starters
Position by position: Boise St 0, Nebraska 4, even 1
Boise StBetterNebraska
G D. Wheeler-Thomas TR14.9 pts · 3.6 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 67
→NEBSmall
G T. Leonhardt TR12 pts · 5.4 reb · 5.7 ast
Score 83
G L. Washington TR9.6 pts · 4.7 reb · 5.1 ast
Score 76
→NEBSmall
F P. Sandfort18.1 pts · 4.9 reb · 2 ast
Score 97
F D. Butka TR13.7 pts · 8.2 reb · 2.6 ast
Score 66
=Even
F B. Kapke TR10.6 pts · 5.7 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 77
F J. Stanback TR8.7 pts · 5.9 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 62
→NEBSmall
F S. Orme TR12.5 pts · 4.9 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 86
F P. Carmichael7.8 pts · 3.1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 59
→NEBSmall
F D. Wilkinson TR14.1 pts · 6.3 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 93
Boise StBetterNebraska
BOIS offense94th of 366 · -0.5
→NEBSmall
NEB defense23rd of 366 · +5.1
BOIS defense74th of 366 · +0.7
=Even
NEB offense43rd of 366 · +4.6
Backcourt+1.4 · 2 players
=Even
Backcourt+2.0 · 1 player
Frontcourt+1.3 · 3 players
→NEBBig
Frontcourt+13.0 · 4 players
Bench-2.0 · 5 players
→NEBBig
Bench+1.7 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestBOIS betterNEB betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
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
Guards
T. Leonhardt35 min · TRC. Jacobsen20 minT. DeGourville19 min · TRC. Essegian14 minJ. LanierNewC. RiceNew
Forwards
P. Sandfort34 minB. Kapke27 min · TRS. Orme26 min · TRD. Wilkinson25 min · TRB. Frager24 minK. Betts6 min · TR
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 77.4 #108 | Points per game | 77.0 #116 |
| 1.13 #82 | Points per possession | 1.15 #61 |
| 68.3 #215 | Pace (possessions) | 67.3 #267 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.2 #138 | Effective FG% | 55.5 #28 |
| 34.3 #151 | 3-point % | 35.5 #91 |
| 43.1 #114 | 3-point attempt rate | 51.1 #9 |
| 42.7 #23 | Free throw rate | 26.2 #356 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.9 #195 | Turnover rate | 14.5 #44 |
| 33.2 #85 | Offensive rebound rate | 26.7 #306 |
| 12.4 #258 | Assists per game | 18.0 #10 |
| Defense | ||
| 73.2 #137 | Points allowed | 66.1 #14 |
| 1.08 #145 | Points allowed per possession | 0.98 #13 |
| 52.6 #250 | Opponent effective FG% | 48.1 #40 |
| 34.4 #213 | Opponent 3-point % | 30.5 #19 |
| 14.6 #317 | Turnovers forced | 18.9 #54 |
| 76.4 #3 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.6 #47 |
| 4.6 #350 | Steals per game | 7.1 #112 |
| 2.1 #339 | Blocks per game | 2.5 #303 |
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.
Nebraska
28-7 in 2025-26 overall · 15-6 in conference · Big Ten Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Iowa71–77
- Wvs Vanderbilt74–72
- Wvs Troy76–47
- Lvs Purdue58–74
- Wvs Iowa84–75
A week or more of rest.