Murphy Center · at MTSU
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | MTSU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 MTSU 79–68 · win probability MTSU 82%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 146.3
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: MTSU has more of the edges
SEMO 1, MTSU 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
SEMO has played the 351st-hardest schedule, MTSU the 132nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
SEMO offense vs MTSU defense
Offense 312th of 366 against a defense 167th, on the model’s ratings
MTSU offense vs SEMO defense
Offense 158th of 366 against a defense 284th, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: SEMO 16.8%, MTSU 17.1%. Forced: SEMO 18.1%, MTSU 14.9%
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: SEMO plays 70.2 a game (109th fastest), MTSU 68.3 (216th). Faster games mean more points
Home court
MTSU at home. This season: MTSU 0-0 at home, SEMO 0-0 away
Three-pointers
SEMO hits 30.9% and allows 33.1%; MTSU hits 33.8% and allows 34.0%. Threes are 36.0% and 45.3% of their shots
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: SEMO 29.6%, MTSU 30.7%. Defensive: SEMO 71.8%, MTSU 71.5%
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: SEMO 49.8 and allows 48.8; MTSU 51.6 and allows 51.0
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: SEMO 26%, MTSU 30%. Transfers in: SEMO 1, MTSU 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: SEMO 38.8, MTSU 32.7. Allowed: SEMO 48.0, MTSU 35.7
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 | — | MTSU -10.7 | — |
| Total | — | 146.3 | — |
| Projected score | — | SEMO 67.8 · MTSU 78.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | MTSU -6.2 | — |
| 1H total | 68.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | SEMO 31.1 · MTSU 37.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% | |
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
SE Missouri
30 games played
Straight up
17-13
57% wins
Against the spread
14-16
47% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-17
43% 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 3 | @ | L 67-92 | +19.5 | L −5.5 | 153.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 7 | @ | L 84-89 | +25.5 | W +20.5 | 157.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 72-84 | +2.5 | L −9.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 70-99 | +23.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 84-68 | -1.5 | W +14.5 | 170.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 26 | @ | L 72-79 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Nov 29 | vs | L 77-88 | -3.5 | L −14.5 | 153.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 74-70 | +3.5 | W +7.5 | 149.5 | U 144 |
| Dec 18 | @ | L 74-85 | -2.5 | L −13.5 | 155.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 91-82 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 151.5 | O 173 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 68-59 | -12.5 | L −3.5 | 146.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 73-50 | -13.5 | W +9.5 | 147.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 84-76 | -7.5 | W +0.5 | 146.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 69-71 | -5.5 | L −7.5 | 144.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 15 | vs | L 76-88 | -6.5 | L −18.5 | 154.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 55-68 | -9.5 | L −22.5 | 139.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 20 | vs | W 66-50 | -2.5 | W +13.5 | 140.5 | U 116 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 70-65 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 78-74 | -10.5 | L −6.5 | 142.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 77-59 | -4.5 | W +13.5 | 138.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 82-70 | -7.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 90-65 | -11.5 | W +13.5 | 141.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 56-74 | -1.5 | L −19.5 | 137.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 73-61 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 154.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 17 | @ | W 56-53 | +2.5 | W +5.5 | 138.5 | U 109 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 70-65 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 143.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 26 | vs | L 71-79 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 151.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 89-73 | -7.5 | W +8.5 | 141.5 | O 162 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 68-66 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 148.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 61-66 | -3.5 | L −8.5 | 139.5 | U 127 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
SLU
L 67-92
−5.5
7
@
MIZ
L 84-89
+20.5
15
vs
STMN
L 72-84
−9.5
18
@
IOWA
L 70-99
−5.5
25
vs
CP
W 84-68
+14.5
26
@
NAU
L 72-79
−4.5
29
vs
LIP
L 77-88
−14.5
6
@
UTC
W 74-70
+7.5
18
@
TNTC
L 74-85
−13.5
20
@
TNST
W 91-82
+7.5
1
vs
EIU
W 68-59
−3.5
3
vs
WIU
W 73-50
+9.5
8
@
USI
W 84-76
+0.5
10
@
MORE
L 69-71
−7.5
15
vs
LIN
L 76-88
−18.5
17
vs
SIUE
L 55-68
−22.5
20
vs
UTM
W 66-50
+13.5
22
vs
LR
W 70-65
−0.5
29
@
WIU
W 78-74
−6.5
31
@
EIU
W 77-59
+13.5
5
vs
MORE
W 82-70
+4.5
7
vs
USI
W 90-65
+13.5
12
@
SIUE
L 56-74
−19.5
14
@
LIN
W 73-61
+13.5
17
@
UTM
W 56-53
+5.5
21
@
LR
W 70-65
+3.5
26
vs
TNST
L 71-79
−10.5
28
vs
TNTC
W 89-73
+8.5
5
vs
LIN
W 68-66
−1.5
6
vs
MORE
L 61-66
−8.5
covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
SLU
L 67-92
+5.5
7
@
MIZ
L 84-89
+15.5
15
vs
STMN
L 72-84
+3.5
18
@
IOWA
L 70-99
+21.5
25
vs
CP
W 84-68
−18.5
26
@
NAU
L 72-79
−2.5
29
vs
LIP
L 77-88
+11.5
6
@
UTC
W 74-70
−5.5
18
@
TNTC
L 74-85
+3.5
20
@
TNST
W 91-82
+21.5
1
vs
EIU
W 68-59
−19.5
3
vs
WIU
W 73-50
−24.5
8
@
USI
W 84-76
+13.5
10
@
MORE
L 69-71
−4.5
15
vs
LIN
L 76-88
+9.5
17
vs
SIUE
L 55-68
−16.5
20
vs
UTM
W 66-50
−24.5
22
vs
LR
W 70-65
−10.5
29
@
WIU
W 78-74
+9.5
31
@
EIU
W 77-59
−2.5
5
vs
MORE
W 82-70
+7.5
7
vs
USI
W 90-65
+13.5
12
@
SIUE
L 56-74
−7.5
14
@
LIN
W 73-61
−20.5
17
@
UTM
W 56-53
−29.5
21
@
LR
W 70-65
−8.5
26
vs
TNST
L 71-79
−1.5
28
vs
TNTC
W 89-73
+20.5
5
vs
LIN
W 68-66
−14.5
6
vs
MORE
L 61-66
−12.5
over 13under 17avg −2.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
MTSU
29 games played
Straight up
14-15
48% wins
Against the spread
13-16
45% covers · avg +0 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-14
52% overs · avg +2.6 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 12 | @ | W 77-72 | +2.5 | W +7.5 | 140.5 | O 149 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 61-86 | +27.5 | W +2.5 | 159.5 | U 147 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 90-87 | +6.5 | W +9.5 | 161.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 79-92 | +9.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 62-72 | +9.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 1 | vs | W 76-61 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 153.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 7 | vs | L 62-83 | +3.5 | L −17.5 | 153.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 68-67 | -3.5 | L −2.5 | 160.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 60-69 | +25.5 | W +16.5 | 138.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 88-51 | -6.5 | W +30.5 | 134.5 | O 139 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 68-67 | -4.5 | L −3.5 | 156.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 80-83 | -3.5 | L −6.5 | 137.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 59-55 | +3.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 114 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 58-59 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 131.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 90-87 | -5.5 | L −2.5 | 137.5 | O 177 |
| Jan 23 | @ | L 58-75 | -1.5 | L −18.5 | 133.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 65-81 | +1.5 | L −14.5 | 136.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 60-65 | -6.5 | L −11.5 | 140.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 84-88 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 154.5 | O 172 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 88-89 | -5.5 | L −6.5 | 133.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 90-87 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 148.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 80-82 | +3.5 | W +1.5 | 145.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 70-78 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 151.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 78-66 | -10.5 | W +1.5 | 137.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 77-67 | -8.5 | W +1.5 | 139.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 86-85 | -5.5 | L −4.5 | 148.5 | O 171 |
| Mar 5 | @ | W 73-67 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 153.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 75-63 | +2.5 | W +14.5 | 145.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 69-80 | -1.5 | L −12.5 | 134.5 | O 149 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
12
@
EVAN
W 77-72
+7.5
19
@
MICH
L 61-86
+2.5
23
vs
MUR
W 90-87
+9.5
24
vs
GW
L 79-92
−3.5
25
vs
MCN
L 62-72
−0.5
1
vs
UAB
W 76-61
+16.5
7
vs
BEL
L 62-83
−17.5
17
vs
KENN
W 68-67
−2.5
29
@
HOU
L 60-69
+16.5
2
vs
LT
W 88-51
+30.5
4
vs
SHSU
W 68-67
−3.5
8
@
UTEP
L 80-83
−6.5
10
@
NMSU
W 59-55
+7.5
14
@
LT
L 58-59
−4.5
17
vs
MOST
W 90-87
−2.5
23
@
JXST
L 58-75
−18.5
29
vs
LIB
L 65-81
−14.5
31
vs
WKU
L 60-65
−11.5
4
vs
FIU
L 84-88
−9.5
7
@
DEL
L 88-89
−6.5
12
@
KENN
W 90-87
+6.5
14
@
WKU
L 80-82
+1.5
18
@
SHSU
L 70-78
−4.5
21
vs
DEL
W 78-66
+1.5
26
vs
UTEP
W 77-67
+1.5
28
vs
NMSU
W 86-85
−4.5
5
@
FIU
W 73-67
+7.5
7
@
MOST
W 75-63
+14.5
12
vs
LT
L 69-80
−12.5
covered 13didn’t cover 16avg +0 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
12
@
EVAN
W 77-72
+8.5
19
@
MICH
L 61-86
−12.5
23
vs
MUR
W 90-87
+15.5
24
vs
GW
L 79-92
+12.5
25
vs
MCN
L 62-72
−13.5
1
vs
UAB
W 76-61
−16.5
7
vs
BEL
L 62-83
−8.5
17
vs
KENN
W 68-67
−25.5
29
@
HOU
L 60-69
−9.5
2
vs
LT
W 88-51
+4.5
4
vs
SHSU
W 68-67
−21.5
8
@
UTEP
L 80-83
+25.5
10
@
NMSU
W 59-55
−30.5
14
@
LT
L 58-59
−14.5
17
vs
MOST
W 90-87
+39.5
23
@
JXST
L 58-75
−0.5
29
vs
LIB
L 65-81
+9.5
31
vs
WKU
L 60-65
−15.5
4
vs
FIU
L 84-88
+17.5
7
@
DEL
L 88-89
+43.5
12
@
KENN
W 90-87
+28.5
14
@
WKU
L 80-82
+16.5
18
@
SHSU
L 70-78
−3.5
21
vs
DEL
W 78-66
+6.5
26
vs
UTEP
W 77-67
+4.5
28
vs
NMSU
W 86-85
+22.5
5
@
FIU
W 73-67
−13.5
7
@
MOST
W 75-63
−7.5
12
vs
LT
L 69-80
+14.5
over 15under 14avg +2.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
MTSU has the better starters
Position by position: SE Missouri 1, MTSU 2, even 2
SE MissouriBetterMTSU
G M. Bell8.6 pts · 5 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 69
←SEMOSmall
G K. de Kovachich TR11.6 pts · 2.2 reb · 2 ast
Score 40
G L. Blocker4.8 pts · 3.6 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 33
→MTSUSmall
G J. Carter10.3 pts · 3.2 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 63
G P. Farmer1.6 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 11
→MTSUSmall
G E. Rice TR6.7 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 43
F D. Sutton TR3.8 pts · 3.9 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 63
=Even
F O. Naveh TR11 pts · 5.9 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 52
F T. Sadler0.2 pts · 0.1 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
C L. Jovanovic2.1 pts · 2.9 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 26
SE MissouriBetterMTSU
SEMO offense312th of 366 · -10.0
→MTSUBig
MTSU defense167th of 366 · -3.7
SEMO defense284th of 366 · -7.1
→MTSUSmall
MTSU offense158th of 366 · -4.7
Backcourt-1.7 · 3 players
=Even
Backcourt-2.0 · 3 players
Frontcourt+0.0 · 2 players
←SEMOSmall
Frontcourt-1.1 · 2 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-0.1 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestSEMO betterMTSU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
M. Bell22 minL. Blocker18 minP. Farmer9 minK. PruettNewF. WilliamsNewM. EavesNew
Forwards
D. Sutton13 min · TRT. Sadler3 minC. JewellNewD. CooperNewA. PerryNew
Guards
K. de Kovachich31 min · TRJ. Carter27 minE. Rice20 min · TRM. Whitlock11 minQ. BarnettNewJ. HowardNew
Forwards
O. Naveh29 min · TRJ. Hall7 minA. BoldenNew
Centers
L. Jovanovic14 minK. SilerNew
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 #217 | Points per game | 73.5 #216 |
| 1.04 #267 | Points per possession | 1.08 #195 |
| 70.2 #109 | Pace (possessions) | 68.3 #216 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.8 #244 | Effective FG% | 51.6 #167 |
| 30.9 #324 | 3-point % | 33.8 #183 |
| 36.0 #250 | 3-point attempt rate | 45.3 #61 |
| 38.8 #84 | Free throw rate | 32.7 #245 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.8 #192 | Turnover rate | 17.1 #214 |
| 29.6 #218 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.7 #171 |
| 11.7 #306 | Assists per game | 13.7 #168 |
| Defense | ||
| 72.3 #112 | Points allowed | 74.6 #180 |
| 1.03 #58 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #205 |
| 48.8 #57 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.0 #155 |
| 33.1 #130 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.0 #180 |
| 18.1 #91 | Turnovers forced | 14.9 #293 |
| 71.8 #76 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.5 #83 |
| 6.4 #190 | Steals per game | 5.8 #265 |
| 3.6 #121 | Blocks per game | 4.0 #76 |
SE Missouri
17-13 in 2025-26 overall · 15-7 in conference · Ohio Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Morehead St61–66
- Wvs Lindenwood Lions68–66
- Wvs Tennessee Tech89–73
- Lvs Tennessee St71–79
- W@ Little Rock70–65
A week or more of rest.
MTSU
14-15 in 2025-26 overall · 11-10 in conference · Conference USA
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Louisiana Tech69–80
- W@ Missouri St75–63
- W@ FIU73–67
- Wvs New Mexico St86–85
- Wvs UTEP77–67
A week or more of rest.