Tennessee Tech Golden Eagles at Eastern Kentucky Colonels: Model Line and Edge

Sat, Nov 28, 4:00 PM ETBaptist Health Arena · at E Kentucky

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Tennessee Tech and E Kentucky
TNTC	This season	EKU
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 EKU 76–75 · win probability EKU 53%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 151.3

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: EKU has more of the edges

TNTC 2, EKU 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

TNTCBig

Free throws

Free throw rate: TNTC 35.5, EKU 30.7. Allowed: TNTC 31.3, EKU 38.5

EKUSmall

Three-pointers

TNTC hits 31.1% and allows 35.8%; EKU hits 35.0% and allows 36.2%. Threes are 36.5% and 50.8% of their shots

Context

Schedule so far

TNTC has played the 353rd-hardest schedule, EKU the 273rd. A record against a soft schedule means less

TNTCSmall

TNTC offense vs EKU defense

Offense 276th of 366 against a defense 340th, on the model’s ratings

EKUSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: TNTC 19.1%, EKU 16.9%. Forced: TNTC 15.0%, EKU 14.8%

EKUSmall

Home court

EKU at home. This season: EKU 0-0 at home, TNTC 0-0 away

EKUSmall

EKU offense vs TNTC defense

Offense 244th of 366 against a defense 288th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Tempo

About 69 possessions: TNTC plays 68.3 a game (214th fastest), EKU 69.8 (128th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: TNTC 18%, EKU 29%. Transfers in: TNTC 6, EKU 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: TNTC 48.9 and allows 51.5; EKU 52.1 and allows 56.1

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: TNTC 31.3%, EKU 32.5%. Defensive: TNTC 69.3%, EKU 68.3%

Sorted by how lopsided each matchup is, from national ranks. Reasons to look, not picks: the market already knows most of this.

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	—	EKU -1.0	—
Total	—	151.3	—
Projected score	—	TNTC 75.2 · EKU 76.1

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	EKU -0.5	—
1H total	70.7	—
1H projected score	TNTC 35.1 · EKU 35.6	—

The 1st-half model is fitted from the full-game model and past halves. ESPN has no 1st-half lines for college games, so there is no market to compare it with.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

ATS

2025-26 season

	Season	Cover	Venue	Role
TNTC WWWLL	14-14	50%	9-8	—
EKU LWLLL	11-19	37%	5-8	—

Venue/role: TNTC away; EKU home. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
TNTC OUUUO	14-14	50%	10-18
EKU OOOUO	19-11	63%	9-21

Squares: last 5 games (O over, U under), oldest first. Tap for the score and line.

Last 10 games

2025-26

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
TNTC	6-4 60%	6-4 60%	5-5 50%
EKU	4-6 40%	3-7 30%	7-3 70%

Wins-losses (pushes last). Spread and over / under skip games without a line.

Next 3 games

With how the last meeting with each opponent went

Tennessee Tech

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 1	@ MTSU	No recent meeting
Dec 5	vs SAM	No recent meeting
Dec 12	@ ARIZ	No recent meeting

E Kentucky

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 2	vs UTM	L74–80LU
Dec 6	@ AUB	No recent meeting
Dec 13	vs LIP	L77–80LU

Last meeting: result, against the spread, over / under. Hover a result for its date.

ATS History · 2025-26

WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total

Tennessee Tech

28 games played

Straight up

10-18

36% wins

Against the spread

14-14

50% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-14

50% overs · avg −0.8 pts vs the total

Straight up

10-1836%

L L L W L L L W W L L L L W L L L L W W W L L W W W L L

2 straight losses2 of last 4 won

Against the spread

14-1450%

W W L W L L W W W L L L L W L L L W W W W L L W W W L L

2 straight misses ATS2 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

14-1450%

U U U O O O O U O O O U U U U O O U O O O U U O U U U O

1 of last 4 overno streak

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	@WKU	L 70-82	+14.5	W +2.5	153.5	U 152
Nov 7	@CLT	L 65-70	+12.5	W +7.5	146.5	U 135
Nov 17	vsWGA	L 59-61	-4.5	L −6.5	152.5	U 120
Nov 19	@UPST	W 88-84	+2.5	W +6.5	150.5	O 172
Nov 26	@UK	L 54-104	+37.5	L −12.5	157.5	O 158
Nov 29	@UGA	L 81-123	+34.5	L −7.5	160.5	O 204
Dec 3	@LIP	L 80-83	+10.5	W +7.5	152.5	O 163
Dec 6	@WGA	W 87-59	+1.5	W +29.5	150.5	U 146
Dec 18	vsSEMO	W 85-74	+2.5	W +13.5	155.5	O 159
Dec 20	vsUTM	L 62-86	+2.5	L −21.5	145.5	O 148
Dec 30	vsTNST	L 76-88	+1.5	L −10.5	155.5	O 164
Jan 1	@LR	L 58-77	+1.5	L −17.5	144.5	U 135
Jan 8	@EIU	L 61-71	-1.5	L −11.5	140.5	U 132
Jan 10	@WIU	W 59-54	-3.5	W +1.5	143.5	U 113
Jan 15	vsUSI	L 54-71	-5.5	L −22.5	142.5	U 125
Jan 17	vsMORE	L 70-76	-1.5	L −7.5	141.5	O 146
Jan 22	@LIN	L 68-89	+8.5	L −12.5	151.5	O 157
Jan 24	@SIUE	L 58-62	+7.5	W +3.5	135.5	U 120
Jan 31	vsLR	W 87-77	+1.5	W +11.5	141.5	O 164
Feb 2	@TNST	W 90-85	+7.5	W +12.5	153.5	O 175
Feb 5	vsWIU	W 97-72	-9.5	W +15.5	143.5	O 169
Feb 7	vsEIU	L 54-60	-4.5	L −10.5	140.5	U 114
Feb 12	@MORE	L 66-73	+4.5	L −2.5	143.5	U 139
Feb 14	@USI	W 82-74	-1.5	W +6.5	140.5	O 156
Feb 19	vsSIUE	W 62-52	+1.5	W +11.5	134.5	U 114
Feb 21	vsLIN	W 72-57	+1.5	W +16.5	151.5	U 129
Feb 26	@UTM	L 49-64	+7.5	L −7.5	134.5	U 113
Feb 28	@SEMO	L 73-89	+7.5	L −8.5	141.5	O 162

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

WKU

L 70-82

+2.5

CLT

L 65-70

+7.5

WGA

L 59-61

−6.5

UPST

W 88-84

+6.5

L 54-104

−12.5

UGA

L 81-123

−7.5

LIP

L 80-83

+7.5

WGA

W 87-59

+29.5

SEMO

W 85-74

+13.5

UTM

L 62-86

−21.5

TNST

L 76-88

−10.5

L 58-77

−17.5

EIU

L 61-71

−11.5

WIU

W 59-54

+1.5

USI

L 54-71

−22.5

L 70-76

−7.5

LIN

L 68-89

−12.5

SIUE

L 58-62

+3.5

W 87-77

+11.5

TNST

W 90-85

+12.5

WIU

W 97-72

+15.5

EIU

L 54-60

−10.5

L 66-73

−2.5

USI

W 82-74

+6.5

SIUE

W 62-52

+11.5

LIN

W 72-57

+16.5

UTM

L 49-64

−7.5

SEMO

L 73-89

−8.5

covered 14didn’t cover 14avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

WKU

L 70-82

−1.5

CLT

L 65-70

−11.5

WGA

L 59-61

−32.5

UPST

W 88-84

+21.5

L 54-104

+0.5

UGA

L 81-123

+43.5

LIP

L 80-83

+10.5

WGA

W 87-59

−4.5

SEMO

W 85-74

+3.5

UTM

L 62-86

+2.5

TNST

L 76-88

+8.5

L 58-77

−9.5

EIU

L 61-71

−8.5

WIU

W 59-54

−30.5

USI

L 54-71

−17.5

L 70-76

+4.5

LIN

L 68-89

+5.5

SIUE

L 58-62

−15.5

W 87-77

+22.5

TNST

W 90-85

+21.5

WIU

W 97-72

+25.5

EIU

L 54-60

−26.5

L 66-73

−4.5

USI

W 82-74

+15.5

SIUE

W 62-52

−20.5

LIN

W 72-57

−22.5

UTM

L 49-64

−21.5

SEMO

L 73-89

+20.5

over 14under 14avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

E Kentucky

30 games played

Straight up

9-21

30% wins

Against the spread

11-19

37% covers · avg −3.9 pts vs the line

Over / Under

19-11

63% overs · avg +4.8 pts vs the total

Straight up

9-2130%

L L L L L L L W L W L L L W W L W L L L L W W L L W W L L L

3 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

11-1937%

L L L L L L W W L W L W L W W W W L L L L W W L L L W L L L

3 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

19-1163%

O U O O U O O U U U U O O O U U O O O O O U O U O O O O U O

3 of last 4 overno streak

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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 10	vsWKU	L 79-87	+1.5	L −6.5	162.5	O 166
Nov 12	@VAN	L 62-92	+28.5	L −1.5	168.5	U 154
Nov 18	@KENT	L 78-93	+10.5	L −4.5	161.5	O 171
Nov 22	vsMER	L 83-95	-4.5	L −16.5	163.5	O 178
Nov 24	@NKU	L 71-82	+4.5	L −6.5	156.5	U 153
Nov 29	vsWOF	L 77-83	+1.5	L −4.5	153.5	O 160
Dec 3	@ILST	L 78-89	+12.5	W +1.5	154.5	O 167
Dec 10	@EIU	W 68-59	-6.5	W +2.5	149.5	U 127
Dec 13	vsM-OH	L 69-79	+5.5	L −4.5	158.5	U 148
Dec 17	@JXST	W 62-59	+2.5	W +5.5	142.5	U 121
Dec 21	@WICH	L 57-88	+14.5	L −16.5	148.5	U 145
Jan 1	@QUC	L 89-91	+4.5	W +2.5	164.5	O 180
Jan 3	@WGA	L 76-88	-1.5	L −13.5	156.5	O 164
Jan 8	vsUNA	W 88-80	-5.5	W +2.5	148.5	O 168
Jan 10	vsCARK	W 79-75	+1.5	W +5.5	156.5	U 154
Jan 15	@APSU	L 72-74	+7.5	W +5.5	153.5	U 146
Jan 17	vsBELL	W 89-69	-5.5	W +14.5	156.5	O 158
Jan 22	@UNF	L 85-87	-8.5	L −10.5	166.5	O 172
Jan 24	@JAX	L 76-81	+1.5	L −3.5	142.5	O 157
Jan 28	vsAPSU	L 82-90	+2.5	L −5.5	151.5	O 172
Jan 31	@CARK	L 81-90	+4.5	L −4.5	151.5	O 171
Feb 5	vsFGCU	W 76-74	-1.5	W +0.5	154.5	U 150
Feb 7	vsSTET	W 100-88	-9.5	W +2.5	151.5	O 188
Feb 11	@LIP	L 61-75	+6.5	L −7.5	160.5	U 136
Feb 15	@UNA	L 78-84	-4.5	L −10.5	150.5	O 162
Feb 18	vsWGA	W 81-80	-7.5	L −6.5	154.5	O 161
Feb 21	@BELL	W 95-92	-1.5	W +1.5	153.5	O 187
Feb 25	vsQUC	L 79-96	+2.5	L −14.5	165.5	O 175
Feb 28	vsLIP	L 77-80	+1.5	L −1.5	157.5	U 157
Mar 4	vsSTET	L 76-92	-5.5	L −21.5	155.5	O 168

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

WKU

L 79-87

−6.5

VAN

L 62-92

−1.5

KENT

L 78-93

−4.5

MER

L 83-95

−16.5

NKU

L 71-82

−6.5

WOF

L 77-83

−4.5

ILST

L 78-89

+1.5

EIU

W 68-59

+2.5

M-OH

L 69-79

−4.5

JXST

W 62-59

+5.5

WICH

L 57-88

−16.5

QUC

L 89-91

+2.5

WGA

L 76-88

−13.5

UNA

W 88-80

+2.5

CARK

W 79-75

+5.5

APSU

L 72-74

+5.5

BELL

W 89-69

+14.5

UNF

L 85-87

−10.5

JAX

L 76-81

−3.5

APSU

L 82-90

−5.5

CARK

L 81-90

−4.5

FGCU

W 76-74

+0.5

STET

W 100-88

+2.5

LIP

L 61-75

−7.5

UNA

L 78-84

−10.5

WGA

W 81-80

−6.5

BELL

W 95-92

+1.5

QUC

L 79-96

−14.5

LIP

L 77-80

−1.5

STET

L 76-92

−21.5

covered 11didn’t cover 19avg −3.9 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

WKU

L 79-87

+3.5

VAN

L 62-92

−14.5

KENT

L 78-93

+9.5

MER

L 83-95

+14.5

NKU

L 71-82

−3.5

WOF

L 77-83

+6.5

ILST

L 78-89

+12.5

EIU

W 68-59

−22.5

M-OH

L 69-79

−10.5

JXST

W 62-59

−21.5

WICH

L 57-88

−3.5

QUC

L 89-91

+15.5

WGA

L 76-88

+7.5

UNA

W 88-80

+19.5

CARK

W 79-75

−2.5

APSU

L 72-74

−7.5

BELL

W 89-69

+1.5

UNF

L 85-87

+5.5

JAX

L 76-81

+14.5

APSU

L 82-90

+20.5

CARK

L 81-90

+19.5

FGCU

W 76-74

−4.5

STET

W 100-88

+36.5

LIP

L 61-75

−24.5

UNA

L 78-84

+11.5

WGA

W 81-80

+6.5

BELL

W 95-92

+33.5

QUC

L 79-96

+9.5

LIP

L 77-80

−0.5

STET

L 76-92

+12.5

over 19under 11avg +4.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.

Tennessee Tech has the better starters

Position by position: Tennessee Tech 3, E Kentucky 0, even 2

Tennessee TechBetterE Kentucky

G T. Mosquera TR13.8 pts · 5.9 reb · 2.3 ast Score 55

TNTCSmall

G J. Holt7 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.3 ast Score 38

G T. Owens7.4 pts · 2.8 reb · 3.5 ast Score 17

No call

G D. King TR2.3 pts · 0.5 reb · 0.2 ast Not ranked

G D. Hackett TR13.9 pts · 4.1 reb · 1.4 ast Score 78

TNTCBig

F S. Lasu TR5.2 pts · 5.4 reb · 0.4 ast Score 15

G C. Newton TR10.5 pts · 2 reb · 1.2 ast Score 55

TNTCBig

F A. Ball7.4 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.8 ast Score 20

G C. Hollenbeck TR5 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.9 ast Score 6

Even

F Y. Paul4.2 pts · 3.9 reb · 0.5 ast Score 12

Tennessee TechBetterE Kentucky

TNTC offense276th of 366 · -8.4

TNTCSmall

EKU defense340th of 366 · -9.1

TNTC defense288th of 366 · -7.2

Even

EKU offense244th of 366 · -7.4

Backcourt-4.8 · 5 players

EKUBig

Backcourt-1.1 · 2 players

FrontcourtNo numbers yet

No call

Frontcourt-5.3 · 3 players

Bench-1.4 · 3 players

Even

Bench-0.4 · 2 players

Score, worst to bestTNTC betterEKU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers

Projected starters: college teams publish no depth chart, so these come from minutes played, and a freshman or a new starter can change them. The score is the share of ranked players at the position that player is ahead of. Numbers are this season's once a player has 30 minutes, 2025-26's before that. Bench is the next five by minutes. Tap a player for the full numbers.

Depth chart

Projected rotation by position, starters outlined

Tennessee Tech

Guards

T. Mosquera32 min · TRT. Owens28 minD. Hackett28 min · TRC. Newton26 min · TRC. Hollenbeck17 min · TRC. GonzalesNew

Forwards

D. Christensen13 min · TRM. Turner8 minC. Sanders8 min · TRD. GreenNewS. ArnoldNewK. FoxNew

E Kentucky

Guards

J. Holt20 minD. King8 min · TRO. Hamama7 min · TRM. Miles1 minJ. McCarterNewD. VasserNew

Forwards

S. Lasu23 min · TRA. Ball20 minY. Paul17 minD. DujmovicNewJ. LoweNewM. CamaraNew

In order of minutes, from rosters as of today. ESPN lists players only as guards, forwards or centers, and no injury report exists for college basketball, so a player who is out may still show here.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams

ChartTable

Scoring

Points per game

TNTC70.3 #280

EKU77.5 #107

Points per possession

TNTC1.03 #287

EKU1.11 #123

Pace (possessions)

TNTC68.3 #214

EKU69.8 #128

Shooting

Effective FG%

TNTC48.9 #293

EKU52.1 #141

3-point %

TNTC31.1 #316

EKU35.0 #111

3-point attempt rate

TNTC36.5 #238

EKU50.8 #10

Free throw rate

TNTC35.5 #164

EKU30.7 #286

Possessions

Turnover rate

TNTC19.1 #325

EKU16.9 #194

Offensive rebound rate

TNTC31.3 #151

EKU32.5 #106

Assists per game

TNTC11.0 #337

EKU14.1 #139

Defense

Points allowed

TNTC75.6 #207

EKU83.1 #346

Points allowed per possession

TNTC1.11 #231

EKU1.19 #354

Opponent effective FG%

TNTC51.5 #186

EKU56.1 #346

Opponent 3-point %

TNTC35.8 #295

EKU36.2 #312

Turnovers forced

TNTC15.0 #285

EKU14.8 #304

Defensive rebound rate

TNTC69.3 #192

EKU68.3 #241

Steals per game

TNTC5.4 #312

EKU6.1 #228

Blocks per game

TNTC2.7 #275

EKU2.9 #245

TNTC		EKU
Scoring
70.3 #280	Points per game	77.5 #107
1.03 #287	Points per possession	1.11 #123
68.3 #214	Pace (possessions)	69.8 #128
Shooting
48.9 #293	Effective FG%	52.1 #141
31.1 #316	3-point %	35.0 #111
36.5 #238	3-point attempt rate	50.8 #10
35.5 #164	Free throw rate	30.7 #286
Possessions
19.1 #325	Turnover rate	16.9 #194
31.3 #151	Offensive rebound rate	32.5 #106
11.0 #337	Assists per game	14.1 #139
Defense
75.6 #207	Points allowed	83.1 #346
1.11 #231	Points allowed per possession	1.19 #354
51.5 #186	Opponent effective FG%	56.1 #346
35.8 #295	Opponent 3-point %	36.2 #312
15.0 #285	Turnovers forced	14.8 #304
69.3 #192	Defensive rebound rate	68.3 #241
5.4 #312	Steals per game	6.1 #228
2.7 #275	Blocks per game	2.9 #245

From the box scores. A longer bar is a better national rank, on every row; the better team's bar is solid. A green rank is near the top of Division I, a red one near the bottom. Pace and 3-point rate are styles, so they have no better side.

Tennessee Tech

10-18 in 2025-26 overall · 8-12 in conference · Southern Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ SE Missouri73–89
L@ UT Martin49–64
Wvs Lindenwood Lions72–57
Wvs SIUE62–52
W@ Southern Indiana Screaming Eagles82–74

A week or more of rest.

E Kentucky

9-21 in 2025-26 overall · 7-12 in conference · United Athletic Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Stetson76–92
Lvs Lipscomb77–80
Lvs Queens University Royals79–96
W@ Bellarmine95–92
Wvs West Georgia81–80

A week or more of rest.

Tennessee Tech Golden Eagles at Eastern Kentucky Colonels

What could decide it: EKU has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Tennessee Tech

E Kentucky

Tennessee Tech has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Tennessee Tech

E Kentucky