UT Martin Skyhawks at North Alabama Lions: Model Line and Edge

Wed, Dec 9, 7:30 PM ETCB&S Bank Arena at Flowers Hall · at North Alabama

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: UT Martin and North Alabama
UTM	This season	UNA
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 UNA 71–67 · win probability UNA 61%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 137.8

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: UTM has more of the edges

UTM 4, UNA 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

UTMBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: UTM 48.7 and allows 46.1; UNA 48.0 and allows 55.2

UTMBig

Three-pointers

UTM hits 30.4% and allows 30.2%; UNA hits 30.7% and allows 35.7%. Threes are 47.1% and 33.6% of their shots

UNASmall

UTM offense vs UNA defense

Offense 352nd of 366 against a defense 251st, on the model’s ratings

UTMSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: UTM 21.4%, UNA 17.5%. Forced: UTM 20.0%, UNA 14.6%

UTMSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: UTM 37.0%, UNA 31.2%. Defensive: UTM 68.0%, UNA 67.8%

UNASmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: UTM 37.4, UNA 37.6. Allowed: UTM 35.8, UNA 30.3

Context

Schedule so far

UTM has played the 364th-hardest schedule, UNA the 294th. A record against a soft schedule means less

UNASmall

Home court

UNA at home. This season: UNA 0-0 at home, UTM 0-0 away

Even

UNA offense vs UTM defense

Offense 308th of 366 against a defense 276th, on the model’s ratings

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: UTM 20%, UNA 16%. Transfers in: UTM 1, UNA 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Context

Tempo

About 66 possessions: UTM plays 66.2 a game (303rd fastest), UNA 66.2 (304th). Faster games mean more points

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	—	UNA -3.1	—
Total	—	137.8	—
Projected score	—	UTM 67.3 · UNA 70.5

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	UNA -1.8	—
1H total	64.5	—
1H projected score	UTM 31.4 · UNA 33.1	—

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
UTM LWLLL	15-15	50%	10-4	—
UNA WLWLL	10-18	36%	3-8	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
UTM UUUOU	9-21	30%	19-11
UNA OUUUU	12-16	43%	7-21

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
UTM	4-6 40%	4-6 40%	3-7 30%
UNA	2-8 20%	3-7 30%	4-6 40%

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

UT Martin

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 14	vs NWST	No recent meeting

North Alabama

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 15	@ MORE	L77–86LO

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

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

UTM 1–1 UNASeries tied · 2 games since 2021-22 · UTM 0-2 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Nov 11, 2024-25	UTM 69 @ UNA 87	UNA -8.5	UNA W
Nov 22, 2023-24	UNA 103 @ UTM 105	UTM -2.5	UNA W

ATS History · 2025-26

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

UT Martin

30 games played

Straight up

19-11

63% wins

Against the spread

15-15

50% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

9-21

30% overs · avg −8.1 pts vs the total

Straight up

19-1163%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

15-1550%

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

3 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

9-2130%

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

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 4	@UNLV	W 86-81	+16.5	W +21.5	146.5	O 167
Nov 12	@BRAD	W 78-67	+15.5	W +26.5	144.5	O 145
Nov 18	@FSU	L 73-87	+19.5	W +5.5	165.5	U 160
Nov 22	vsPV	W 69-68	-10.5	L −9.5	155.5	U 137
Nov 23	vsUSM	L 60-70	-1.5	L −11.5	146.5	U 130
Dec 2	vsCHSO	W 73-56	-3.5	W +13.5	147.5	U 129
Dec 7	vsALST	W 74-64	-6.5	W +3.5	144.5	U 138
Dec 10	@SIU	L 54-83	+8.5	L −20.5	146.5	U 137
Dec 18	@TNST	L 71-78	+2.5	L −4.5	141.5	O 149
Dec 20	@TNTC	W 86-62	-2.5	W +21.5	145.5	O 148
Jan 1	vsWIU	W 67-60	-13.5	L −6.5	140.5	U 127
Jan 3	vsEIU	W 65-61	-10.5	L −6.5	133.5	U 126
Jan 8	@MORE	W 76-68	-2.5	W +5.5	135.5	O 144
Jan 10	@USI	W 73-56	-5.5	W +11.5	137.5	U 129
Jan 15	vsSIUE	W 65-59	-7.5	L −1.5	131.5	U 124
Jan 17	vsLIN	W 69-55	-2.5	W +11.5	147.5	U 124
Jan 20	@SEMO	L 50-66	+2.5	L −13.5	140.5	U 116
Jan 29	@EIU	W 76-68	-3.5	W +4.5	129.5	O 144
Jan 31	@WIU	W 84-44	-10.5	W +29.5	137.5	U 128
Feb 3	vsLR	W 55-52	-6.5	L −3.5	139.5	U 107
Feb 5	vsUSI	W 76-54	-10.5	W +11.5	132.5	U 130
Feb 7	vsMORE	L 55-61	-8.5	L −14.5	136.5	U 116
Feb 12	@LIN	L 74-75	+1.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 149
Feb 14	@SIUE	W 81-76	-1.5	W +3.5	129.5	O 157
Feb 17	vsSEMO	L 53-56	-2.5	L −5.5	138.5	U 109
Feb 19	@LR	L 65-67	-2.5	L −4.5	136.5	U 132
Feb 26	vsTNTC	W 64-49	-7.5	W +7.5	134.5	U 113
Feb 28	vsTNST	L 42-67	-2.5	L −27.5	143.5	U 109
Mar 5	vsEIU	W 66-63	-7.5	L −4.5	126.5	O 129
Mar 6	vsTNST	L 55-68	+1.5	L −11.5	137.5	U 123

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

UNLV

W 86-81

+21.5

BRAD

W 78-67

+26.5

FSU

L 73-87

+5.5

W 69-68

−9.5

USM

L 60-70

−11.5

CHSO

W 73-56

+13.5

ALST

W 74-64

+3.5

SIU

L 54-83

−20.5

TNST

L 71-78

−4.5

TNTC

W 86-62

+21.5

WIU

W 67-60

−6.5

EIU

W 65-61

−6.5

W 76-68

+5.5

USI

W 73-56

+11.5

SIUE

W 65-59

−1.5

LIN

W 69-55

+11.5

SEMO

L 50-66

−13.5

EIU

W 76-68

+4.5

WIU

W 84-44

+29.5

W 55-52

−3.5

USI

W 76-54

+11.5

L 55-61

−14.5

LIN

L 74-75

+0.5

SIUE

W 81-76

+3.5

SEMO

L 53-56

−5.5

L 65-67

−4.5

TNTC

W 64-49

+7.5

TNST

L 42-67

−27.5

EIU

W 66-63

−4.5

TNST

L 55-68

−11.5

covered 15didn’t cover 15avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

UNLV

W 86-81

+20.5

BRAD

W 78-67

+0.5

FSU

L 73-87

−5.5

W 69-68

−18.5

USM

L 60-70

−16.5

CHSO

W 73-56

−18.5

ALST

W 74-64

−6.5

SIU

L 54-83

−9.5

TNST

L 71-78

+7.5

TNTC

W 86-62

+2.5

WIU

W 67-60

−13.5

EIU

W 65-61

−7.5

W 76-68

+8.5

USI

W 73-56

−8.5

SIUE

W 65-59

−7.5

LIN

W 69-55

−23.5

SEMO

L 50-66

−24.5

EIU

W 76-68

+14.5

WIU

W 84-44

−9.5

W 55-52

−32.5

USI

W 76-54

−2.5

L 55-61

−20.5

LIN

L 74-75

+3.5

SIUE

W 81-76

+27.5

SEMO

L 53-56

−29.5

L 65-67

−4.5

TNTC

W 64-49

−21.5

TNST

L 42-67

−34.5

EIU

W 66-63

+2.5

TNST

L 55-68

−14.5

over 9under 21avg −8.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

North Alabama

28 games played

Straight up

7-21

25% wins

Against the spread

10-18

36% covers · avg −4.3 pts vs the line

Over / Under

12-16

43% overs · avg −0.5 pts vs the total

Straight up

7-2125%

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

2 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

10-1836%

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

2 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

12-1643%

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

4 straight unders0 of last 4 over

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 5	@MSST	L 62-86	+24.5	W +0.5	151.5	U 148
Nov 11	vsNWST	W 87-83	-6.5	L −2.5	142.5	O 170
Nov 15	vsETSU	L 74-78	-1.5	L −5.5	145.5	O 152
Nov 17	@CLEM	L 61-81	+25.5	W +5.5	144.5	U 142
Nov 22	@UTC	L 57-71	+9.5	L −4.5	149.5	U 128
Dec 1	@JXST	W 73-66	+6.5	W +13.5	134.5	O 139
Dec 3	@SF	W 65-63	+16.5	W +18.5	145.5	U 128
Dec 15	@AAMU	L 60-68	-4.5	L −12.5	140.5	U 128
Dec 19	@LMU	L 57-91	+10.5	L −23.5	140.5	O 148
Jan 1	vsSTET	L 67-70	-9.5	L −12.5	142.5	U 137
Jan 3	vsFGCU	L 55-72	+2.5	L −14.5	147.5	U 127
Jan 8	@EKU	L 80-88	+5.5	L −2.5	148.5	O 168
Jan 10	@BELL	W 82-73	+4.5	W +13.5	146.5	O 155
Jan 15	vsUNF	L 91-105	-9.5	L −23.5	157.5	O 196
Jan 17	vsJAX	L 68-90	-1.5	L −23.5	133.5	O 158
Jan 21	@QUC	L 62-87	+12.5	L −12.5	162.5	U 149
Jan 29	@FGCU	L 64-72	+9.5	W +1.5	147.5	U 136
Jan 31	@STET	W 68-66	+1.5	W +3.5	144.5	U 134
Feb 4	@CARK	L 60-81	+10.5	L −10.5	147.5	U 141
Feb 7	@APSU	L 62-91	+12.5	L −16.5	145.5	O 153
Feb 9	vsCARK	L 65-72	+6.5	L −0.5	145.5	U 137
Feb 11	vsWGA	L 73-82	-1.5	L −10.5	145.5	O 155
Feb 15	vsEKU	W 84-78	+4.5	W +10.5	150.5	O 162
Feb 18	vsQUC	L 78-85	+8.5	W +1.5	156.5	O 163
Feb 21	@LIP	L 51-73	+12.5	L −9.5	149.5	U 124
Feb 25	vsBELL	W 73-68	+2.5	W +7.5	146.5	U 141
Feb 28	@WGA	L 63-75	+4.5	L −7.5	146.5	U 138
Mar 4	vsFGCU	L 58-69	+8.5	L −2.5	139.5	U 127

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

MSST

L 62-86

+0.5

NWST

W 87-83

−2.5

ETSU

L 74-78

−5.5

CLEM

L 61-81

+5.5

UTC

L 57-71

−4.5

JXST

W 73-66

+13.5

W 65-63

+18.5

AAMU

L 60-68

−12.5

LMU

L 57-91

−23.5

STET

L 67-70

−12.5

FGCU

L 55-72

−14.5

EKU

L 80-88

−2.5

BELL

W 82-73

+13.5

UNF

L 91-105

−23.5

JAX

L 68-90

−23.5

QUC

L 62-87

−12.5

FGCU

L 64-72

+1.5

STET

W 68-66

+3.5

CARK

L 60-81

−10.5

APSU

L 62-91

−16.5

CARK

L 65-72

−0.5

WGA

L 73-82

−10.5

EKU

W 84-78

+10.5

QUC

L 78-85

+1.5

LIP

L 51-73

−9.5

BELL

W 73-68

+7.5

WGA

L 63-75

−7.5

FGCU

L 58-69

−2.5

covered 10didn’t cover 18avg −4.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

MSST

L 62-86

−3.5

NWST

W 87-83

+27.5

ETSU

L 74-78

+6.5

CLEM

L 61-81

−2.5

UTC

L 57-71

−21.5

JXST

W 73-66

+4.5

W 65-63

−17.5

AAMU

L 60-68

−12.5

LMU

L 57-91

+7.5

STET

L 67-70

−5.5

FGCU

L 55-72

−20.5

EKU

L 80-88

+19.5

BELL

W 82-73

+8.5

UNF

L 91-105

+38.5

JAX

L 68-90

+24.5

QUC

L 62-87

−13.5

FGCU

L 64-72

−11.5

STET

W 68-66

−10.5

CARK

L 60-81

−6.5

APSU

L 62-91

+7.5

CARK

L 65-72

−8.5

WGA

L 73-82

+9.5

EKU

W 84-78

+11.5

QUC

L 78-85

+6.5

LIP

L 51-73

−25.5

BELL

W 73-68

−5.5

WGA

L 63-75

−8.5

FGCU

L 58-69

−12.5

over 12under 16avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

North Alabama has the better starters

Position by position: UT Martin 0, North Alabama 2, even 3

UT MartinBetterNorth Alabama

G F. Petkovski5.5 pts · 3.1 reb · 2.6 ast Score 5

UNABig

G M. Evbagharu TR9.2 pts · 7 reb · 3.1 ast Score 43

G D. Remagen TR1.6 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.7 ast Not ranked

No call

G B. Patton6 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.5 ast Score 17

G E. Moya NEWNo Division I numbers yet Not ranked

No call

G J. Clark TR6.1 pts · 1.9 reb · 0.3 ast Not ranked

F V. Khryapa2.2 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.9 ast Score 5

UNABig

F D. Yates TR6.5 pts · 3.6 reb · 0.6 ast Score 59

F G. Sulaberidze NEWNo Division I numbers yet Not ranked

No call

F J. Whitted TR2.8 pts · 3.5 reb · 0.8 ast Score 9

UT MartinBetterNorth Alabama

UTM offense352nd of 366 · -13.0

UNASmall

UNA defense251st of 366 · -6.6

UTM defense276th of 366 · -7.0

Even

UNA offense308th of 366 · -9.6

Backcourt-4.5 · 3 players

UNASmall

Backcourt-3.3 · 3 players

Frontcourt-1.8 · 2 players

Even

Frontcourt-1.6 · 2 players

BenchNo numbers yet

No call

Bench-3.8 · 2 players

Score, worst to bestUTM betterUNA 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

UT Martin

Guards

F. Petkovski27 minD. Remagen11 min · TRE. MoyaNewR. ConleyNewS. SavkovNewN. StuknysNew

Forwards

V. Khryapa14 minG. SulaberidzeNewA. BanceviciusNewO. SambeNewG. BubnysNewA. VilkasNew

North Alabama

Guards

M. Evbagharu34 min · TRB. Patton18 minJ. Clark15 min · TRQ. Lax15 min · TRC. Graham-Howard14 minC. HarrisNew

Forwards

D. Yates17 min · TRJ. Whitted15 min · TRD. CarterNewA. OsmanNewJ. GulleyNew

Centers

M. ChaffeeNew

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

UTM67.8 #319

UNA67.9 #317

Points per possession

UTM1.03 #294

UNA1.02 #300

Pace (possessions)

UTM66.2 #303

UNA66.2 #304

Shooting

Effective FG%

UTM48.7 #297

UNA48.0 #312

3-point %

UTM30.4 #337

UNA30.7 #327

3-point attempt rate

UTM47.1 #32

UNA33.6 #306

Free throw rate

UTM37.4 #118

UNA37.6 #111

Possessions

Turnover rate

UTM21.4 #358

UNA17.5 #238

Offensive rebound rate

UTM37.0 #17

UNA31.2 #160

Assists per game

UTM12.9 #222

UNA9.7 #363

Defense

Points allowed

UTM64.7 #5

UNA78.0 #267

Points allowed per possession

UTM0.98 #11

UNA1.18 #350

Opponent effective FG%

UTM46.1 #11

UNA55.2 #337

Opponent 3-point %

UTM30.2 #9

UNA35.7 #292

Turnovers forced

UTM20.0 #24

UNA14.6 #319

Defensive rebound rate

UTM68.0 #259

UNA67.8 #268

Steals per game

UTM8.3 #27

UNA6.3 #202

Blocks per game

UTM4.1 #65

UNA3.7 #112

UTM		UNA
Scoring
67.8 #319	Points per game	67.9 #317
1.03 #294	Points per possession	1.02 #300
66.2 #303	Pace (possessions)	66.2 #304
Shooting
48.7 #297	Effective FG%	48.0 #312
30.4 #337	3-point %	30.7 #327
47.1 #32	3-point attempt rate	33.6 #306
37.4 #118	Free throw rate	37.6 #111
Possessions
21.4 #358	Turnover rate	17.5 #238
37.0 #17	Offensive rebound rate	31.2 #160
12.9 #222	Assists per game	9.7 #363
Defense
64.7 #5	Points allowed	78.0 #267
0.98 #11	Points allowed per possession	1.18 #350
46.1 #11	Opponent effective FG%	55.2 #337
30.2 #9	Opponent 3-point %	35.7 #292
20.0 #24	Turnovers forced	14.6 #319
68.0 #259	Defensive rebound rate	67.8 #268
8.3 #27	Steals per game	6.3 #202
4.1 #65	Blocks per game	3.7 #112

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.

UT Martin

19-11 in 2025-26 overall · 14-8 in conference · Ohio Valley Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Tennessee St55–68
Wvs E Illinois66–63
Lvs Tennessee St42–67
Wvs Tennessee Tech64–49
L@ Little Rock65–67

A week or more of rest.

North Alabama

7-21 in 2025-26 overall · 4-15 in conference · United Athletic Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs FGCU58–69
L@ West Georgia63–75
Wvs Bellarmine73–68
L@ Lipscomb51–73
Lvs Queens University Royals78–85

A week or more of rest.

UT Martin Skyhawks at North Alabama Lions

What could decide it: UTM has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

UT Martin

North Alabama

North Alabama has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

UT Martin

North Alabama