Milwaukee Panthers at USC Trojans: Model Line and Edge

Mon, Nov 2, 10:30 PM ETGalen Center · at USC

#36USCUSC AP #21

LineUSC -26.5moved 1 toward USC

Total157.5up 1 from 156.5

Season records: Milwaukee and USC
MILW	This season	USC
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 USC 91–67 · win probability USC 98%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Spread

Total

Winner

Line

USC -26.5

moved 1 toward USC

Total

157.5

model 157.8

Model edge

MILW by 2

model vs market

Public on the spread

98% MILW

63% of the money

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: USC has more of the edges

MILW 2, USC 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

USCBig

USC offense vs MILW defense

Offense 27th of 366 against a defense 297th, on the model’s ratings

USCBig

Free throws

Free throw rate: MILW 32.1, USC 44.2. Allowed: MILW 35.9, USC 33.4

Context

Schedule so far

MILW has played the 191st-hardest schedule, USC the 42nd. A record against a soft schedule means less

USCBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: MILW 49.9 and allows 55.5; USC 50.4 and allows 49.7

USCBig

Three-pointers

MILW hits 32.3% and allows 36.5%; USC hits 31.7% and allows 30.9%. Threes are 38.1% and 34.1% of their shots

USCBig

MILW offense vs USC defense

Offense 180th of 366 against a defense 55th, on the model’s ratings

MILWSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: MILW 33.0%, USC 32.4%. Defensive: MILW 70.8%, USC 67.8%

Context

Tempo

About 71 possessions: MILW plays 69.1 a game (174th fastest), USC 72.4 (25th). Faster games mean more points

MILWSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: MILW 15.3%, USC 17.4%. Forced: MILW 15.8%, USC 16.4%

USCSmall

Home court

USC at home. This season: USC 0-0 at home, MILW 0-0 away

USCSmall

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: MILW 40%, USC 64%. Transfers in: MILW 3, USC 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

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

How games like this went

Division I games since 2023-24, closing lines

Situation	Games	Favorite won	Favorite covered	Went over
Home favorites of 20 or more	1165	99%	50%	52%
Non-conference games at this spread	1090	99%	50%	52%
Lines that moved 1+ toward the favorite	6763	75%	50%	51%
Games with a total of 155 to 159.5	1555	74%	51%	49%

A bet at standard prices needs 52.4% to break even, and most situations sit near 50%. Past rates, not a prediction.

Market

Open → current

Spread

OpenUSC -25.5

1 → USC

NowUSC -26.5

1 pt toward USC

Total

Open156.5

▲ 1

Now157.5

Up 1 since the open

Moneyline

MILW +3300 · USC -10000

Line movement

Median of 8 sportsbooks, pre-tip-off · tap a dot

Opened USC -25.5 · now USC -26 · moved 0.5 toward USCmodel USC -24.5

model USC -24.5

Openline modelNow

Pre-game lines only (ESPN, DraftKings first). After tip-off the line shown is the closing line.

Public betting

Share of bets and of money

MILW +26.5Spread

USC -26.5

Bets

98%

Money

63%37%

Money is 35 pts ahead of bets on USC -26.5

Over 157.5TotalUnder 157.5

Bets

21%79%

Money

27%73%

MILWWinner

USC

Bets

96%

Money

36%64%

Money is 32 pts ahead of bets on MILW

Sports Betting Dime, an average of sportsbooks. Read Mon, Nov 2, 4:41 AM ET. ⓘ

Books

8 sportsbooks · current prices

SpreadTotalMoneyline

Book	Spread		Total		Moneyline
Book	MILW	USC	Over	Under	MILW	USC
BetMGMMGM	-26.5-110	+26.5-110	157.5-115	157.5-105	+3300	-10000
BetOnline.agBetOnline.ag	-26-110	+26-110	158-115	158-105	—	—
BetRiversBetRivers	-26.5-109	+26.5-117	158.5-114	158.5-112	—	—
BetUSBetUS	-26-104	+26-116	158-115	158-105	—	—
BovadaBovada	-26-110	+26-110	157.5-105	157.5-115	—	—
DraftKingsDK	-25.5-102	+25.5-118	157.5-112	157.5-108	+2500	-9000
FanDuelFD	-25.5-105	+25.5-115	157.5-110	157.5-110	+3500	-20000
LowVig.agLowVig.ag	-26-106	+26-106	158-113	158-103	—	—

Prices from The Odds API, updated 5:30 AM ET. Green = best price in the column.

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	USC -26.5	USC -24.5	MILW +2.0
Total	157.5	157.8	Over 0.3
Projected score	—	MILW 66.7 · USC 91.1

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	USC -14.4	—
1H total	73.7	—
1H projected score	MILW 29.6 · USC 44.1	—

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
MILW WLLWL	11-20	35%	5-12	5-11
USC LLLLL	13-18	42%	6-9	7-10

Venue/role: MILW away, as underdog; USC home, as favorite. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
MILW OOUUU	14-17	45%	11-20
USC UUOOO	17-14	55%	17-14

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
MILW	3-7 30%	4-6 40%	4-6 40%
USC	2-8 20%	2-8 20%	6-4 60%

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

Milwaukee

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 4	@ SCU	No recent meeting
Nov 11	@ INST	L68–70LU
Nov 13	@ TCU	No recent meeting

USC

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 8	vs WICH	No recent meeting
Nov 11	@ CAL	L66–71LU
Nov 15	vs UAPB	No recent meeting

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

Milwaukee

31 games played

Straight up

11-20

35% wins

Against the spread

11-20

35% covers · avg −3 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-17

45% overs · avg −1 pts vs the total

Straight up

11-2035%

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

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

11-2035%

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

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

14-1745%

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

3 straight unders1 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 3	vsHAMP	W 90-86	-5.5	L −1.5	146.5	O 176
Nov 8	@WOF	L 76-86	-3.5	L −13.5	150.5	O 162
Nov 10	vsLR	W 92-72	-3.5	W +16.5	156.5	O 164
Nov 12	@IU	L 70-101	+24.5	L −6.5	165.5	O 171
Nov 14	@TTU	L 63-80	+27.5	W +10.5	165.5	U 143
Nov 22	@WICH	L 58-75	+10.5	L −6.5	158.5	U 133
Nov 29	@AKR	L 81-105	+12.5	L −11.5	166.5	O 186
Dec 6	vsRMU	W 74-72	-4.5	L −2.5	153.5	U 146
Dec 14	vsINST	L 68-70	-2.5	L −4.5	159.5	U 138
Dec 19	vsSDST	W 88-87	+1.5	W +2.5	151.5	O 175
Dec 21	@CLE	W 81-71	-6.5	W +3.5	160.5	U 152
Dec 29	vsPFW	W 77-55	-3.5	W +18.5	156.5	U 132
Dec 30	@WIS	L 60-80	+19.5	L −0.5	157.5	U 140
Jan 1	@WRST	L 70-76	+3.5	L −2.5	147.5	U 146
Jan 5	@GB	L 76-79	-3.5	L −6.5	144.5	O 155
Jan 9	vsNKU	L 67-85	-1.5	L −19.5	157.5	U 152
Jan 11	vsIUIN	W 95-83	-8.5	W +3.5	165.5	O 178
Jan 15	vsOAK	L 60-73	+2.5	L −10.5	166.5	U 133
Jan 18	@PFW	L 82-100	+3.5	L −14.5	148.5	O 182
Jan 22	@RMU	L 76-88	+4.5	L −7.5	152.5	O 164
Jan 24	@YSU	W 65-64	+6.5	W +7.5	151.5	U 129
Jan 30	vsWRST	L 69-76	+2.5	L −4.5	151.5	U 145
Feb 1	vsCLE	L 88-90	-9.5	L −11.5	160.5	O 178
Feb 4	vsDETM	L 63-76	-6.5	L −19.5	155.5	U 139
Feb 7	@NKU	L 62-67	+6.5	W +1.5	156.5	U 129
Feb 10	@IUIN	W 92-88	-2.5	W +1.5	158.5	O 180
Feb 15	vsGB	W 75-72	-2.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 147
Feb 20	@DETM	L 86-91	-1.5	L −6.5	153.5	O 177
Feb 22	@OAK	L 70-81	+5.5	L −5.5	159.5	U 151
Feb 25	vsYSU	W 78-65	+1.5	W +14.5	147.5	U 143
Mar 4	@DETM	L 63-84	+1.5	L −19.5	151.5	U 147

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

HAMP

W 90-86

−1.5

WOF

L 76-86

−13.5

W 92-72

+16.5

L 70-101

−6.5

TTU

L 63-80

+10.5

WICH

L 58-75

−6.5

AKR

L 81-105

−11.5

RMU

W 74-72

−2.5

INST

L 68-70

−4.5

SDST

W 88-87

+2.5

CLE

W 81-71

+3.5

PFW

W 77-55

+18.5

WIS

L 60-80

−0.5

WRST

L 70-76

−2.5

L 76-79

−6.5

NKU

L 67-85

−19.5

IUIN

W 95-83

+3.5

OAK

L 60-73

−10.5

PFW

L 82-100

−14.5

RMU

L 76-88

−7.5

YSU

W 65-64

+7.5

WRST

L 69-76

−4.5

CLE

L 88-90

−11.5

DETM

L 63-76

−19.5

NKU

L 62-67

+1.5

IUIN

W 92-88

+1.5

W 75-72

+0.5

DETM

L 86-91

−6.5

OAK

L 70-81

−5.5

YSU

W 78-65

+14.5

DETM

L 63-84

−19.5

covered 11didn’t cover 20avg −3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

HAMP

W 90-86

+29.5

WOF

L 76-86

+11.5

W 92-72

+7.5

L 70-101

+5.5

TTU

L 63-80

−22.5

WICH

L 58-75

−25.5

AKR

L 81-105

+19.5

RMU

W 74-72

−7.5

INST

L 68-70

−21.5

SDST

W 88-87

+23.5

CLE

W 81-71

−8.5

PFW

W 77-55

−24.5

WIS

L 60-80

−17.5

WRST

L 70-76

−1.5

L 76-79

+10.5

NKU

L 67-85

−5.5

IUIN

W 95-83

+12.5

OAK

L 60-73

−33.5

PFW

L 82-100

+33.5

RMU

L 76-88

+11.5

YSU

W 65-64

−22.5

WRST

L 69-76

−6.5

CLE

L 88-90

+17.5

DETM

L 63-76

−16.5

NKU

L 62-67

−27.5

IUIN

W 92-88

+21.5

W 75-72

+1.5

DETM

L 86-91

+23.5

OAK

L 70-81

−8.5

YSU

W 78-65

−4.5

DETM

L 63-84

−4.5

over 14under 17avg −1 ptslonger = bigger margin

USC

31 games played

Straight up

17-14

55% wins

Against the spread

13-18

42% covers · avg −3.5 pts vs the line

Over / Under

17-14

55% overs · avg +2.3 pts vs the total

Straight up

17-1455%

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

8 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

13-1842%

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

7 straight misses ATS0 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

17-1455%

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

3 straight overs3 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 3	vsCP	W 94-64	-24.5	W +5.5	163.5	U 158
Nov 9	vsMAN	W 114-83	-28.5	W +2.5	155.5	O 197
Nov 14	vsILST	W 87-67	-15.5	W +4.5	155.5	U 154
Nov 20	vsTROY	W 107-106	-18.5	L −17.5	159.5	O 213
Nov 24	vsBOIS	W 70-67	-3.5	L −0.5	155.5	U 137
Nov 25	vsHALL	W 83-81	-6.5	L −4.5	145.5	O 164
Nov 26	vsASU	W 88-75	-4.5	W +8.5	161.5	O 163
Dec 2	@ORE	W 82-77	-2.5	W +2.5	154.5	O 159
Dec 6	vsWASH	L 76-84	-4.5	L −12.5	154.5	O 160
Dec 9	@USD	W 94-81	-14.5	L −1.5	158.5	O 175
Dec 14	vsWSU	W 68-61	-12.5	L −5.5	156.5	U 129
Dec 17	vsUTSA	W 97-70	-25.5	W +1.5	157.5	O 167
Jan 2	@MICH	L 66-96	+22.5	L −7.5	173.5	U 162
Jan 5	@MSU	L 51-80	+11.5	L −17.5	151.5	U 131
Jan 9	@MINN	W 70-69	+3.5	W +4.5	147.5	U 139
Jan 13	vsMD	W 88-71	-9.5	W +7.5	150.5	O 159
Jan 17	vsPUR	L 64-69	+9.5	W +4.5	155.5	U 133
Jan 21	vsNU	L 68-74	-6.5	L −12.5	149.5	U 142
Jan 25	@WIS	W 73-71	+7.5	W +9.5	158.5	U 144
Jan 28	@IOWA	L 72-73	+9.5	W +8.5	141.5	O 145
Jan 31	vsRUTG	W 78-75	-11.5	L −8.5	146.5	O 153
Feb 3	vsIU	W 81-75	+1.5	W +7.5	153.5	O 156
Feb 8	@PSU	W 77-75	-3.5	L −1.5	157.5	U 152
Feb 11	@OSU	L 82-89	+7.5	W +0.5	152.5	O 171
Feb 18	vsILL	L 65-101	+8.5	L −27.5	151.5	O 166
Feb 21	vsORE	L 70-71	-5.5	L −6.5	149.5	U 141
Feb 24	@UCLA	L 62-81	+6.5	L −12.5	150.5	U 143
Feb 28	vsNEB	L 67-82	+5.5	L −9.5	149.5	U 149
Mar 4	@WASH	L 72-91	+5.5	L −13.5	150.5	O 163
Mar 7	vsUCLA	L 68-89	+4.5	L −16.5	151.5	O 157
Mar 11	vsWASH	L 79-83	+3.5	L −0.5	154.5	O 162

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

W 94-64

+5.5

MAN

W 114-83

+2.5

ILST

W 87-67

+4.5

TROY

W 107-106

−17.5

BOIS

W 70-67

−0.5

HALL

W 83-81

−4.5

ASU

W 88-75

+8.5

ORE

W 82-77

+2.5

WASH

L 76-84

−12.5

USD

W 94-81

−1.5

WSU

W 68-61

−5.5

UTSA

W 97-70

+1.5

MICH

L 66-96

−7.5

MSU

L 51-80

−17.5

MINN

W 70-69

+4.5

W 88-71

+7.5

PUR

L 64-69

+4.5

L 68-74

−12.5

WIS

W 73-71

+9.5

IOWA

L 72-73

+8.5

RUTG

W 78-75

−8.5

W 81-75

+7.5

PSU

W 77-75

−1.5

OSU

L 82-89

+0.5

ILL

L 65-101

−27.5

ORE

L 70-71

−6.5

UCLA

L 62-81

−12.5

NEB

L 67-82

−9.5

WASH

L 72-91

−13.5

UCLA

L 68-89

−16.5

WASH

L 79-83

−0.5

covered 13didn’t cover 18avg −3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

W 94-64

−5.5

MAN

W 114-83

+41.5

ILST

W 87-67

−1.5

TROY

W 107-106

+53.5

BOIS

W 70-67

−18.5

HALL

W 83-81

+18.5

ASU

W 88-75

+1.5

ORE

W 82-77

+4.5

WASH

L 76-84

+5.5

USD

W 94-81

+16.5

WSU

W 68-61

−27.5

UTSA

W 97-70

+9.5

MICH

L 66-96

−11.5

MSU

L 51-80

−20.5

MINN

W 70-69

−8.5

W 88-71

+8.5

PUR

L 64-69

−22.5

L 68-74

−7.5

WIS

W 73-71

−14.5

IOWA

L 72-73

+3.5

RUTG

W 78-75

+6.5

W 81-75

+2.5

PSU

W 77-75

−5.5

OSU

L 82-89

+18.5

ILL

L 65-101

+14.5

ORE

L 70-71

−8.5

UCLA

L 62-81

−7.5

NEB

L 67-82

−0.5

WASH

L 72-91

+12.5

UCLA

L 68-89

+5.5

WASH

L 79-83

+7.5

over 17under 14avg +2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

USC has the better starters

Position by position: Milwaukee 0, USC 4, even 1

MilwaukeeBetterUSC

G I. Dorceus5.3 pts · 1.5 reb · 3.6 ast Score 14

USCBig

G J. Cox TR18.4 pts · 5.3 reb · 5.2 ast Score 96

G T. Norman TR2.2 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.7 ast Score 55

USCSmall

G J. Jones15.5 pts · 8.8 reb · 2.6 ast Score 86

F D. Jovanovich12.3 pts · 6.1 reb · 2.2 ast Score 78

USCSmall

G R. Rice20.3 pts · 3.3 reb · 6 ast Score 97

F C. Jackson9.7 pts · 2.8 reb · 0.9 ast Score 67

USCSmall

G I. Bruns TR20.9 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.2 ast Score 88

F S. Murchison0.7 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.1 ast Not ranked

No call

F J. Cofie9.8 pts · 6.8 reb · 2 ast Score 77

MilwaukeeBetterUSC

MILW offense180th of 366 · -5.5

USCSmall

USC defense55th of 366 · +1.4

MILW defense297th of 366 · -7.6

USCBig

USC offense27th of 366 · +7.0

Backcourt-2.5 · 2 players

USCBig

Backcourt+15.2 · 4 players

Frontcourt+1.9 · 3 players

Even

Frontcourt+1.7 · 1 player

Bench-0.2 · 2 players

USCBig

Bench+2.9 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestMILW betterUSC 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

Milwaukee

Guards

I. Dorceus22 minT. Norman8 min · TRJ. Hansen1 min · TRJ. LovelaceNewD. OmwenoNewA. WomackNew

Forwards

D. Jovanovich31 minC. Jackson23 minS. Murchison5 minA. Amadou3 min · TRN. MalosaNewB. AkoroNew

USC

Guards

J. Cox35 min · TRJ. Jones35 minR. Rice34 minI. Bruns32 min · TRK. Lewis30 min · TRA. Hunkin-Claytor28 min · TR

Forwards

J. Cofie31 minJ. Hughes28 min · TRA. RatliffNewC. CollinsNew

Centers

E. Reibe14 min · TRD. RatliffNewO. Joe AguNew

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

MILW74.7 #173

USC77.8 #97

Points per possession

MILW1.09 #172

USC1.07 #199

Pace (possessions)

MILW69.1 #174

USC72.4 #25

Shooting

Effective FG%

MILW49.9 #242

USC50.4 #225

3-point %

MILW32.3 #266

USC31.7 #299

3-point attempt rate

MILW38.1 #212

USC34.1 #292

Free throw rate

MILW32.1 #256

USC44.2 #8

Possessions

Turnover rate

MILW15.3 #85

USC17.4 #228

Offensive rebound rate

MILW33.0 #88

USC32.4 #113

Assists per game

MILW12.9 #220

USC14.9 #92

Defense

Points allowed

MILW79.9 #317

USC78.4 #277

Points allowed per possession

MILW1.15 #328

USC1.08 #173

Opponent effective FG%

MILW55.5 #340

USC49.7 #89

Opponent 3-point %

MILW36.5 #329

USC30.9 #31

Turnovers forced

MILW15.8 #232

USC16.4 #198

Defensive rebound rate

MILW70.8 #121

USC67.8 #269

Steals per game

MILW6.5 #176

USC6.2 #217

Blocks per game

MILW3.0 #230

USC5.5 #8

MILW		USC
Scoring
74.7 #173	Points per game	77.8 #97
1.09 #172	Points per possession	1.07 #199
69.1 #174	Pace (possessions)	72.4 #25
Shooting
49.9 #242	Effective FG%	50.4 #225
32.3 #266	3-point %	31.7 #299
38.1 #212	3-point attempt rate	34.1 #292
32.1 #256	Free throw rate	44.2 #8
Possessions
15.3 #85	Turnover rate	17.4 #228
33.0 #88	Offensive rebound rate	32.4 #113
12.9 #220	Assists per game	14.9 #92
Defense
79.9 #317	Points allowed	78.4 #277
1.15 #328	Points allowed per possession	1.08 #173
55.5 #340	Opponent effective FG%	49.7 #89
36.5 #329	Opponent 3-point %	30.9 #31
15.8 #232	Turnovers forced	16.4 #198
70.8 #121	Defensive rebound rate	67.8 #269
6.5 #176	Steals per game	6.2 #217
3.0 #230	Blocks per game	5.5 #8

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.

Milwaukee

11-20 in 2025-26 overall · 8-13 in conference · Horizon League

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Detroit Mercy63–84
Wvs Youngstown St78–65
L@ Oakland70–81
L@ Detroit Mercy86–91
Wvs Green Bay75–72

A week or more of rest.

USC

17-14 in 2025-26 overall · 7-14 in conference · Big Ten Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Washington79–83
Lvs UCLA68–89
L@ Washington72–91
Lvs Nebraska67–82
L@ UCLA62–81

A week or more of rest.