Western Michigan Broncos at Purdue Fort Wayne Mastodons: Model Line and Edge

Thu, Nov 12, 7:00 PM ETMemorial Coliseum (IN) · at Purdue FW

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: W Michigan and Purdue FW
WMU	This season	PFW
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 WMU 77–76 · win probability WMU 54%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 153.5

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: PFW has more of the edges

WMU 3, PFW 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

PFWBig

Turnovers

Turnover rate: WMU 16.8%, PFW 14.5%. Forced: WMU 13.4%, PFW 19.1%

WMUBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: WMU 30.5%, PFW 22.9%. Defensive: WMU 70.9%, PFW 65.5%

WMUBig

WMU offense vs PFW defense

Offense 137th of 366 against a defense 291st, on the model’s ratings

PFWSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: WMU 32.8, PFW 30.6. Allowed: WMU 37.5, PFW 28.6

WMUSmall

Three-pointers

WMU hits 35.3% and allows 36.1%; PFW hits 34.2% and allows 37.9%. Threes are 36.1% and 45.4% of their shots

PFWSmall

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: WMU 0%, PFW 29%. Transfers in: WMU 9, PFW 2. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

PFWSmall

Home court

PFW at home. This season: PFW 0-0 at home, WMU 0-0 away

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: WMU 49.9 and allows 54.4; PFW 52.6 and allows 56.1

Even

PFW offense vs WMU defense

Offense 218th of 366 against a defense 253rd, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

WMU has played the 175th-hardest schedule, PFW the 209th. A record against a soft schedule means less

Context

Tempo

About 69 possessions: WMU plays 69.3 a game (160th fastest), PFW 69.0 (179th). 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	—	WMU -1.2	—
Total	—	153.5	—
Projected score	—	WMU 77.4 · PFW 76.1

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	WMU -0.9	—
1H total	71.7	—
1H projected score	WMU 36.3 · PFW 35.4	—

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
WMU LWWLW	16-13	55%	8-8	—
PFW LWLWL	13-16	45%	5-7	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
WMU OOUOO	18-11	62%	9-20
PFW OOUOU	16-13	55%	14-15

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
WMU	2-8 20%	4-6 40%	7-3 70%
PFW	4-6 40%	4-6 40%	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

W Michigan

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 15	@ USI	W88–74WO
Nov 20	@ MSM	W83–60WU
Dec 2	vs BUF	L71–88LO

Purdue FW

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 15	@ EIU	No recent meeting
Nov 18	@ BRAD	No recent meeting
Nov 24	@ SEMO	W89–80LO

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

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

WMU 2–0 PFWWMU leads · 2 games since 2021-22 · WMU has won the last 2 meetings · WMU 2-0 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Nov 12, 2025-26	PFW 71 @ WMU 83	WMU +3.5	WMU W
Nov 27, 2021-22	PFW 85 vs WMU 93	WMU +4.5	WMU W

ATS History · 2025-26

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

W Michigan

29 games played

Straight up

9-20

31% wins

Against the spread

16-13

55% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

18-11

62% overs · avg +1.5 pts vs the total

Straight up

9-2031%

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

3 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

16-1355%

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

3 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

18-1162%

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

2 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	vsCCU	W 76-71	-2.5	W +2.5	146.5	O 147
Nov 9	@CAM	L 82-91	+9.5	W +0.5	152.5	O 173
Nov 12	vsPFW	W 83-71	+3.5	W +15.5	161.5	U 154
Nov 16	@SDAK	L 78-83	+3.5	L −1.5	172.5	U 161
Nov 20	@OSU	L 58-91	+26.5	L −6.5	159.5	U 149
Nov 23	vsMSM	W 83-60	-1.5	W +21.5	150.5	U 143
Nov 29	@VAL	L 55-84	+4.5	L −24.5	146.5	U 139
Dec 3	vsUSI	W 88-74	-5.5	W +8.5	150.5	O 162
Dec 6	@SIUE	W 83-73	+5.5	W +15.5	139.5	O 156
Dec 14	@IOWA	L 51-91	+25.5	L −14.5	137.5	O 142
Dec 20	vsBUF	L 71-88	+2.5	L −14.5	150.5	O 159
Dec 30	@TOL	L 79-84	+10.5	W +5.5	160.5	O 163
Jan 6	@M-OH	L 76-87	+14.5	W +3.5	160.5	O 163
Jan 10	vsEMU	W 79-62	+1.5	W +18.5	145.5	U 141
Jan 13	vsMASS	L 82-85	+5.5	W +2.5	157.5	O 167
Jan 17	@AKR	L 89-104	+21.5	W +6.5	163.5	O 193
Jan 20	vsBGSU	L 54-72	+6.5	L −11.5	152.5	U 126
Jan 24	vsCMU	W 77-65	-5.5	W +6.5	148.5	U 142
Jan 27	@NIU	L 65-85	+1.5	L −18.5	146.5	O 150
Feb 3	@OHIO	L 71-91	+10.5	L −9.5	155.5	O 162
Feb 7	@TXST	L 61-77	+6.5	L −9.5	146.5	U 138
Feb 11	vsTOL	L 79-90	+6.5	L −4.5	154.5	O 169
Feb 14	@EMU	W 76-62	+6.5	W +20.5	143.5	U 138
Feb 17	vsAKR	L 73-90	+14.5	L −2.5	160.5	O 163
Feb 21	@CMU	L 70-83	+3.5	L −9.5	150.5	O 153
Feb 24	@BGSU	W 88-79	+11.5	W +20.5	149.5	O 167
Feb 27	vsM-OH	L 67-69	+12.5	W +10.5	161.5	U 136
Mar 3	vsBALL	L 71-74	-1.5	L −4.5	138.5	O 145
Mar 6	@KENT	L 78-86	+13.5	W +5.5	157.5	O 164

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

CCU

W 76-71

+2.5

CAM

L 82-91

+0.5

PFW

W 83-71

+15.5

SDAK

L 78-83

−1.5

OSU

L 58-91

−6.5

MSM

W 83-60

+21.5

VAL

L 55-84

−24.5

USI

W 88-74

+8.5

SIUE

W 83-73

+15.5

IOWA

L 51-91

−14.5

BUF

L 71-88

−14.5

TOL

L 79-84

+5.5

M-OH

L 76-87

+3.5

EMU

W 79-62

+18.5

MASS

L 82-85

+2.5

AKR

L 89-104

+6.5

BGSU

L 54-72

−11.5

CMU

W 77-65

+6.5

NIU

L 65-85

−18.5

OHIO

L 71-91

−9.5

TXST

L 61-77

−9.5

TOL

L 79-90

−4.5

EMU

W 76-62

+20.5

AKR

L 73-90

−2.5

CMU

L 70-83

−9.5

BGSU

W 88-79

+20.5

M-OH

L 67-69

+10.5

BALL

L 71-74

−4.5

KENT

L 78-86

+5.5

covered 16didn’t cover 13avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

CCU

W 76-71

+0.5

CAM

L 82-91

+20.5

PFW

W 83-71

−7.5

SDAK

L 78-83

−11.5

OSU

L 58-91

−10.5

MSM

W 83-60

−7.5

VAL

L 55-84

−7.5

USI

W 88-74

+11.5

SIUE

W 83-73

+16.5

IOWA

L 51-91

+4.5

BUF

L 71-88

+8.5

TOL

L 79-84

+2.5

M-OH

L 76-87

+2.5

EMU

W 79-62

−4.5

MASS

L 82-85

+9.5

AKR

L 89-104

+29.5

BGSU

L 54-72

−26.5

CMU

W 77-65

−6.5

NIU

L 65-85

+3.5

OHIO

L 71-91

+6.5

TXST

L 61-77

−8.5

TOL

L 79-90

+14.5

EMU

W 76-62

−5.5

AKR

L 73-90

+2.5

CMU

L 70-83

+2.5

BGSU

W 88-79

+17.5

M-OH

L 67-69

−25.5

BALL

L 71-74

+6.5

KENT

L 78-86

+6.5

over 18under 11avg +1.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Purdue FW

29 games played

Straight up

14-15

48% wins

Against the spread

13-16

45% covers · avg −3.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

16-13

55% overs · avg −1 pts vs the total

Straight up

14-1548%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

13-1645%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

16-1355%

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

2 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	@GCU	L 71-90	+14.5	L −4.5	155.5	O 161
Nov 7	@OSU	L 68-94	+24.5	L −1.5	159.5	O 162
Nov 12	@WMU	L 71-83	-3.5	L −15.5	161.5	U 154
Nov 18	@UTAH	L 77-85	+13.5	W +5.5	161.5	O 162
Nov 21	@SLU	L 60-91	+19.5	L −11.5	166.5	U 151
Nov 25	vsCHST	W 90-77	-12.5	W +0.5	149.5	O 167
Dec 3	@OAK	L 92-101	+4.5	L −4.5	162.5	O 193
Dec 6	vsNKU	W 79-77	-1.5	W +0.5	153.5	O 156
Dec 10	vsEMU	W 80-65	-3.5	W +11.5	147.5	U 145
Dec 14	vsDETM	W 81-77	-9.5	L −5.5	153.5	O 158
Dec 21	@ND	W 72-69	+11.5	W +14.5	149.5	U 141
Dec 29	@MILW	L 55-77	+3.5	L −18.5	156.5	U 132
Jan 1	vsGB	L 54-72	-8.5	L −26.5	145.5	U 126
Jan 4	vsCLE	W 74-71	-11.5	L −8.5	159.5	U 145
Jan 7	@YSU	W 71-69	+4.5	W +6.5	145.5	U 140
Jan 11	@RMU	W 79-74	+4.5	W +9.5	146.5	O 153
Jan 18	vsMILW	W 100-82	-3.5	W +14.5	148.5	O 182
Jan 21	@DETM	W 83-76	-2.5	W +4.5	155.5	O 159
Jan 28	vsOAK	L 65-74	+1.5	L −7.5	162.5	U 139
Jan 31	vsRMU	W 83-71	-2.5	W +9.5	145.5	O 154
Feb 4	vsYSU	L 61-90	-2.5	L −31.5	147.5	O 151
Feb 7	@WRST	L 68-73	+6.5	W +1.5	150.5	U 141
Feb 12	@GB	L 59-76	-1.5	L −18.5	144.5	U 135
Feb 15	vsIUIN	W 83-78	-7.5	L −2.5	159.5	O 161
Feb 18	@NKU	L 71-87	+5.5	L −10.5	153.5	O 158
Feb 22	@CLE	W 92-86	-3.5	W +2.5	163.5	O 178
Feb 25	vsWRST	L 70-74	+1.5	L −2.5	150.5	U 144
Feb 28	@IUIN	W 87-81	-1.5	W +4.5	163.5	O 168
Mar 3	@GB	L 56-64	+3.5	L −4.5	145.5	U 120

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

GCU

L 71-90

−4.5

OSU

L 68-94

−1.5

WMU

L 71-83

−15.5

UTAH

L 77-85

+5.5

SLU

L 60-91

−11.5

CHST

W 90-77

+0.5

OAK

L 92-101

−4.5

NKU

W 79-77

+0.5

EMU

W 80-65

+11.5

DETM

W 81-77

−5.5

W 72-69

+14.5

MILW

L 55-77

−18.5

L 54-72

−26.5

CLE

W 74-71

−8.5

YSU

W 71-69

+6.5

RMU

W 79-74

+9.5

MILW

W 100-82

+14.5

DETM

W 83-76

+4.5

OAK

L 65-74

−7.5

RMU

W 83-71

+9.5

YSU

L 61-90

−31.5

WRST

L 68-73

+1.5

L 59-76

−18.5

IUIN

W 83-78

−2.5

NKU

L 71-87

−10.5

CLE

W 92-86

+2.5

WRST

L 70-74

−2.5

IUIN

W 87-81

+4.5

L 56-64

−4.5

covered 13didn’t cover 16avg −3.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

GCU

L 71-90

+5.5

OSU

L 68-94

+2.5

WMU

L 71-83

−7.5

UTAH

L 77-85

+0.5

SLU

L 60-91

−15.5

CHST

W 90-77

+17.5

OAK

L 92-101

+30.5

NKU

W 79-77

+2.5

EMU

W 80-65

−2.5

DETM

W 81-77

+4.5

W 72-69

−8.5

MILW

L 55-77

−24.5

L 54-72

−19.5

CLE

W 74-71

−14.5

YSU

W 71-69

−5.5

RMU

W 79-74

+6.5

MILW

W 100-82

+33.5

DETM

W 83-76

+3.5

OAK

L 65-74

−23.5

RMU

W 83-71

+8.5

YSU

L 61-90

+3.5

WRST

L 68-73

−9.5

L 59-76

−9.5

IUIN

W 83-78

+1.5

NKU

L 71-87

+4.5

CLE

W 92-86

+14.5

WRST

L 70-74

−6.5

IUIN

W 87-81

+4.5

L 56-64

−25.5

over 16under 13avg −1 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

W Michigan has the better starters

Position by position: W Michigan 3, Purdue FW 1, even 1

W MichiganBetterPurdue FW

G T. Hayhurst TR10 pts · 3.3 reb · 1.4 ast Score 41

PFWSmall

G D. Craig13.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 2.7 ast Score 68

G M. Bendinger TR14.4 pts · 3.6 reb · 1.1 ast Score 37

WMUSmall

G A. Williamson TR7.3 pts · 2.3 reb · 2.1 ast Score 16

G R. Lee TR15.9 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.9 ast Score 79

WMUBig

G C. Morgan2.3 pts · 1 reb · 0.9 ast Score 2

G J. Washington TR10 pts · 2.3 reb · 4 ast Score 73

WMUBig

G E. Mosley2.8 pts · 1 reb · 0.6 ast Score 9

F I. Finlinson TR9.4 pts · 3.8 reb · 0.8 ast Score 56

Even

F A. Isaac TR9.5 pts · 7.3 reb · 0.9 ast Score 63

W MichiganBetterPurdue FW

WMU offense137th of 366 · -4.0

WMUBig

PFW defense291st of 366 · -7.3

WMU defense253rd of 366 · -6.6

Even

PFW offense218th of 366 · -6.7

Backcourt-1.0 · 4 players

WMUBig

Backcourt-5.6 · 4 players

Frontcourt0.0 · 1 player

Even

Frontcourt+0.4 · 1 player

Bench-1.7 · 4 players

PFWSmall

Bench-0.2 · 1 player

Score, worst to bestWMU betterPFW 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

W Michigan

Guards

T. Hayhurst31 min · TRM. Bendinger31 min · TRR. Lee29 min · TRJ. Washington27 min · TRJ. Gomez23 min · TRA. Harakow19 min · TR

Forwards

I. Finlinson23 min · TRJ. Eli15 min · TRA. Kiudulas14 min · TRD. WatkinsNew

Centers

J. JünemannNew

Purdue FW

Guards

D. Craig30 minA. Williamson23 min · TRC. Morgan14 minE. Mosley12 minM. Shrout3 minD. LewisNew

Forwards

A. Isaac24 min · TRE. OrtizNewQ. MorganNewA. WalkerNew

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

WMU73.9 #203

PFW74.2 #189

Points per possession

WMU1.06 #225

PFW1.07 #204

Pace (possessions)

WMU69.3 #160

PFW69.0 #179

Shooting

Effective FG%

WMU49.9 #241

PFW52.6 #125

3-point %

WMU35.3 #95

PFW34.2 #163

3-point attempt rate

WMU36.1 #248

PFW45.4 #60

Free throw rate

WMU32.8 #241

PFW30.6 #292

Possessions

Turnover rate

WMU16.8 #191

PFW14.5 #43

Offensive rebound rate

WMU30.5 #177

PFW22.9 #351

Assists per game

WMU12.4 #256

PFW13.1 #207

Defense

Points allowed

WMU80.1 #320

PFW78.8 #286

Points allowed per possession

WMU1.16 #336

PFW1.14 #311

Opponent effective FG%

WMU54.4 #310

PFW56.1 #345

Opponent 3-point %

WMU36.1 #307

PFW37.9 #355

Turnovers forced

WMU13.4 #346

PFW19.1 #44

Defensive rebound rate

WMU70.9 #110

PFW65.5 #327

Steals per game

WMU4.1 #362

PFW7.9 #42

Blocks per game

WMU2.5 #301

PFW3.0 #224

WMU		PFW
Scoring
73.9 #203	Points per game	74.2 #189
1.06 #225	Points per possession	1.07 #204
69.3 #160	Pace (possessions)	69.0 #179
Shooting
49.9 #241	Effective FG%	52.6 #125
35.3 #95	3-point %	34.2 #163
36.1 #248	3-point attempt rate	45.4 #60
32.8 #241	Free throw rate	30.6 #292
Possessions
16.8 #191	Turnover rate	14.5 #43
30.5 #177	Offensive rebound rate	22.9 #351
12.4 #256	Assists per game	13.1 #207
Defense
80.1 #320	Points allowed	78.8 #286
1.16 #336	Points allowed per possession	1.14 #311
54.4 #310	Opponent effective FG%	56.1 #345
36.1 #307	Opponent 3-point %	37.9 #355
13.4 #346	Turnovers forced	19.1 #44
70.9 #110	Defensive rebound rate	65.5 #327
4.1 #362	Steals per game	7.9 #42
2.5 #301	Blocks per game	3.0 #224

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.

W Michigan

9-20 in 2025-26 overall · 4-14 in conference · Mid-American Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Kent State78–86
Lvs Ball State71–74
Lvs Miami OH67–69
W@ Bowling Green88–79
L@ C Michigan70–83

A week or more of rest.

Purdue FW

14-15 in 2025-26 overall · 11-10 in conference · Horizon League

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Green Bay56–64
W@ IU Indy87–81
Lvs Wright St70–74
W@ Cleveland St92–86
L@ N Kentucky71–87

A week or more of rest.

Western Michigan Broncos at Purdue Fort Wayne Mastodons

What could decide it: PFW 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

W Michigan

Purdue FW

W Michigan has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

W Michigan

Purdue FW