Mountain America Center · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | BOIS | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 BOIS 74–69 · win probability BOIS 69%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 142.6
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: BOIS has more of the edges
UNT 1, BOIS 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UNT 16.8%, BOIS 16.9%. Forced: UNT 21.3%, BOIS 14.6%
Free throws
Free throw rate: UNT 39.6, BOIS 42.7. Allowed: UNT 45.1, BOIS 32.1
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UNT 33.5%, BOIS 33.2%. Defensive: UNT 67.6%, BOIS 76.4%
UNT offense vs BOIS defense
Offense 165th of 366 against a defense 74th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
UNT has played the 121st-hardest schedule, BOIS the 82nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
BOIS offense vs UNT defense
Offense 94th of 366 against a defense 66th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UNT 45%, BOIS 34%. Transfers in: UNT 3, BOIS 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: UNT plays 67.6 a game (245th fastest), BOIS 68.3 (215th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Three-pointers
UNT hits 28.7% and allows 30.9%; BOIS hits 34.3% and allows 34.4%. Threes are 32.4% and 43.1% of their shots
Context
Neutral floor
No home court: the model takes it out of the line
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: UNT 46.0 and allows 48.5; BOIS 52.2 and allows 52.6
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 | — | BOIS -5.6 | — |
| Total | — | 142.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | UNT 68.5 · BOIS 74.1 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | BOIS -3.2 | — |
| 1H total | 66.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | UNT 31.8 · BOIS 35 | — |
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% | 6-4 60% | |
| 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% | 7-3 70% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
UNT 0–1 BOISBOIS leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · UNT 1-0 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 5, 2023-24 | UNT 64 @ BOIS 69 | BOIS -5.5 | UNT W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
North Texas
31 games played
Straight up
17-14
55% wins
Against the spread
17-14
55% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-17
45% overs · avg −0.2 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 6 | vs | W 80-53 | -11.5 | W +15.5 | 137.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 9 | vs | W 64-62 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 138.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 64-66 | +3.5 | W +1.5 | 134.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 49-80 | +14.5 | L −16.5 | 128.5 | O 129 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 74-56 | -16.5 | W +1.5 | 134.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 79-71 | -12.5 | L −4.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 72-69 | -16.5 | L −13.5 | 141.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 77-75 | -11.5 | L −9.5 | 127.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 7 | vs | L 55-65 | +9.5 | L −0.5 | 135.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 14 | @ | W 58-57 | +1.5 | W +2.5 | 135.5 | U 115 |
| Dec 17 | vs | L 60-63 | +12.5 | W +9.5 | 139.5 | U 123 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 48-57 | +9.5 | W +0.5 | 137.5 | U 105 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 72-67 | +2.5 | W +7.5 | 138.5 | O 139 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 70-74 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 11 | @ | L 67-78 | +8.5 | L −2.5 | 135.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 18 | @ | W 71-63 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 137.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 81-62 | -15.5 | W +3.5 | 138.5 | O 143 |
| Jan 23 | vs | L 59-63 | -10.5 | L −14.5 | 134.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 28 | @ | L 66-82 | +8.5 | L −7.5 | 141.5 | O 148 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 68-72 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 83-86 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 134.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 81-58 | -10.5 | W +12.5 | 141.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 76-69 | +2.5 | W +9.5 | 138.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 15 | @ | W 65-62 | +2.5 | W +5.5 | 135.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 71-77 | -6.5 | L −12.5 | 137.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 73-72 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 140.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 79-80 | -2.5 | L −3.5 | 133.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 1 | @ | W 62-58 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 142.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 62-58 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 74-70 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 136.5 | O 144 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 84-90 | +7.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | O 174 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
6
vs
NWST
W 80-53
+15.5
9
vs
LUC
W 64-62
+3.5
12
@
ORST
L 64-66
+1.5
14
@
SMC
L 49-80
−16.5
20
vs
CARK
W 74-56
+1.5
25
vs
EWU
W 79-71
−4.5
30
vs
PV
W 72-69
−13.5
2
vs
HCU
W 77-75
−9.5
7
vs
TCU
L 55-65
−0.5
14
@
USA
W 58-57
+2.5
17
vs
SCU
L 60-63
+9.5
31
@
MEM
L 48-57
+0.5
4
vs
TLSA
W 72-67
+7.5
7
vs
USF
L 70-74
+0.5
11
@
WICH
L 67-78
−2.5
18
@
TULN
W 71-63
+9.5
21
vs
UTSA
W 81-62
+3.5
23
vs
ECU
L 59-63
−14.5
28
@
TLSA
L 66-82
−7.5
31
vs
UAB
L 68-72
−5.5
4
@
RICE
L 83-86
−4.5
7
@
UTSA
W 81-58
+12.5
12
vs
MEM
W 76-69
+9.5
15
@
TEM
W 65-62
+5.5
19
vs
TULN
L 71-77
−12.5
22
vs
FAU
W 73-72
−1.5
25
@
CLT
L 79-80
−3.5
1
@
UAB
W 62-58
+8.5
4
vs
RICE
W 62-58
−2.5
12
vs
FAU
W 74-70
+2.5
13
vs
TLSA
L 84-90
+1.5
covered 17didn’t cover 14avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
6
vs
NWST
W 80-53
−4.5
9
vs
LUC
W 64-62
−12.5
12
@
ORST
L 64-66
−4.5
14
@
SMC
L 49-80
+0.5
20
vs
CARK
W 74-56
−4.5
25
vs
EWU
W 79-71
+8.5
30
vs
PV
W 72-69
−0.5
2
vs
HCU
W 77-75
+24.5
7
vs
TCU
L 55-65
−15.5
14
@
USA
W 58-57
−20.5
17
vs
SCU
L 60-63
−16.5
31
@
MEM
L 48-57
−32.5
4
vs
TLSA
W 72-67
+0.5
7
vs
USF
L 70-74
−3.5
11
@
WICH
L 67-78
+9.5
18
@
TULN
W 71-63
−3.5
21
vs
UTSA
W 81-62
+4.5
23
vs
ECU
L 59-63
−12.5
28
@
TLSA
L 66-82
+6.5
31
vs
UAB
L 68-72
−1.5
4
@
RICE
L 83-86
+34.5
7
@
UTSA
W 81-58
−2.5
12
vs
MEM
W 76-69
+6.5
15
@
TEM
W 65-62
−8.5
19
vs
TULN
L 71-77
+10.5
22
vs
FAU
W 73-72
+4.5
25
@
CLT
L 79-80
+25.5
1
@
UAB
W 62-58
−22.5
4
vs
RICE
W 62-58
−17.5
12
vs
FAU
W 74-70
+7.5
13
vs
TLSA
L 84-90
+32.5
over 14under 17avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Boise St
30 games played
Straight up
19-11
63% wins
Against the spread
17-13
57% covers · avg −1.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-13
57% overs · avg +3.7 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 8 | vs | W 101-77 | -12.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | O 178 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 85-65 | -16.5 | W +3.5 | 161.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 62-58 | -16.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | U 120 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 62-59 | -9.5 | L −6.5 | 150.5 | U 121 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 67-70 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 155.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 70-81 | +6.5 | L −4.5 | 152.5 | U 151 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 77-68 | +2.5 | W +11.5 | 148.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 86-64 | -14.5 | W +7.5 | 150.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 14 | vs | W 68-67 | +2.5 | W +3.5 | 139.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 66-81 | -3.5 | L −18.5 | 141.5 | O 147 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 62-53 | -5.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 107-110 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 138.5 | O 217 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 58-75 | -8.5 | L −25.5 | 140.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 68-93 | +1.5 | L −23.5 | 149.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 13 | @ | L 85-89 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 16 | vs | W 79-73 | -5.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 20 | @ | W 81-65 | -1.5 | W +14.5 | 145.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 96-54 | -23.5 | W +18.5 | 137.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 27 | @ | W 89-58 | -12.5 | W +18.5 | 141.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 30 | @ | L 69-86 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 141.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 3 | vs | W 91-87 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 141.5 | O 178 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 91-90 | +4.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 13 | vs | L 83-86 | -10.5 | L −13.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 56-75 | +9.5 | L −9.5 | 151.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 84-69 | -18.5 | L −3.5 | 146.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 24 | vs | W 72-62 | -8.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 69-53 | -7.5 | W +8.5 | 149.5 | U 122 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 86-77 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 143.5 | O 163 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 78-67 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 143.5 | O 145 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 74-84 | -14.5 | L −24.5 | 146.5 | O 158 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
vs
UVU
W 101-77
+11.5
11
vs
RGV
W 85-65
+3.5
15
vs
MTST
W 62-58
−12.5
18
vs
WICH
W 62-59
−6.5
24
vs
USC
L 67-70
+0.5
25
vs
NCSU
L 70-81
−4.5
6
@
BTLR
W 77-68
+11.5
10
vs
DUQ
W 86-64
+7.5
14
vs
SMC
W 68-67
+3.5
20
@
NEV
L 66-81
−18.5
30
vs
UNM
W 62-53
+3.5
3
@
SDSU
L 107-110
+1.5
7
vs
GCU
L 58-75
−25.5
10
vs
USU
L 68-93
−23.5
13
@
UNLV
L 85-89
−5.5
16
vs
CSU
W 79-73
+0.5
20
@
WYO
W 81-65
+14.5
24
vs
AF
W 96-54
+18.5
27
@
SJSU
W 89-58
+18.5
30
@
GCU
L 69-86
−15.5
3
vs
NEV
W 91-87
−2.5
7
@
UNM
W 91-90
+5.5
13
vs
UNLV
L 83-86
−13.5
18
@
USU
L 56-75
−9.5
21
vs
SJSU
W 84-69
−3.5
24
vs
WYO
W 72-62
+1.5
28
@
FRES
W 69-53
+8.5
3
vs
SDSU
W 86-77
+7.5
7
@
CSU
W 78-67
+12.5
11
vs
SJSU
L 74-84
−24.5
covered 17didn’t cover 13avg −1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
vs
UVU
W 101-77
+26.5
11
vs
RGV
W 85-65
−11.5
15
vs
MTST
W 62-58
−27.5
18
vs
WICH
W 62-59
−29.5
24
vs
USC
L 67-70
−18.5
25
vs
NCSU
L 70-81
−1.5
6
@
BTLR
W 77-68
−3.5
10
vs
DUQ
W 86-64
−0.5
14
vs
SMC
W 68-67
−4.5
20
@
NEV
L 66-81
+5.5
30
vs
UNM
W 62-53
−31.5
3
@
SDSU
L 107-110
+78.5
7
vs
GCU
L 58-75
−7.5
10
vs
USU
L 68-93
+11.5
13
@
UNLV
L 85-89
+23.5
16
vs
CSU
W 79-73
+11.5
20
@
WYO
W 81-65
+0.5
24
vs
AF
W 96-54
+12.5
27
@
SJSU
W 89-58
+5.5
30
@
GCU
L 69-86
+13.5
3
vs
NEV
W 91-87
+36.5
7
@
UNM
W 91-90
+28.5
13
vs
UNLV
L 83-86
+15.5
18
@
USU
L 56-75
−20.5
21
vs
SJSU
W 84-69
+6.5
24
vs
WYO
W 72-62
−12.5
28
@
FRES
W 69-53
−27.5
3
vs
SDSU
W 86-77
+19.5
7
@
CSU
W 78-67
+1.5
11
vs
SJSU
L 74-84
+11.5
over 17under 13avg +3.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Boise St has the better starters
Position by position: North Texas 1, Boise St 2, even 2
North TexasBetterBoise St
G J. Stevenson17.4 pts · 3.5 reb · 2 ast
Score 94
←UNTSmall
G D. Wheeler-Thomas TR14.9 pts · 3.6 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 67
G C. Chavis TR10.3 pts · 2.4 reb · 3.2 ast
Score 53
→BOISSmall
G L. Washington TR9.6 pts · 4.7 reb · 5.1 ast
Score 76
G C. Franklin6.1 pts · 4.3 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 47
→BOISSmall
F D. Butka TR13.7 pts · 8.2 reb · 2.6 ast
Score 66
G A. Amkou TR5.5 pts · 1.8 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 74
=Even
F J. Stanback TR8.7 pts · 5.9 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 62
F R. Robinson7.9 pts · 4.7 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 65
=Even
F P. Carmichael7.8 pts · 3.1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 59
North TexasBetterBoise St
UNT offense165th of 366 · -5.0
→BOISSmall
BOIS defense74th of 366 · +0.7
UNT defense66th of 366 · +1.0
=Even
BOIS offense94th of 366 · -0.5
Backcourt+2.8 · 4 players
←UNTSmall
Backcourt+1.4 · 2 players
Frontcourt+0.5 · 1 player
=Even
Frontcourt+1.3 · 3 players
Bench-0.7 · 2 players
←UNTSmall
Bench-2.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestUNT betterBOIS betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Stevenson33 minC. Chavis27 min · TRC. Franklin25 minA. Amkou12 min · TRE. Horton9 minB. BarnesNew
Forwards
R. Robinson23 minM. Holmes6 min · TRO. NdourNewT. CrumbleNewF. KalajzicNew
Guards
D. Wheeler-Thomas31 min · TRL. Washington29 min · TRA. Neto19 minJ. Bowie5 minR. Bergersen2 minB. Ramirez2 min
Forwards
D. Butka34 min · TRJ. Stanback25 min · TRP. Carmichael19 minS. Ahrens13 minB. Buom5 minE. Lathan2 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 69.1 #298 | Points per game | 77.4 #108 |
| 1.02 #302 | Points per possession | 1.13 #82 |
| 67.6 #245 | Pace (possessions) | 68.3 #215 |
| Shooting | ||
| 46.0 #349 | Effective FG% | 52.2 #138 |
| 28.7 #358 | 3-point % | 34.3 #151 |
| 32.4 #325 | 3-point attempt rate | 43.1 #114 |
| 39.6 #63 | Free throw rate | 42.7 #23 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.8 #182 | Turnover rate | 16.9 #195 |
| 33.5 #76 | Offensive rebound rate | 33.2 #85 |
| 12.1 #282 | Assists per game | 12.4 #258 |
| Defense | ||
| 68.2 #35 | Points allowed | 73.2 #137 |
| 1.01 #33 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #145 |
| 48.5 #47 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.6 #250 |
| 30.9 #32 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.4 #213 |
| 21.3 #6 | Turnovers forced | 14.6 #317 |
| 67.6 #278 | Defensive rebound rate | 76.4 #3 |
| 8.9 #11 | Steals per game | 4.6 #350 |
| 4.3 #51 | Blocks per game | 2.1 #339 |
North Texas
17-14 in 2025-26 overall · 10-10 in conference · American Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Tulsa84–90
- Wvs FAU74–70
- Wvs Rice62–58
- W@ UAB62–58
- L@ Charlotte79–80
A week or more of rest.
Boise St
19-11 in 2025-26 overall · 12-9 in conference · Pac-12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs San José St74–84
- W@ Colorado St78–67
- Wvs San Diego St86–77
- W@ Fresno St69–53
- Wvs Wyoming72–62
A week or more of rest.