State Farm Field House · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | UCF | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UCF 83–75 · win probability UCF 76%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 157.1
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: UCF has more of the edges
BC 0, UCF 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: BC 28.3%, UCF 35.0%. Defensive: BC 71.4%, UCF 71.2%
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: BC plays 67.5 a game (257th fastest), UCF 71.2 (63rd). Faster games mean more points
Three-pointers
BC hits 29.4% and allows 31.9%; UCF hits 36.2% and allows 33.9%. Threes are 42.4% and 34.8% of their shots
UCF offense vs BC defense
Offense 18th of 366 against a defense 83rd, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
BC has played the 79th-hardest schedule, UCF the 41st. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: BC 1%, UCF 20%. Transfers in: BC 11, UCF 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: BC 47.0 and allows 48.9; UCF 52.6 and allows 52.1
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: BC 32.4, UCF 30.5. Allowed: BC 34.6, UCF 34.9
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: BC 15.4%, UCF 16.0%. Forced: BC 14.8%, UCF 15.7%
Context
Neutral floor
No home court: the model takes it out of the line
Even
BC offense vs UCF defense
Offense 96th of 366 against a defense 93rd, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | UCF -8.2 | — |
| Total | — | 157.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | BC 74.5 · UCF 82.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UCF -4.8 | — |
| 1H total | 73.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | BC 34.3 · UCF 39.1 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-8 20% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% | |
| 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Boston College
31 games played
Straight up
11-20
35% wins
Against the spread
15-16
48% covers · avg −0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-19
39% overs · avg −4 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 3 | @ | L 78-83 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 76-47 | -15.5 | W +13.5 | 144.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 59-60 | -17.5 | L −18.5 | 136.5 | U 119 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 76-71 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 142.5 | O 147 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 63-52 | -12.5 | L −1.5 | 135.5 | U 115 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 49-59 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 140.5 | U 108 |
| Nov 23 | vs | L 90-93 | -2.5 | L −5.5 | 140.5 | O 183 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 73-60 | -7.5 | W +5.5 | 138.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 69-78 | +7.5 | L −1.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 67-63 | -17.5 | L −13.5 | 126.5 | O 130 |
| Dec 10 | vs | L 74-76 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 72-61 | -16.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 28 | vs | W 72-64 | -12.5 | L −4.5 | 146.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 53-65 | +6.5 | L −5.5 | 145.5 | U 118 |
| Jan 6 | vs | L 71-79 | +11.5 | W +3.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 62-75 | +21.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 13 | @ | L 50-74 | +15.5 | L −8.5 | 136.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 81-73 | +5.5 | W +13.5 | 141.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 65-62 | +2.5 | W +5.5 | 137.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 64-68 | +7.5 | W +3.5 | 137.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 66-73 | +13.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 49-67 | +26.5 | W +8.5 | 141.5 | U 116 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 68-74 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 64-70 | +3.5 | L −2.5 | 139.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 75-86 | +3.5 | L −7.5 | 144.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 72-80 | +11.5 | W +3.5 | 148.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 70-94 | +15.5 | L −8.5 | 150.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 68-67 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 54-76 | +15.5 | L −6.5 | 143.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 63-72 | +11.5 | W +2.5 | 142.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 77-69 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | O 146 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
FAU
L 78-83
−3.5
6
vs
CIT
W 76-47
+13.5
11
vs
CCSU
L 59-60
−18.5
15
@
TEM
W 76-71
+8.5
18
vs
HAMP
W 63-52
−1.5
21
vs
DAV
L 49-59
−11.5
23
vs
TULN
L 90-93
−5.5
26
vs
HARV
W 73-60
+5.5
3
vs
LSU
L 69-78
−1.5
6
vs
NHVN
W 67-63
−13.5
10
vs
MASS
L 74-76
−3.5
22
vs
FDU
W 72-61
−5.5
28
vs
LEM
W 72-64
−4.5
3
@
GT
L 53-65
−5.5
6
vs
NCSU
L 71-79
+3.5
10
@
LOU
L 62-75
+8.5
13
@
CLEM
L 50-74
−8.5
17
vs
SYR
W 81-73
+13.5
21
vs
PITT
W 65-62
+5.5
24
@
ND
L 64-68
+3.5
31
vs
UVA
L 66-73
+6.5
3
@
DUKE
L 49-67
+8.5
7
vs
MIA
L 68-74
+2.5
11
vs
STAN
L 64-70
−2.5
14
vs
CAL
L 75-86
−7.5
17
@
FSU
L 72-80
+3.5
21
@
SMU
L 70-94
−8.5
25
vs
WAKE
W 68-67
+4.5
28
@
MIA
L 54-76
−6.5
3
@
VT
L 63-72
+2.5
7
vs
ND
W 77-69
+9.5
covered 15didn’t cover 16avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
FAU
L 78-83
+12.5
6
vs
CIT
W 76-47
−21.5
11
vs
CCSU
L 59-60
−17.5
15
@
TEM
W 76-71
+4.5
18
vs
HAMP
W 63-52
−20.5
21
vs
DAV
L 49-59
−32.5
23
vs
TULN
L 90-93
+42.5
26
vs
HARV
W 73-60
−5.5
3
vs
LSU
L 69-78
−2.5
6
vs
NHVN
W 67-63
+3.5
10
vs
MASS
L 74-76
+6.5
22
vs
FDU
W 72-61
−8.5
28
vs
LEM
W 72-64
−10.5
3
@
GT
L 53-65
−27.5
6
vs
NCSU
L 71-79
+8.5
10
@
LOU
L 62-75
−13.5
13
@
CLEM
L 50-74
−12.5
17
vs
SYR
W 81-73
+12.5
21
vs
PITT
W 65-62
−10.5
24
@
ND
L 64-68
−5.5
31
vs
UVA
L 66-73
−2.5
3
@
DUKE
L 49-67
−25.5
7
vs
MIA
L 68-74
+0.5
11
vs
STAN
L 64-70
−5.5
14
vs
CAL
L 75-86
+16.5
17
@
FSU
L 72-80
+3.5
21
@
SMU
L 70-94
+13.5
25
vs
WAKE
W 68-67
−10.5
28
@
MIA
L 54-76
−13.5
3
@
VT
L 63-72
−7.5
7
vs
ND
W 77-69
+4.5
over 12under 19avg −4 ptslonger = bigger margin
UCF
33 games played
Straight up
21-12
64% wins
Against the spread
16-17
48% covers · avg +1.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-20
39% overs · avg +1.2 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 3 | vs | W 82-78 | -8.5 | L −4.5 | 140.5 | O 160 |
| Nov 8 | vs | L 93-105 | +10.5 | L −1.5 | 166.5 | O 198 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 97-60 | -23.5 | W +13.5 | 169.5 | U 157 |
| Nov 14 | @ | W 86-74 | +10.5 | W +22.5 | 172.5 | U 160 |
| Nov 17 | vs | W 87-83 | -13.5 | L −9.5 | 163.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 77-67 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 149.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 102-91 | -13.5 | L −2.5 | 162.5 | O 193 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 82-57 | -25.5 | L −0.5 | 159.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 86-61 | -9.5 | W +15.5 | 148.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 81-63 | -16.5 | W +1.5 | 160.5 | U 144 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 102-80 | -17.5 | W +4.5 | 161.5 | O 182 |
| Dec 23 | vs | W 85-80 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 162.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 81-75 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 157.5 | U 156 |
| Jan 6 | @ | L 76-87 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 175.5 | U 163 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 73-72 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 82-73 | +2.5 | W +11.5 | 170.5 | U 155 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 77-84 | +9.5 | W +2.5 | 165.5 | U 161 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 57-87 | +14.5 | L −15.5 | 156.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 95-86 | +3.5 | W +12.5 | 159.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 79-76 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 161.5 | U 155 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 88-80 | +5.5 | W +13.5 | 159.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 55-79 | +15.5 | L −8.5 | 146.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 8 | @ | L 72-92 | +4.5 | L −15.5 | 146.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 67-74 | -3.5 | L −10.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 17 | vs | W 82-71 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 73-71 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 154.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 24 | @ | W 97-84 | +14.5 | W +27.5 | 162.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 86-87 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 159.5 | O 173 |
| Mar 3 | vs | L 104-111 | -8.5 | L −15.5 | 167.5 | O 215 |
| Mar 6 | @ | L 62-77 | +4.5 | L −10.5 | 142.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 66-65 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 149.5 | U 131 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 59-81 | +15.5 | L −6.5 | 159.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 71-75 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
HOF
W 82-78
−4.5
8
vs
VAN
L 93-105
−1.5
11
vs
FAMU
W 97-60
+13.5
14
@
TA&M
W 86-74
+22.5
17
vs
OAK
W 87-83
−9.5
20
vs
PITT
W 77-67
+11.5
25
vs
QUIN
W 102-91
−2.5
29
vs
VMI
W 82-57
−0.5
7
vs
TOW
W 86-61
+15.5
17
vs
MER
W 81-63
+1.5
20
vs
FGCU
W 102-80
+4.5
23
vs
FAU
W 85-80
−3.5
3
vs
KU
W 81-75
+10.5
6
@
OKST
L 76-87
−9.5
11
vs
CIN
W 73-72
−1.5
14
@
KSU
W 82-73
+11.5
17
vs
ARIZ
L 77-84
+2.5
20
@
ISU
L 57-87
−15.5
24
@
COLO
W 95-86
+12.5
27
vs
ASU
W 79-76
−3.5
31
vs
TTU
W 88-80
+13.5
4
@
HOU
L 55-79
−8.5
8
@
CIN
L 72-92
−15.5
14
vs
WVU
L 67-74
−10.5
17
vs
TCU
W 82-71
+12.5
21
@
UTAH
W 73-71
+0.5
24
@
BYU
W 97-84
+27.5
28
vs
BAY
L 86-87
−2.5
3
vs
OKST
L 104-111
−15.5
6
@
WVU
L 62-77
−10.5
11
vs
CIN
W 66-65
+4.5
12
vs
ARIZ
L 59-81
−6.5
20
vs
UCLA
L 71-75
+1.5
covered 16didn’t cover 17avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
HOF
W 82-78
+19.5
8
vs
VAN
L 93-105
+31.5
11
vs
FAMU
W 97-60
−12.5
14
@
TA&M
W 86-74
−12.5
17
vs
OAK
W 87-83
+6.5
20
vs
PITT
W 77-67
−5.5
25
vs
QUIN
W 102-91
+30.5
29
vs
VMI
W 82-57
−20.5
7
vs
TOW
W 86-61
−1.5
17
vs
MER
W 81-63
−16.5
20
vs
FGCU
W 102-80
+20.5
23
vs
FAU
W 85-80
+2.5
3
vs
KU
W 81-75
−1.5
6
@
OKST
L 76-87
−12.5
11
vs
CIN
W 73-72
−5.5
14
@
KSU
W 82-73
−15.5
17
vs
ARIZ
L 77-84
−4.5
20
@
ISU
L 57-87
−12.5
24
@
COLO
W 95-86
+21.5
27
vs
ASU
W 79-76
−6.5
31
vs
TTU
W 88-80
+8.5
4
@
HOU
L 55-79
−12.5
8
@
CIN
L 72-92
+17.5
14
vs
WVU
L 67-74
+0.5
17
vs
TCU
W 82-71
−1.5
21
@
UTAH
W 73-71
−10.5
24
@
BYU
W 97-84
+18.5
28
vs
BAY
L 86-87
+13.5
3
vs
OKST
L 104-111
+47.5
6
@
WVU
L 62-77
−3.5
11
vs
CIN
W 66-65
−18.5
12
vs
ARIZ
L 59-81
−19.5
20
vs
UCLA
L 71-75
−5.5
over 13under 20avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
The starting fives are even
Position by position: Boston College 1, UCF 1, even 3
Boston CollegeBetterUCF
G E. Shelton TR15.9 pts · 3.1 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 65
=Even
G C. Vasko TR11 pts · 4.7 reb · 4.1 ast
Score 52
G A. Zeigler TR12.3 pts · 4.9 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 60
→UCFBig
G D. Johnson TR23.5 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 100
G M. Williams TR21.6 pts · 4.3 reb · 4.5 ast
Score 96
=Even
F L. Walker TR18.7 pts · 4.9 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 87
F B. Benjamin TR14.2 pts · 10.4 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 89
=Even
F I. Malone TR10.4 pts · 5.5 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 82
F A. Bukumirovic TR13.7 pts · 7.7 reb · 1 ast
Score 86
←BCSmall
F C. Abass TR8.4 pts · 5.7 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 70
Boston CollegeBetterUCF
BC offense96th of 366 · -0.7
=Even
UCF defense93rd of 366 · -0.4
BC defense83rd of 366 · +0.1
→UCFSmall
UCF offense18th of 366 · +8.0
Backcourt+4.7 · 3 players
→UCFSmall
Backcourt+7.4 · 2 players
Frontcourt+5.8 · 2 players
=Even
Frontcourt+5.3 · 3 players
Bench-4.5 · 5 players
→UCFBig
Bench+2.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestBC betterUCF betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
E. Shelton37 min · TRA. Zeigler33 min · TRM. Williams32 min · TRJ. Frankel21 min · TRJ. O'Toole3 min · TRJ. Furphy3 min · TR
Forwards
B. Benjamin31 min · TRA. Bukumirovic30 min · TRC. Duggan28 min · TRL. Hunger19 min · TRA. Tounkara18 min · TRJ. BaileyNew
Guards
C. Vasko33 min · TRD. Johnson26 min · TRM. Dean17 min · TRC. Pacheco16 minA. DeanNewT. JonesNew
Forwards
L. Walker34 min · TRI. Malone23 min · TRC. Abass20 min · TRJ. Asemota8 min · TRL. GivanNewD. MannNew
Centers
J. Bol19 minE. Hulsewe5 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 67.4 #326 | Points per game | 80.7 #53 |
| 1.00 #323 | Points per possession | 1.13 #77 |
| 67.5 #257 | Pace (possessions) | 71.2 #63 |
| Shooting | ||
| 47.0 #338 | Effective FG% | 52.6 #123 |
| 29.4 #348 | 3-point % | 36.2 #49 |
| 42.4 #130 | 3-point attempt rate | 34.8 #281 |
| 32.4 #251 | Free throw rate | 30.5 #295 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.4 #102 | Turnover rate | 16.0 #137 |
| 28.3 #254 | Offensive rebound rate | 35.0 #47 |
| 11.3 #323 | Assists per game | 15.7 #56 |
| Defense | ||
| 70.7 #70 | Points allowed | 78.3 #274 |
| 1.04 #81 | Points allowed per possession | 1.10 #219 |
| 48.9 #62 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.1 #221 |
| 31.9 #59 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.9 #176 |
| 14.8 #303 | Turnovers forced | 15.7 #241 |
| 71.4 #87 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.2 #96 |
| 4.8 #341 | Steals per game | 5.6 #285 |
| 4.1 #62 | Blocks per game | 3.0 #225 |
Boston College
11-20 in 2025-26 overall · 4-14 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Wvs Notre Dame77–69
- L@ Virginia Tech63–72
- L@ Miami54–76
- Wvs Wake Forest68–67
- L@ SMU70–94
A week or more of rest.
UCF
21-12 in 2025-26 overall · 10-10 in conference · Big 12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UCLA71–75
- Lvs Arizona59–81
- Wvs Cincinnati66–65
- L@ West Virginia62–77
- Lvs Oklahoma St104–111
A week or more of rest.