No games match these filters
Loosen a filter, or start over.
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 79.2
Projected
38–41
✓ TROY won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 66.3
Projected
34–32
✗ URI lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.1
Projected
34–35
✓ PAC won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.8
Projected
33–37
✓ BGSU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.2
Projected
36–35
✗ ETAM lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 72.8
Projected
35–38
✗ ORST lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.8
Projected
30–39
✓ TENN won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 72.3
Projected
31–42
✓ BEL won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 77.4
Projected
40–38
✓ UAB won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 70.5
Projected
37–33
✓ LIB won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.8
Projected
34–36
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 74.2
Projected
37–37
✓ BAY won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.3
Projected
32–36
✗ NCSU lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 72.4
Projected
34–39
✗ BUF lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 74.2
Projected
36–38
✓ IONA won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 67.3
Projected
32–35
✗ UCR lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.9
Projected
32–37
✓ KU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.9
Projected
37–35
✓ W&M won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 70.0
Projected
36–34
✓ OAK won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.6
Projected
37–38
✓ SJU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 74.8
Projected
36–39
✗ KENN lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.3
Projected
35–36
✓ UCSD won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 74.7
Projected
39–36
✓ USC won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.1
Projected
40–35
✓ GW won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.0
Projected
36–33
✓ COFC won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 63.5
Projected
28–36
✓ HOU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.8
Projected
37–33
✓ GMU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 65.4
Projected
35–31
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 76.0
Projected
37–39
✓ YSU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.9
Projected
33–37
✗ APP lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 74.8
Projected
29–46
✓ LOU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.0
Projected
35–38
✓ FIU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.3
Projected
35–38
✗ NKU lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.8
Projected
39–37
✓ BELL won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.9
Projected
35–35
✓ LIN won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 64.8
Projected
24–41
✓ CIN won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 65.6
Projected
32–34
✓ CCSU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 67.3
Projected
32–35
✓ BRAD won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.9
Projected
34–40
✓ FGCU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 76.5
Projected
32–44
✗ MSST lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.4
Projected
37–39
✓ MCN won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 76.9
Projected
30–47
✓ ILL won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 74.6
Projected
41–34
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.8
Projected
37–39
✗ AKR lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 74.0
Projected
36–38
✓ ARST won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 72.7
Projected
37–36
✗ CP lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.4
Projected
31–45
✓ SMU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 66.5
Projected
32–35
✓ MOST won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.2
Projected
35–34
✓ FAU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.9
Projected
34–35
✓ ACU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 64.7
Projected
29–36
✓ UCD won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 80.4
Projected
40–41
✗ ALA lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.0
Projected
27–46
✓ ARIZ won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 72.8
Projected
32–41
✓ MICH won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.1
Projected
33–38
✗ TEX lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 77.4
Projected
38–39
✗ MD lost
| Status | Matchup | Spread | Total | Model line | Spread edge | Model total | Total edge | Win prob | Model | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Half final | 3-2 · #157 3-3 · #147 |
— | — | TROY -3.2 | — | 79.2 | — | 64% TROY | › | |
| Half final | 4-1 · #105 2-2 · #165 |
— | — | URI -1.6 | — | 66.3 | — | 57% URI | › | |
| Half final | 2-1 · #191 2-2 · #163 |
— | — | PAC -0.9 | — | 69.1 | — | 54% PAC | › | |
| Half final | 2-4 · #299 2-2 · #200 |
— | — | BGSU -3.9 | — | 69.8 | — | 67% BGSU | › | |
| Half final | 0-3 · #342 0-4 · #356 |
— | — | ETAM -1.2 | — | 71.2 | — | 55% ETAM | › | |
| Half final | 3-3 · #209 3-3 · #99 |
— | — | ORST -2.3 | — | 72.8 | — | 60% ORST | › | |
| Half final | 4-1 · #62 5-0 · #7 |
— | — | TENN -8.8 | — | 68.8 | — | 83% TENN | › | |
| Half final | 0-4 · #88 4-0 · #138 |
— | — | BEL -10.8 | — | 72.3 | — | 88% BEL | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #102 2-2 · #195 |
— | — | UAB -2.0 | — | 77.4 | — | 58% UAB | › | |
| Half final | 2-0 · #160 2-1 · #186 |
— | — | LIB -4.2 | — | 70.5 | — | 68% LIB | › | |
| Half final | 1-3 · #223 1-3 · #202 |
— | — | BCU -2.4 | — | 69.8 | — | 60% BCU | › | |
| Half final | 3-1 · #37 3-0 · #29 |
— | — | BAY -0.7 | — | 74.2 | — | 53% BAY | › | |
| Half final | 5-0 · #67 4-0 · #48 |
— | — | NCSU -4.2 | — | 68.3 | — | 68% NCSU | › | |
| Half final | 1-4 · #320 4-0 · #237 |
— | — | BUF -4.8 | — | 72.4 | — | 70% BUF | › | |
| Half final | 1-5 · #226 5-1 · #233 |
— | — | IONA -2.7 | — | 74.2 | — | 62% IONA | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #338 2-3 · #281 |
— | — | UCR -3.5 | — | 67.3 | — | 65% UCR | › | |
| Half final | 4-1 · #71 3-2 · #16 |
— | — | KU -5.1 | — | 68.9 | — | 71% KU | › | |
| Half final | 2-2 · #217 0-2 · #190 |
— | — | W&M -1.0 | — | 71.9 | — | 54% W&M | › | |
| Half final | 0-5 · #204 2-1 · #293 |
— | — | OAK -1.4 | — | 70.0 | — | 56% OAK | › | |
| Half final | 4-0 · #13 3-1 · #9 |
— | — | SJU -1.2 | — | 75.6 | — | 55% SJU | › | |
| Half final | 1-4 · #177 1-1 · #148 |
— | — | KENN -2.1 | — | 74.8 | — | 59% KENN | › | |
| Half final | 3-1 · #111 3-0 · #123 |
— | — | UCSD -0.8 | — | 71.3 | — | 53% UCSD | › | |
| Half final | 4-0 · #36 4-0 · #86 |
— | — | USC -3.2 | — | 74.7 | — | 64% USC | › | |
| Half final | 5-1 · #101 2-1 · #154 |
— | — | GW -5.7 | — | 75.1 | — | 73% GW | › | |
| Half final | 2-4 · #117 1-4 · #255 |
— | — | COFC -3.7 | — | 69.0 | — | 66% COFC | › | |
| Half final | 4-0 · #63 5-0 · #2 |
— | — | HOU -8.4 | — | 63.5 | — | 82% HOU | › | |
| Half final | 4-0 · #93 1-4 · #128 |
— | — | GMU -4.7 | — | 69.8 | — | 70% GMU | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #260 1-5 · #317 |
— | — | SIE -3.7 | — | 65.4 | — | 66% SIE | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #296 1-4 · #265 |
— | — | YSU -1.5 | — | 76.0 | — | 57% YSU | › | |
| Half final | 2-2 · #232 3-2 · #259 |
— | — | APP -3.2 | — | 69.9 | — | 64% APP | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #188 5-0 · #14 |
— | — | LOU -17.5 | — | 74.8 | — | 97% LOU | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #158 0-2 · #178 |
— | — | FIU -2.3 | — | 73.0 | — | 60% FIU | › | |
| Half final | 0-4 · #294 1-2 · #230 |
— | — | NKU -3.5 | — | 73.3 | — | 65% NKU | › | |
| Half final | 0-4 · #295 0-3 · #339 |
— | — | BELL -2.2 | — | 75.8 | — | 60% BELL | › | |
| Half final | 0-4 · #335 1-4 · #258 |
— | — | LIN -0.9 | — | 69.9 | — | 54% LIN | › | |
| Half final | 3-3 · #316 4-1 · #30 |
— | — | CIN -16.6 | — | 64.8 | — | 97% CIN | › | |
| Half final | 1-3 · #311 2-2 · #337 |
— | — | CCSU -2.6 | — | 65.6 | — | 61% CCSU | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #135 2-3 · #167 |
— | — | BRAD -3.5 | — | 67.3 | — | 65% BRAD | › | |
| Half final | 0-4 · #305 2-2 · #266 |
— | — | FGCU -6.4 | — | 73.9 | — | 76% FGCU | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #276 2-3 · #53 |
— | — | MSST -11.7 | — | 76.5 | — | 90% MSST | › | |
| Half final | 4-2 · #132 2-1 · #127 |
— | — | MCN -1.5 | — | 75.4 | — | 57% MCN | › | |
| Half final | 1-3 · #287 5-1 · #4 |
— | — | ILL -17.7 | — | 76.9 | — | 97% ILL | › | |
| Half final | 4-1 · #21 4-0 · #57 |
— | — | AUB -6.9 | — | 74.6 | — | 78% AUB | › | |
| Half final | 5-1 · #126 4-1 · #118 |
— | — | AKR -1.5 | — | 75.8 | — | 56% AKR | › | |
| Half final | 1-1 · #198 2-3 · #171 |
— | — | ARST -2.8 | — | 74.0 | — | 62% ARST | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #164 0-2 · #321 |
— | — | CP -0.8 | — | 72.7 | — | 53% CP | › | |
| Half final | 1-5 · #246 6-0 · #55 |
— | — | SMU -14.0 | — | 75.4 | — | 94% SMU | › | |
| Half final | 3-3 · #324 1-2 · #250 |
— | — | MOST -3.2 | — | 66.5 | — | 64% MOST | › | |
| Half final | 3-1 · #109 5-0 · #121 |
— | — | FAU -0.8 | — | 69.2 | — | 54% FAU | › | |
| Half final | 1-2 · #192 1-2 · #253 |
— | — | ACU -0.3 | — | 68.9 | — | 51% ACU | › | |
| Half final | 1-5 · #221 3-2 · #182 |
— | — | UCD -6.9 | — | 64.7 | — | 77% UCD | › | |
| Half final | 5-0 · #17 3-1 · #15 |
— | — | ALA -0.6 | — | 80.4 | — | 53% ALA | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #263 5-0 · #5 |
— | — | ARIZ -19.0 | — | 73.0 | — | 98% ARIZ | › | |
| Half final | 2-1 · #75 4-0 · #8 |
— | — | MICH -8.2 | — | 72.8 | — | 81% MICH | › | |
| Half final | 4-1 · #60 4-1 · #11 |
— | — | TEX -4.6 | — | 71.1 | — | 69% TEX | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #98 4-1 · #50 |
— | — | MD -1.4 | — | 77.4 | — | 56% MD | › |
The model’s 1st half is fitted from its full-game numbers and past halves; ESPN posts no 1st-half lines for college games. The # beside a record is the team’s power rank today, from the Rankings; AP is the poll. Spread is the market line (the favorite shows the minus). Model line and Model edge are from the model, never the market. Lines are pre-tip-off: after tip-off a tile shows the closing line. Model record