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 71.4
Projected
35–37
✓ BCU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 64.0
Projected
31–33
✓ LIB won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.1
Projected
41–28
✓ MSU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.6
Projected
33–36
✓ ND won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 65.6
Projected
34–32
✓ PAC won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.2
Projected
36–36
✗ DEL lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.7
Projected
37–35
✓ TLSA won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 72.1
Projected
33–39
✓ ISU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.0
Projected
35–34
✓ ETAM won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 70.8
Projected
36–34
✓ NCSU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.1
Projected
37–34
✓ URI won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.0
Projected
38–33
✓ SAM won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.2
Projected
33–36
✓ KU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.2
Projected
33–38
✓ UAB won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 64.2
Projected
35–30
✓ UNI won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 77.4
Projected
42–36
✓ SJU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 78.9
Projected
42–36
✗ KENN lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.7
Projected
36–34
✗ LMU lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.3
Projected
35–34
✓ UCSD won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.7
Projected
34–38
✗ MCN lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.5
Projected
35–37
✗ USC lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 63.4
Projected
30–33
✓ HOU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 70.8
Projected
32–39
✓ UNC won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.0
Projected
36–37
✗ SDST lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.3
Projected
37–33
✓ DREX won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.3
Projected
37–39
✓ UNCA won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.4
Projected
35–33
✓ W&M won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.9
Projected
33–36
✓ CBU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.0
Projected
28–43
✓ OSU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 74.6
Projected
37–38
✓ JMU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.4
Projected
34–38
✓ UPST won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.3
Projected
30–38
✓ PSU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.5
Projected
30–44
✓ FSU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.3
Projected
28–41
✓ VILL won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 70.5
Projected
38–32
✓ WRST won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.0
Projected
35–38
✗ FGCU lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.1
Projected
34–35
✗ BELL lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 60.8
Projected
32–29
✓ HAMP won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.6
Projected
32–39
✓ PFW won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 76.0
Projected
34–42
✗ UCF lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.9
Projected
32–42
✓ WAKE won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 62.2
Projected
29–33
✓ MRST won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 67.8
Projected
31–37
✓ RID won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.7
Projected
36–34
✓ GMU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 66.3
Projected
32–34
✓ CARK won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 77.6
Projected
37–41
✗ GW lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.8
Projected
38–34
✗ TEM lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.5
Projected
36–39
✓ IU won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 72.4
Projected
24–49
✓ TA&M won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 76.6
Projected
38–39
✓ CP won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.2
Projected
28–46
✓ MIZ won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 66.5
Projected
30–37
✓ UNT won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.4
Projected
32–37
✓ APSU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.8
Projected
35–39
✗ ASU lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 78.5
Projected
38–40
✓ MICH won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.8
Projected
34–42
✗ NEB lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 67.8
Projected
35–33
✓ NMSU won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 74.5
Projected
37–37
✗ UTSA lost
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 76.9
Projected
39–38
✓ OAK won
Half finalNon-conference
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 71.8
Projected
37–35
✗ PRST lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 73.0
Projected
32–41
✓ GONZ won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 72.7
Projected
35–38
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 69.0
Projected
37–32
✓ UCLA won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 68.6
Projected
33–35
✗ ORE lost
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 83.9
Projected
37–47
✓ ALA won
Half finalNon-conference · Neutral site
1H spread
—
no 1H line yet
1H total
—
model 75.6
Projected
38–38
✗ UTAH lost
| Status | Matchup | Spread | Total | Model line | Spread edge | Model total | Total edge | Win prob | Model | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Half final | 2-2 · #191 1-4 · #202 |
— | — | BCU -2.3 | — | 71.4 | — | 60% BCU | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #165 3-0 · #160 |
— | — | LIB -1.7 | — | 64.0 | — | 57% LIB | › | |
| Half final | 5-0 · #10 1-3 · #145 |
— | — | MSU -13.4 | — | 69.1 | — | 93% MSU | › | |
| Half final | 4-2 · #62 4-2 · #71 |
— | — | ND -3.1 | — | 68.6 | — | 63% ND | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #163 2-3 · #223 |
— | — | PAC -2.7 | — | 65.6 | — | 62% PAC | › | |
| Half final | 1-5 · #284 1-3 · #206 |
— | — | DEL -0.1 | — | 71.2 | — | 51% DEL | › | |
| Half final | 3-1 · #108 1-3 · #143 |
— | — | TLSA -2.0 | — | 71.7 | — | 59% TLSA | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #37 5-0 · #13 |
— | — | ISU -6.3 | — | 72.1 | — | 75% ISU | › | |
| Half final | 1-3 · #342 0-5 · #288 |
— | — | ETAM -1.1 | — | 69.0 | — | 55% ETAM | › | |
| Half final | 4-1 · #48 4-1 · #86 |
— | — | NCSU -2.0 | — | 70.8 | — | 59% NCSU | › | |
| Half final | 4-2 · #105 2-2 · #186 |
— | — | URI -3.3 | — | 71.1 | — | 64% URI | › | |
| Half final | 3-4 · #184 0-5 · #208 |
— | — | SAM -5.2 | — | 71.0 | — | 72% SAM | › | |
| Half final | 4-1 · #63 4-2 · #16 |
— | — | KU -2.5 | — | 69.2 | — | 61% KU | › | |
| Half final | 0-3 · #190 4-2 · #102 |
— | — | UAB -5.2 | — | 71.2 | — | 71% UAB | › | |
| Half final | 5-0 · #131 1-5 · #113 |
— | — | UNI -5.3 | — | 64.2 | — | 72% UNI | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #9 4-0 · #29 |
— | — | SJU -6.3 | — | 77.4 | — | 75% SJU | › | |
| Half final | 2-1 · #148 0-5 · #305 |
— | — | KENN -6.0 | — | 78.9 | — | 74% KENN | › | |
| Half final | 5-1 · #121 1-5 · #128 |
— | — | LMU -1.7 | — | 69.7 | — | 57% LMU | › | |
| Half final | 4-0 · #123 3-3 · #167 |
— | — | UCSD -1.4 | — | 68.3 | — | 56% UCSD | › | |
| Half final | 2-2 · #154 3-1 · #127 |
— | — | MCN -3.5 | — | 71.7 | — | 65% MCN | › | |
| Half final | 6-0 · #67 5-0 · #36 |
— | — | USC -2.1 | — | 71.5 | — | 59% USC | › | |
| Half final | 6-0 · #7 6-0 · #2 |
— | — | HOU -2.7 | — | 63.4 | — | 62% HOU | › | |
| Half final | 5-0 · #142 5-0 · #44 |
— | — | UNC -7.4 | — | 70.8 | — | 79% UNC | › | |
| Half final | 1-2 · #150 2-2 · #201 |
— | — | SDST -1.1 | — | 73.0 | — | 55% SDST | › | |
| Half final | 2-4 · #262 0-5 · #345 |
— | — | DREX -4.0 | — | 69.3 | — | 67% DREX | › | |
| Half final | 0-3 · #245 1-3 · #271 |
— | — | UNCA -2.3 | — | 75.3 | — | 60% UNCA | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #217 2-2 · #253 |
— | — | W&M -1.8 | — | 68.4 | — | 58% W&M | › | |
| Half final | 2-2 · #146 5-0 · #203 |
— | — | CBU -3.8 | — | 68.9 | — | 66% CBU | › | |
| Half final | 1-5 · #278 5-0 · #33 |
— | — | OSU -15.5 | — | 71.0 | — | 95% OSU | › | |
| Half final | 1-4 · #279 3-3 · #158 |
— | — | JMU -1.3 | — | 74.6 | — | 56% JMU | › | |
| Half final | 0-5 · #357 1-4 · #325 |
— | — | UPST -4.1 | — | 71.4 | — | 67% UPST | › | |
| Half final | 3-3 · #261 5-1 · #78 |
— | — | PSU -8.1 | — | 68.3 | — | 81% PSU | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #329 4-1 · #81 |
— | — | FSU -13.7 | — | 73.5 | — | 93% FSU | › | |
| Half final | 2-4 · #234 4-1 · #32 |
— | — | VILL -13.1 | — | 68.3 | — | 92% VILL | › | |
| Half final | 1-3 · #180 2-3 · #303 |
— | — | WRST -6.1 | — | 70.5 | — | 75% WRST | › | |
| Half final | 1-5 · #177 3-2 · #266 |
— | — | FGCU -2.5 | — | 73.0 | — | 61% FGCU | › | |
| Half final | 1-1 · #300 1-4 · #295 |
— | — | BELL -1.4 | — | 69.1 | — | 56% BELL | › | |
| Half final | 1-5 · #159 2-5 · #364 |
— | — | HAMP -3.6 | — | 60.8 | — | 65% HAMP | › | |
| Half final | 0-6 · #362 0-5 · #249 |
— | — | PFW -7.0 | — | 71.6 | — | 78% PFW | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #241 5-1 · #39 |
— | — | UCF -8.7 | — | 76.0 | — | 83% UCF | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #243 4-2 · #89 |
— | — | WAKE -9.6 | — | 73.9 | — | 85% WAKE | › | |
| Half final | 1-4 · #216 2-2 · #236 |
— | — | MRST -4.2 | — | 62.2 | — | 68% MRST | › | |
| Half final | 0-7 · #352 0-4 · #347 |
— | — | RID -5.9 | — | 67.8 | — | 74% RID | › | |
| Half final | 5-0 · #93 4-1 · #109 |
— | — | GMU -2.4 | — | 69.7 | — | 60% GMU | › | |
| Half final | 1-3 · #361 1-4 · #240 |
— | — | CARK -1.5 | — | 66.3 | — | 57% CARK | › | |
| Half final | 4-3 · #132 6-1 · #101 |
— | — | GW -4.7 | — | 77.6 | — | 70% GW | › | |
| Half final | 3-2 · #111 2-4 · #135 |
— | — | TEM -4.6 | — | 71.8 | — | 69% TEM | › | |
| Half final | 5-1 · #83 5-0 · #38 |
— | — | IU -3.4 | — | 75.5 | — | 64% IU | › | |
| Half final | 0-6 · #366 4-2 · #28 |
— | — | TA&M -24.8 | — | 72.4 | — | 100% TA&M | › | |
| Half final | 0-4 · #306 2-4 · #164 |
— | — | CP -1.1 | — | 76.6 | — | 55% CP | › | |
| Half final | 0-6 · #353 6-0 · #54 |
— | — | MIZ -17.9 | — | 73.2 | — | 97% MIZ | › | |
| Half final | 0-5 · #254 3-2 · #112 |
— | — | UNT -7.3 | — | 66.5 | — | 79% UNT | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #334 2-3 · #210 |
— | — | APSU -5.2 | — | 68.4 | — | 72% APSU | › | |
| Half final | 2-3 · #139 5-1 · #60 |
— | — | ASU -3.7 | — | 73.8 | — | 66% ASU | › | |
| Half final | 5-1 · #21 5-0 · #8 |
— | — | MICH -2.1 | — | 78.5 | — | 59% MICH | › | |
| Half final | 3-3 · #205 6-0 · #27 |
— | — | NEB -8.0 | — | 75.8 | — | 81% NEB | › | |
| Half final | 2-0 · #133 1-3 · #149 |
— | — | NMSU -1.6 | — | 67.8 | — | 57% NMSU | › | |
| Half final | 1-3 · #192 2-4 · #296 |
— | — | UTSA -0.2 | — | 74.5 | — | 51% UTSA | › | |
| Half final | 1-5 · #204 2-3 · #273 |
— | — | OAK -0.2 | — | 76.9 | — | 51% OAK | › | |
| Half final | 1-2 · #274 2-4 · #268 |
— | — | PRST -1.2 | — | 71.8 | — | 55% PRST | › | |
| Half final | 5-1 · #50 6-0 · #17 |
— | — | GONZ -8.6 | — | 73.0 | — | 82% GONZ | › | |
| Half final | 5-0 · #46 5-0 · #43 |
— | — | IOWA -2.7 | — | 72.7 | — | 62% IOWA | › | |
| Half final | 5-1 · #26 5-1 · #92 |
— | — | UCLA -5.3 | — | 69.0 | — | 72% UCLA | › | |
| Half final | 2-2 · #75 4-1 · #57 |
— | — | ORE -2.3 | — | 68.6 | — | 60% ORE | › | |
| Half final | 3-3 · #98 3-2 · #15 |
— | — | ALA -10.0 | — | 83.9 | — | 86% ALA | › | |
| Half final | 5-1 · #73 3-2 · #80 |
— | — | UTAH -0.1 | — | 75.6 | — | 51% UTAH | › |
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