FinalCurrentUpcomingWeek 5: 1st-half lines & halftime results ›Spread edge and Total edge = our projection vs the market ⓘ · Trend = this season’s results

Week in numbers

Tap a number to filter the games below
Games5151 final · 0 to play
Favorites ATS27-2453% covered
Upsets10outright
Over / Under24-2747% over
Model Favorite41-1080% won
Did the team the spread moved toward cover? ATS vs the closing line, by how far it moved
Moved towardThis week20252024–2026
Any move
15–2241%
287–313–248%
789–801–850%
1.5+ pts
5–1328%
143–153–148%
446–443–450%
3+ pts
4–736%
78–74–151%
215–206–251%
5+ pts
1–233%
14–1352%
47–4551%
7+ pts
—
6–186%
13–765%
Covered–didn’t–push; % leaves out pushes and is grey under 10 games; green or red from 10 games. ClickTap a row or count to filter.
Sort by
⌨ Shortcuts

Group the list

Sort by
No games match these filters
Loosen a filter, or start over.

Jump to

Thursday, Sep 25

1
Final · Conf
Army
1-2 · #83
6
2-2 · #51
28
Spread
ECU -3.5
✓ ECU W ATS
Total
52.5 ▼1
▼ Under 34
Projected
23–28
✓ ECU won
Trend: ECU ATS ✓ Model: ECU by 6.5 ✓ Model: Under 1.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q1

Friday, Sep 26

3
Final · Conf
3-0 · #23
38
3-1 · #32
46
Spread
FSU -6.5
✓ UVA W ATS
Total
60.5 ▲9
▲ Over 84 · Q4
Projected
32–26
✗ FSU lost
Trend: UVA ATS ✓Trend: Over ✓ Model: UVA by 1.5 ✓ Model: Under 3 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
TCU
3-0 · #33
24
3-1 · #41
27
Spread
ASU -2.5
✓ ASU W ATS
Total
54.5 ▼2
▼ Under 51
Projected
27–30
✓ ASU won
Trend: Under ✓ Model: ASU by 1.5 ✓ Model: Over 2 ✗ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Non-conf
3-0 · #49
27
0-4 · #100
24
Spread
HOU -11.5
✓ ORST W ATS
Total
48.5
▲ Over 51 · OT
Projected
29–18
✓ HOU won
Trend: HOU ATS ✗ Model: ORST by 1.5 ✓ Model: Under 1 ✗ Cover settled: Q1

Saturday, Sep 27

47
Final · Conf
4-0 · #39
30
2-1 · #53
29
Spread
GT -11.5
✓ WAKE W ATS
Total
53.5
▲ Over 59 · OT
Projected
32–20
✓ GT won
Model: GT by 4 ✗ Model: Under 2 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
USC
4-0 · #12
32
3-1 · #30
34
Spread
USC -6.5
✓ ILL W ATS
Total
62.5 ▲6
▲ Over 66 · Q4
Projected
34–27
✗ USC lost
Trend: Over ✓ Model: USC by 3.5 ✗ Model: Under 1 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Non-conf
1-2 · #3
56
2-2 · #40
13
Spread
ND -5.5
✓ ND W ATS
Total
62.5 ▲4
▲ Over 69 · Q4
Projected
33–28
✓ ND won
Trend: ND ATS ✓Trend: Over ✓ Model: ARK by 2 ✗ Model: Under 1 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
3-1 · #62
28
2-1 · #69
31
Spread
MINN -3.5
✓ RUTG W ATS
Total
51.5
▲ Over 59 · Q4
Projected
24–27
✓ MINN won
Model: RUTG by 0 ✓ Model: Under 0.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
Duke
2-2 · #47
38
3-1 · #92
3
Spread
DUKE -3.5
✓ DUKE W ATS
Total
59.5 ▲1
▼ Under 41
Projected
31–29
✓ DUKE won
Trend: SYR ATS ✗Trend: Over ✗ Model: SYR by 8 ✗ Model: Over 1 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
3-0 · #25
34
2-1 · #35
27
Spread
LOU -3.5
✓ LOU W ATS
Total
52.5 ▼3
▲ Over 61 · Q4
Projected
31–27
✓ LOU won
Trend: PITT ATS ✗Trend: Under ✗ Model: LOU by 1.5 ✓ Model: Over 5 ✓ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Conf
2-1 · #58
37
3-1 · #54
34
Spread
KU -4.5
✓ CIN W ATS
Total
57.5 ▲3
▲ Over 71 · Q4
Projected
24–29
✗ KU lost
Trend: Over ✓ Model: KU by 2 ✗ Model: Under 3.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
UCF
3-0 · #66
20
1-3 · #42
34
Spread
KSU -5.5
✓ KSU W ATS
Total
48.5 ▼2
▲ Over 54 · Q4
Projected
23–27
✓ KSU won
Trend: UCF ATS ✗Trend: Under ✗ Model: UCF by 7 ✗ Model: Over 1.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q2
Final · Non-conf
1-3 · #102
22
4-0 · #38
36
Spread
UNT -11.5
✓ UNT W ATS
Total
63.5
▼ Under 58
Projected
25–37
✓ UNT won
Trend: UNT ATS ✓Trend: Over ✗ Model: UNT by 3 ✓ Model: Under 1 ✓ Cover settled: Q3
Final · Conf
2-2 · #120
20
Ohio
2-2 · #78
35
Spread
OHIO -7.5
✓ OHIO W ATS
Total
49.5 ▼1
▲ Over 55 · Q4
Projected
21–29
✓ OHIO won
Trend: BGSU ATS ✗ Model: OHIO by 1 ✓ Model: Over 1 ✓ Cover settled: Q2
Final · Non-conf
3-1 · #86
35
4-0 · #13
55
Spread
VAN -24.5
✓ USU W ATS
Total
58.5 ▼1
▲ Over 90 · Q3
Projected
18–43
✓ VAN won
Trend: VAN ATS ✗ Model: USU by 1 ✓ Model: Over 3 ✓ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Conf
1-3 · #123
13
2-2 · #103
24
Spread
CMU -3.5
✓ CMU W ATS
Total
55.5 ▲1
▼ Under 37
Projected
26–30
✓ CMU won
Trend: EMU ATS ✗Trend: Over ✗ Model: CMU by 0.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
2-2 · #105
10
2-1 · #28
35
Spread
JMU -16.5
✓ JMU W ATS
Total
54.5 ▲1
▼ Under 45
Projected
19–36
✓ JMU won
Model: GASO by 1.5 ✗ Model: Over 0.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q2
Final · Conf
1-3 · #110
16
2-1 · #130
28
Spread
ULM -1.5
✓ ULM W ATS
Total
55.5
▼ Under 44
Projected
28–29
✓ ULM won
Trend: ARST ATS ✗ Model: ULM by 1 ✓ Model: Over 2 ✗ Cover settled: Q2
Final · Conf
3-0 · #2
24
3-0 · #15
6
Spread
OSU -9.5
✓ OSU W ATS
Total
52.5 ▲4
▼ Under 30
Projected
32–23
✓ OSU won
Trend: WASH ATS ✗Trend: Over ✗ Model: WASH by 2.5 ✗ Model: Over 2.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Conf
LSU
4-0 · #31
19
4-0 · #9
24
Spread
MISS -3.5
✓ MISS W ATS
Total
58.5 ▲2
▼ Under 43
Projected
26–30
✓ MISS won
Trend: MISS ATS ✓Trend: Over ✗ Model: MISS by 3.5 ✓ Model: Under 2 ✓ Cover settled: Q2
Final · Conf
3-1 · #24
10
3-0 · #10
16
Spread
TA&M -6.5
✓ AUB W ATS
Total
51.5 ▲5
▼ Under 26
Projected
23–29
✓ TA&M won
Trend: TA&M ATS ✗Trend: Over ✗ Model: AUB by 0.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Conf
4-0 · #1
20
Iowa
3-1 · #20
15
Spread
IU -8.5
✓ IOWA W ATS
Total
47.5 ▼1
▼ Under 35
Projected
28–20
✓ IU won
Model: IU by 0 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
UCLA
0-3 · #70
14
1-2 · #59
17
Spread
NU -6.5
✓ UCLA W ATS
Total
46.5 ▲1
▼ Under 31
Projected
18–24
✓ NU won
Model: UCLA by 2 ✓ Model: Under 5 ✓ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Conf
3-1 · #76
28
1-2 · #84
24
Spread
BC -6.5
✓ CAL W ATS
Total
54.5 ▲2
▼ Under 52
Projected
21–28
✗ BC lost
Trend: Over ✗ Model: BC by 2 ✗ Model: Under 6 ✓ Cover settled: Q2
Final · Conf
2-2 · #50
45
1-2 · #111
27
Spread
BAY -21.5
✓ OKST W ATS
Total
58.5 ▼1
▲ Over 72 · Q3
Projected
41–20
✓ BAY won
Trend: OKST ATS ✓ Model: OKST by 2.5 ✓ Model: Over 3 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
Utah
3-1 · #8
48
2-2 · #77
14
Spread
UTAH -12.5
✓ UTAH W ATS
Total
46.5 ▼3
▲ Over 62 · Q4
Projected
31–19
✓ UTAH won
Trend: UTAH ATS ✓Trend: Under ✗ Model: WVU by 4 ✗ Model: Over 3.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Non-conf
2-2 · #87
20
2-2 · #118
17
Spread
CONN -2.5
✓ CONN W ATS
Total
51.5
▼ Under 37
Projected
28–25
✓ CONN won
Model: BUFF by 0 ✗ Model: Over 1.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q3
Final · Non-conf
2-1 · #68
6
1-2 · #124
3
Spread
SDSU -1.5
✓ SDSU W ATS
Total
42.5 ▼1
▼ Under 9
Projected
20–19
✓ SDSU won
Model: NIU by 3.5 ✗ Model: Under 4 ✓ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Conf
Rice
3-1 · #126
13
Navy
3-0 · #64
21
Spread
NAVY -14.5
✓ RICE W ATS
Total
45.5
▼ Under 34
Projected
17–32
✓ NAVY won
Model: NAVY by 4.5 ✗ Model: Over 3 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
1-3 · #127
3
2-2 · #48
45
Spread
TOL -22.5
✓ TOL W ATS
Total
49.5 ▲1
▼ Under 48
Projected
13–36
✓ TOL won
Trend: TOL ATS ✓ Model: TOL by 2.5 ✓ Model: Under 1.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q2
Final · Non-conf
2-1 · #129
20
2-1 · #81
38
Spread
UNM -17.5
✓ UNM W ATS
Total
53.5 ▼1
▲ Over 58 · Q4
Projected
19–36
✓ UNM won
Trend: UNM ATS ✓ Model: NMSU by 1 ✗ Model: Over 2 ✓ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Conf
3-2 · #90
44
1-2 · #95
35
Spread
AFA -6.5
✓ HAW W ATS
Total
52.5 ▼1
▲ Over 79 · Q4
Projected
20–27
✗ AFA lost
Trend: AFA ATS ✗ Model: AFA by 4.5 ✗ Model: Under 5.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
3-1 · #57
31
2-2 · #113
14
Spread
TULN -14.5
✓ TULN W ATS
Total
52.5 ▼1
▼ Under 45
Projected
33–18
✓ TULN won
Model: TULN by 0.5 ✓ Model: Under 1 ✓ Cover settled: Q3
Final · Conf
3-1 · #22
41
4-0 · #56
34
Spread
TENN -7.5
✓ MSST W ATS
Total
63.5 ▲2
▲ Over 75 · Q4
Projected
34–27
✓ TENN won
Trend: Over ✓ Model: MSST by 0.5 ✓ Model: Under 2.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
1-3 · #128
16
2-2 · #97
24
Spread
KENN -7.5
✓ KENN W ATS
Total
54.5 ▲2
▼ Under 40
Projected
22–29
✓ KENN won
Trend: KENN ATS ✓Trend: Over ✗ Model: MTSU by 3 ✗ Model: Under 4 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Non-conf
1-3 · #104
7
2-1 · #46
21
Spread
ODU -14.5
✓ LIB W ATS
Total
53.5 ▲1
▼ Under 28
Projected
19–33
✓ ODU won
Trend: ODU ATS ✗ Model: LIB by 2.5 ✓ Model: Under 1.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
3-0 · #26
14
4-0 · #36
39
Spread
ISU -4.5
✓ ISU W ATS
Total
48.5 ▼1
▲ Over 53 · Q3
Projected
22–27
✓ ISU won
Trend: ARIZ ATS ✗ Model: ISU by 1.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
1-3 · #73
23
3-1 · #44
21
Spread
NCSU -10.5
✓ VT W ATS
Total
56.5 ▼2
▼ Under 44
Projected
23–33
✗ NCSU lost
Trend: Under ✓ Model: VT by 3.5 ✓ Model: Under 0.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Non-conf
2-2 · #101
25
2-2 · #98
42
Spread
USM -5.5
✓ USM W ATS
Total
55.5 ▼2
▲ Over 67 · Q4
Projected
26–30
✓ USM won
Trend: Under ✗ Model: JXST by 8 ✗ Model: Over 1 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
3-1 · #94
27
2-2 · #112
22
Spread
WKU -3.5
✓ WKU W ATS
Total
59.5 ▼1
▼ Under 49
Projected
31–27
✓ WKU won
Model: WKU by 1.5 ✓ Model: Under 0.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q3
Final · Conf
4-0 · #61
55
1-2 · #108
26
Spread
MEM -13.5
✓ MEM W ATS
Total
62.5 ▲1
▲ Over 81 · Q4
Projected
36–22
✓ MEM won
Trend: MEM ATS ✓ Model: MEM by 0.5 ✓ Model: Under 5 ✗ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Conf
4-0 · #4
30
3-0 · #17
24
Spread
PSU -4.5
✓ ORE W ATS
Total
52.5 ▼1
▲ Over 54 · OT
Projected
27–31
✗ PSU lost
Trend: ORE ATS ✓ Model: ORE by 3 ✓ Model: Over 5 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
2-1 · #11
24
3-0 · #7
21
Spread
UGA -2.5
✓ ALA W ATS
Total
52.5 ▼1
▼ Under 45
Projected
26–29
✗ UGA lost
Trend: ALA ATS ✓ Model: ALA by 1 ✓ Model: Over 2.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Non-conf
0-3 · #136
6
4-0 · #18
42
Spread
MIZ -44.5
✓ MASS W ATS
Total
56.5 ▲1
▼ Under 48
Projected
5–50
✓ MIZ won
Trend: MIZ ATS ✗ Model: MIZ by 2 ✗ Model: Under 2 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Non-conf
2-2 · #60
20
1-2 · #116
3
Spread
CSU -6.5
✓ WSU W ATS
Total
48.5 ▼2
▼ Under 23
Projected
21–28
✗ CSU lost
Trend: CSU ATS ✗Trend: Under ✓ Model: CSU by 0.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Non-conf
1-2 · #106
29
1-3 · #85
30
Spread
STAN -3.5
✓ SJSU W ATS
Total
49.5
▲ Over 59 · Q4
Projected
24–28
✓ STAN won
Trend: SJSU ATS ✓ Model: Over 3 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Non-conf
2-1 · #115
14
2-1 · #55
47
Spread
BOIS -17.5
✓ BOIS W ATS
Total
59.5 ▼2
▲ Over 61 · Q4
Projected
22–39
✓ BOIS won
Trend: Under ✗ Model: APP by 1.5 ✗ Model: Over 1 ✓ Cover settled: Q3
Final · Conf
2-1 · #52
13
2-2 · #43
35
Spread
SC -6.5
✓ SC W ATS
Total
46.5 ▼1
▲ Over 48 · Q4
Projected
19–25
✓ SC won
Model: UK by 4 ✗ Model: Under 2.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q2
Final · Conf
2-2 · #88
51
1-3 · #114
54
Spread
MRSH -1.5
✓ UL W ATS
Total
48.5 ▲2
▲ Over 105 · Q3
Projected
25–24
✗ MRSH lost
Trend: MRSH ATS ✗Trend: Over ✓ Model: UL by 3 ✓ Cover settled: Q4
Final · Conf
3-1 · #93
30
UTEP
1-3 · #131
11
Spread
LT -3.5
✓ LT W ATS
Total
47.5 ▼1
▼ Under 41
Projected
24–22
✓ LT won
Model: UTEP by 5 ✗ Model: Under 1.5 ✓ Cover settled: Q1
Final · Conf
BYU
3-0 · #19
24
2-2 · #75
21
Spread
BYU -6.5
✓ COLO W ATS
Total
48.5 ▲1
▼ Under 45
Projected
28–21
✓ BYU won
Trend: BYU ATS ✗ Model: BYU by 1 ✗ Model: Over 0.5 ✗ Cover settled: Q1
Loading…
StatusMatchupSpreadMoveTotalModelSignalDetails
Loading…
Hover a column name for what it means. Records are before kickoff; #N = power rank. Data signal badges: green = ATS, teal = Over, purple = Under; solid = moderate or strong lean (blue left edge on the row); ✓/✗ = how the lean did. ↗ Line toward model the line (or total) has moved toward the model's pick since the open; hover it for how such picks have done. small sample · QB ⓘ quarterback on the injury report (hover or tap it to see who). In our 2023–26 backtest, moderate-or-stronger ATS leans went 365-359 (50%) and total leans 21-19 (53%) over 2024–26, so treat them as context, not picks.
Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total