Loyola Maryland Greyhounds vs Towson Tigers basketball final score
Thu, Nov 12 · 7:00 PM ET · SECU Arena, Towson, MD
410 InvitationalNon-conferenceSECU Arena, Towson, MD
Loyola MD
1-2 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #317
@
Towson
1-2 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #146
Final
6090
Final score
Projected 62.9 – 79.2
L-MD win 8%TOW win 92%
MarketClose
Spread
TOW −13.5
open TOW −13.5
Total
133.5
open 138.5
Our line
TOW −16.3
Our total
142.1
as of Thu, Nov 12 · 6:51 PM ET
Our play
How our line is built
each step, from an even game to our lineSpread
Even game
0.0
Towsonrated 0.7 above average
+0.7
Loyola MDrated 12.0 below average
+12.0
Home court
+3.6
Our line
TOW −16.3
◂ Loyola MD sideTowson side ▸
Total
Average D-I game
151.4
Towsonlower-scoring games
−10.5
Loyola MDhigher-scoring games
+1.2
Our line
142.1
Axis starts at 135 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
The spread is seen from the home side: a plus moves it toward Towson.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 66.8, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw season pace, Towson is the faster team (68.2, #267 of 365) and Loyola MD the slower (68.1, #269). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
66.8
per team, 40 min
Market total
133.5
Market close · open 138.5
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.7#234
Loyola MD
67.6#331
Towson
How this game plays
points this game from the four factors, vs an average D-I matchupOur line
TOW −16.3
Four factors 9.9Not in these stats 6.4
From the four factors
Towson has the ball−1.5
Loyola MD has the ball−11.4
Towson has the ball
✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 46.2% #265 · L-MD allows 49.6% #165−2.6
✓Takes care of the ballTO% 20.5% #268 · L-MD forces 13.2% #323 · ~11 turnovers+1.4
✗Few trips to the lineFTR 41.8% #113 · L-MD allows 31.1% #112 · FT 50.7% #359−1.2
✓Wins second chancesOR% 37.3% #72 · L-MD allows 27.4% #101+0.9
Loyola MD has the ball
✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 41.5% #322 · TOW allows 47.2% #105−6.3
✗Coughs it upTO% 17.6% #177 · TOW forces 22.5% #52 · ~14 turnovers−2.0
✗Few trips to the lineFTR 17.7% #359 · TOW allows 40.0% #232 · FT 54.5% #354−1.5
✗Few second chancesOR% 28.2% #244 · TOW allows 28.4% #123−1.5
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shootLoyola MDoffense vsTowsondefense
Share of shots by zone
Loyola MD shoots
30.4
4.5
18.8
46.4
Towson allows
31.2
8.7
6.5
53.6
D-I average
38.1
8.1
12.5
41.4
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 47.1%#306 | 48.8%#60 | 58.0% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 20.0%#296 | 58.3%#316 | 38.0% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 14.3%#326 | 44.4%#261 | 35.6% |
| Three | 32.2%#180 | 30.5%#141 | 32.5% |
Towsonoffense vsLoyola MDdefense
Share of shots by zone
Towson shoots
46.5
5.2
14.2
34.2
Loyola MD allows
39.6
3.6
12.6
44.1
D-I average
38.1
8.1
12.5
41.4
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 47.2%#305 | 56.8%#162 | 58.0% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 37.5%#161 | 25.0%#68 | 38.0% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 36.4%#161 | 50.0%#294 | 35.6% |
| Three | 34.5%#134 | 28.3%#90 | 32.5% |
RimShort 2 (≤9 ft)Mid 2 (10 ft+)Three
Zones from play-by-play shot descriptions; garbage time removed. Bars show the share of field-goal attempts in each zone; where a slice is too thin for its number, the shares are listed under the bar. FG% ranks: #1 = best for that side (most accurate shooting, stingiest defense).
Shot volume
Extra scoring chances from rebounds, turnovers and the foul lineLoyola MD
−6.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#274 of 365
Off reb %
28.2%
#244
Def reb %
72.6%
#101
Turnover %
17.6%
#177
Forced TO %
13.2%
#323
FT rate
17.7%
#359
FT allowed
31.1%
#112
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.1
Defensive rebounding+1.4
Ball security+0.4
Forcing turnovers−3.4
Foul shots drawn−5.1
Foul shots allowed+1.6
Towson
+5.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#107 of 365
Off reb %
37.3%
#72
Def reb %
71.6%
#123
Turnover %
20.5%
#268
Forced TO %
22.5%
#52
FT rate
41.8%
#113
FT allowed
40.0%
#232
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+2.0
Defensive rebounding+1.1
Ball security−1.7
Forcing turnovers+3.2
Foul shots drawn+1.2
Foul shots allowed−0.7
Towson has more extra scoring chances per game: +5.1 (#107 of 365) to Loyola MD’s −6.1 (#274).
Grade = extra shots and foul-line trips per game compared with a D-I average team, built from six season rates. Cell shading is the national rank for each rate (greener = better for that team).
Rotation
Who has been playing, and who has notLoyola MD2026-27 numbers through Thu, Nov 12 · last game: Mount St Marys, Nov 6
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | Min/40, last 8 | Last 3 vs before | Status | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | G | So | 6'5" | 4-4 | 29.8 | 36 | — | Started last | 8.3 | 4.3 | 5.3 | 3.0 | 39.2% | 38.9% | 4.5 | 80.0% | 24.8% | |
| 33 | G | Jr | 6'0" | 4-4 | 25.5 | 28 | — | Started last | 18.3 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 1.5 | 60.9% | 41.4% | 7.3 | 94.4% | 33.8% | |
| 0 | F | Fr | 6'5" | 4-4 | 23.0 | 14 | — | Started last | 8.5 | 5.3 | 0.8 | 2.0 | 48.5% | 22.2% | 2.3 | 28.6% | 27.6% | |
| 13 | F | So | 6'6" | 3-3 | 27.3 | 31 | — | Started last | 9.3 | 8.3 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 32.4% | 21.1% | 6.3 | 75.0% | 30.6% | |
| 3 | G | Fr | 6'4" | 4-0 | 19.5 | 20 | — | Bench | 5.5 | 3.0 | 0.8 | 1.8 | 58.3% | 41.7% | 3.0 | 33.3% | 19.4% | |
| 17 | F | So | 6'9" | 4-4 | 18.3 | 15 | — | Started last | 4.0 | 4.8 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0% | 33.3% | 0.8 | 50.0% | 14.0% | |
| 24 | F | Fr | 6'7" | 4-0 | 18.0 | 25 | — | Bench | 4.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 0.8 | 0.0% | 14.8% | |
| 14 | F | So | 6'7" | 4-1 | 17.0 | 16 | — | Bench | 2.3 | 2.8 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 19.4% | 7.1% | 3.5 | 100.0% | 16.7% | |
| 1 | G | So | 6'2" | 4-0 | 14.0 | 13 | — | Bench | 2.5 | 3.3 | 2.5 | 1.0 | 33.3% | 28.6% | 1.8 | 50.0% | 18.0% | |
| 2 | G | Jr | 6'2" | 4-0 | 7.5 | 5 | — | Bench | 4.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 60.0% | 46.2% | 3.3 | — | 32.3% | |
| 7 | G | Fr | 6'3" | 3-0 | 4.0 | 0 | — | Missed last game | 2.3 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 70.0% | 50.0% | 0.7 | — | 23.3% | |
| 9 | F | So | 6'10" | 3-0 | 3.3 | — | — | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 37.5% | 33.3% | 1.0 | — | 22.1% | ||
| 4 | G | Fr | 6'0" | 3-0 | 2.3 | — | — | 4.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 125.0% | 100.0% | 0.7 | 100.0% | 38.6% |
Competitive minutes leave out garbage time (provisional rule: a second-half lead of 25+ inside 15:00, 20+ inside 10:00, 15+ inside 5:00 or 10+ inside 2:00, held to the end) and are shown per 40 minutes. Status says only whether a player appeared; the reason is not published.
Trends
Results against the closing spread and total, last ten games, entering this gameLoyola MD
Against the spread
Season
1-1
Home
0-0
Road
1-1
Last 10
1-1
avg cover 0.0
Missed the spread in the last game
Over / under
Season
0-2
Home
0-0
Road
0-2
Last 10
0-2
avg vs total −20.0
Under 2 straight
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 9 | Washington Maryland Shoremen | H | W 106–64 | — | — | — | — | 137.3 | 82.9 | 77.2 |
| Nov 6 | Mount St Marys | A | L 57–68 | +5.5 | L−5.5 | 149.0 | U125 | 82.9 | 98.9 | 68.7 |
| Nov 2 | Georgetown | A | L 58–80 | +27.5 | W+5.5 | 154.0 | U138 | 85.9 | 118.5 | 67.5 |
| Mar 5 | Colgate | A | L 77–90 | +5.5 | L−7.5 | 154.0 | O167 | 119.4 | 139.5 | 64.5 |
| Feb 28 | Holy Cross | A | W 76–62 | +1.0 | W+15.0 | 151.0 | U138 | 120.0 | 97.9 | 63.3 |
| Feb 25 | Navy | H | L 51–78 | +6.5 | L−20.5 | 146.5 | U129 | 83.8 | 128.1 | 60.9 |
| Feb 21 | Colgate | A | L 98–101 OT | +8.5 | W+5.5 | 149.5 | O199 | 112.3 | 115.7 | 87.3 |
| Feb 18 | Army | H | L 77–87 | −4.5 | L−14.5 | 150.0 | O164 | 111.6 | 126.1 | 69.0 |
| Feb 15 | Holy Cross | H | W 83–73 | −4.5 | W+5.5 | 145.5 | O156 | 127.5 | 112.2 | 65.1 |
| Feb 11 | Lafayette | A | W 68–54 | +3.0 | W+17.0 | 148.5 | U122 | 103.9 | 82.5 | 65.5 |
Towson
Against the spread
Season
1-2
Home
1-0
Road
0-2
Last 10
1-2
avg cover +1.5
Covered the last game
Over / under
Season
1-2
Home
0-1
Road
1-1
Last 10
1-2
avg vs total −9.7
Under 2 straight
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 9 | Long Island | H | W 66–46 | −8.0 | W+12.0 | 139.5 | U112 | 100.5 | 70.0 | 65.7 |
| Nov 5 | Utah | A | L 57–67 | +8.0 | L−2.0 | 138.0 | U124 | 87.0 | 102.3 | 65.5 |
| Nov 2 | Santa Clara | A | L 70–89 | +13.5 | L−5.5 | 146.5 | O159 | 95.4 | 121.3 | 73.4 |
| Mar 9 | Hofstra | N | L 65–68 OT | +4.0 | W+1.0 | 131.5 | O133 | 106.8 | 111.7 | 60.9 |
| Mar 8 | Charleston | N | W 81–56 | +2.5 | W+27.5 | 139.0 | U137 | 134.0 | 92.7 | 60.4 |
| Mar 7 | Hampton | N | W 74–68 | −7.5 | L−1.5 | 132.0 | O142 | 108.9 | 100.1 | 67.9 |
| Mar 3 | Stony Brook | A | W 69–57 | −1.0 | W+11.0 | 135.5 | U126 | 112.7 | 93.1 | 61.2 |
| Feb 28 | Campbell | H | W 71–67 | −5.0 | L−1.0 | 141.5 | U138 | 120.0 | 113.2 | 59.2 |
| Feb 26 | Elon | H | W 58–56 | −5.5 | L−3.5 | 144.0 | U114 | 94.1 | 90.9 | 61.6 |
| Feb 22 | Drexel | A | L 62–68 | −2.5 | L−8.5 | 131.0 | U130 | 93.9 | 102.9 | 66.1 |
Records vs the closing line describe the past; ten games is a small sample.
Team comparison
national rank toned left for away, right for homeLoyola MDTowson
Efficiency
99.4
101.6
110.8
100.3
69.7
67.6
-2.1
3.2
Shooting
41.5%
46.2%
35.4%
43.5%
32.2%
34.5%
54.5%
50.7%
17.7%
41.8%
Ball control & glass
17.6%
20.5%
13.2%
22.5%
28.2%
37.3%
27.4%
28.4%
8.8%
10.8%
10.8%
15.7%
Style
47.6%
32.4%
36.5%
46.6%
11.3%
9.3%
64.3%
42.0%
40.3%
33.9%
Roster
1.84
2.29
6'4.8"
6'6.3"
23.5%
25.7%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputLoyola MD
Returning minutes: 31.8%Returning production: 24.8%
Lost
- Braeden Speed 32.7 mpg, 15.3 ppg · transferred to FAU
- Jordan Stiemke 27.5 mpg, 9.9 ppg · transferred to Jax State
- Tyson Commander 22.8 mpg, 4.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Emmett Adair 21.4 mpg, 12.3 ppg · transferred to George Mason
- Jacob Theodosiou 19.7 mpg, 11.0 ppg · transferred to Duke
- Jonas Sirtautas 11.4 mpg, 3.8 ppg · transferred to Georgia St
Added
- Max Ortega from Wofford · 6.3 mpg, 2.4 ppg last season
- Alex Huguet from UL Monroe · 3.5 mpg, 0.9 ppg last season
- D'Andre Harrison from Kansas City · 2.4 mpg, 0.5 ppg last season
- Mason Hagedorn from VMI · 2.0 mpg, 0.4 ppg last season
- Abdullah Amzil from UC Davis · 1.4 mpg, 0.2 ppg last season
- Gage Howard no D1 minutes last season
Returns 32% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5 (4 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Towson
Returning minutes: 25.7%Returning production: 21.8%
Lost
- Dylan Williamson 35.9 mpg, 14.6 ppg · transferred to Rhode Island
- Tyler Tejada 33.4 mpg, 16.7 ppg · transferred to Cincinnati
- Jack Doumbia Jr. 22.5 mpg, 10.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Tyler Coleman 18.8 mpg, 5.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Mor Seck 14.5 mpg, 3.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Tyler Schmidt 13.2 mpg, 2.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Ben Roseborough from San José St · 9.2 mpg, 4.0 ppg last season
- Denis Badalau from Rutgers · 8.8 mpg, 2.2 ppg last season
- Zion Stanford from Villanova · 1.5 mpg, 0.4 ppg last season
- Stephon Ashley Wright no D1 minutes last season
- Christian Doerr no D1 minutes last season
- Devan Kirk no D1 minutes last season
Returns 26% of last season's minutes; lost 4 of its top 5 (2 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Line history
Market line, home spread or game totalLines by book
| Book | Spread (home) open → now | Total open → now | ML home | ML away |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DraftKings | -14.5→-13.5-105 | 136.5→133.5o-110 u-110 | -1100 | +700 |
| FanDuel | -13.5-115 | 138.5→133.5o-110 u-110 | -1400 | +800 |
| BetMGM | -13.5-110 | 138.5→133.5o-110 u-110 | -1200 | +725 |
| BetRivers | -13.5-106 | 138.5→133.5o-105 u-118 | -1250 | +650 |
| Caesars | -13.5-110 | 138.5→134o-110 u-110 | -1100 | +700 |
| Fanatics | -13.5-110 | 139→133.5o-110 u-110 | -1100 | +700 |
| BetOnline | -14→-13.5-115 | 138.5→133o-110 u-110 | — | — |
| Bovada | -13.5-110 | 138.5→134o-105 u-115 | -1100 | +650 |
| theScore Bet | -14.5→-13.5-105 | 136.5→133.5o-110 u-110 | -1600 | +800 |
| Hard Rock | -13.5-105 | 138.5→133.5o-105 u-115 | -1300 | +650 |
| Kalshi | -12.5-117 | 137.5→133.5o-104 u+100 | -1011 | +900 |
| Polymarket | -13.5-104 | 133.5o-104 u+100 | -1011 | +900 |
| Novig | -13.5-106 | 138.5→— | -953 | +900 |
DraftKings
FanDuel
BetMGM
BetRivers
Caesars
Fanatics
BetOnline
Bovada
theScore Bet
Hard Rock
Kalshi
Polymarket
Novigopen = first-sighted line for this event · now = latest capture
Head-to-head
this season and last| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Mon, Nov 3 | 2025-26 | Towson 67 – 56 Loyola MD(N) |
More games on Thu, Nov 12
- Kansas City vs George Mason · 3:00 PM ET
- Morgan St at UMBC · 6:00 PM ET
- Bradley vs Coppin St · 6:00 PM ET
- Tennessee Tech at Indiana · 6:30 PM ET
- Mercyhurst at Penn State · 6:30 PM ET
- Niagara at Bowling Green · 7:00 PM ET
- Canisius at Brown · 7:00 PM ET
- MD Eastern at Rhode Island · 7:00 PM ET
- Bakersfield at W Illinois · 7:00 PM ET
- Southern Utah at High Point · 7:00 PM ET
- Mercer at West Virginia · 7:00 PM ET
- Stetson at Howard · 7:00 PM ET
- Monmouth at Quinnipiac · 7:00 PM ET
- C Connecticut at Sacred Heart · 7:00 PM ET
- W Michigan at Purdue FW · 7:00 PM ET
- Richmond at S Illinois · 8:00 PM ET
- Southern at Minnesota · 8:00 PM ET
- LMU vs South Alabama · 8:00 PM ET
- Oklahoma St at Texas A&M · 8:00 PM ET
- West Florida at Alabama A&M · 8:00 PM ET
- New Mexico St at UTEP · 9:00 PM ET
- Montana St at BYU · 9:00 PM ET
- UC Riverside at San José St · 10:00 PM ET
The CBB Matchups tab lays out the day's Division I slate: matchup, tip time, records and rank, and — once posted — the market spread and total (the median across books when no market line is up). Three views switch the table between projected scores, pace and totals, and each team's offensive and defensive tendencies. Each game opens into opponent-adjusted possessions, efficiency and four-factor tendencies for both teams, plus recent form, rotation and head-to-head history. Every game also carries our projected score, spread and total, from our line: the same view our bets are made from.
What these numbers mean: line shopping.