Who will win Fordham vs Campbell?
The model gives Fordham a 74% chance to beat Campbell, with a projected score of Fordham 67, Campbell 58.
Half of games like thisFour in five
Calls of 70–80% have been right 74.9% of the time in 7,564 past games, and the typical miss on the margin is 9.5 points. After the final, the result is pinned to this strip. As of 2:23 AM ET on November 13, 2026. Updated three times a day until tip-off.
Players to watch
| Player | Pts | Reb | Ast | Last games | Chance of |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Fordham | |||||
| EdwardsG · 34 min | 14.4 | 2.5 | 1.4 | 15+ 45% | |
| SirtautaiteF · 25 min | 12.9 | 6.6 | 0.6 | 15+ 36% | |
| EasleyG · 30 min | 10.8 | 3.4 | 4.1 | 10+ 54% | |
| KulykG · 19 min | 9.3 | 2.8 | 0.5 | 10+ 43% | |
 Campbell | |||||
| FeltonG · 35 min | 13.9 | 6.3 | 1.3 | 15+ 42% | |
| SchneebergF · 26 min | 9.5 | 6.2 | 1.0 | 10+ 45% | |
| PredojevicF · 26 min | 6.5 | 4.7 | 1.2 | 5+ 61% | |
| DavisG · 17 min | 5.0 | 1.8 | 1.0 | 5+ 46% | |
Bars: points in the player's latest games this season. Blue line: tonight's projection. Every regular's line
The game without one player
Without Olivia Kulyk: Fordham 70%Campbell 30%
The white mark is the call with her: Fordham 74%.
| Player | Points a game she adds | Fordham without her | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fordham | ||||
| Olivia Kulyk | 1.5 | 70% | −4 | 66–59 |
| Ugne Sirtautaite | 1.0 | 71% | −3 | 66–59 |
Change is in Fordham's win chance, in points. Scores read Fordham, then Campbell. A player's value is what the team is better by with her than with a replacement, from the player ratings.
Model against the line
Your call
All of today's gamesPlay-by-play
Team numbers
Form
The spread and the total are the lines logged with each prediction. Form is what happened; the ratings above already count recent games more.
Offense against defense
| Fordham | Campbell | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 87.4 228th | 80.7 309th |
| Points allowed per 100 | 94.4 179th | 102.9 338th |
| Possessions a game | 72.1 164th | 69.4 357th |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 47.6% 67th | 44.9% 217th |
| Opponents' shooting | 45.6% 181st | 48.2% 321st |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 24.8% 272nd | 30.2% 361st |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 32.8% 176th | 34.1% 116th |
| Free throws per shot | 0.23 61st | 0.19 291st |
The widest gap: Fordham's defense (179th) against Campbell's offense (309th), of 363 teams.
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Fordham 32, Campbell 27
- First-half margin
- Fordham by 4.7
- First-half points, both teams
- 59.3
- Projected second half
- Fordham 35, Campbell 31
- Second-half points, both teams
- 65.7
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Fordham, first halves so far
- Led 3 of 4 · 39.0 scored, 30.8 allowed
- Campbell, first halves so far
- Led 0 of 4 · 21.0 scored, 42.8 allowed
Our own projection, not a sportsbook's first-half line. On 10,911 past games it had not seen, the halftime leader was right 73.0% of the time and the first-half total was off by 8.0 points on average. This season: 404 of 492 halftime leaders right. Scorecard
Player projections
Fordham
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lakresha EdwardsG | 34 | 14.4 | 2.5 | 1.4 | 2.5 |
| 15+ pts 45% · 3+ reb 42% · 3+ threes 42% | |||||
| Carryn EasleyG | 30 | 10.8 | 3.4 | 4.1 | 0.8 |
| 10+ pts 54% · 4+ ast 57% · 1+ threes 51% | |||||
| Anastasija VeljovicG | 27 | 8.3 | 5.7 | 1.1 | 0.6 |
| 10+ pts 36% · 6+ reb 48% · 1+ threes 42% | |||||
| Ugne SirtautaiteF | 25 | 12.9 | 6.6 | 0.6 | 0.1 |
| 15+ pts 36% · 7+ reb 47% | |||||
| Zala SrotF | 23 | 4.2 | 4.0 | 1.2 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 37% · 4+ reb 53% · 2+ ast 32% | |||||
| Caitlyn MartinG | 20 | 3.3 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 0.4 |
| 5+ pts 29% · 2+ reb 45% · 2+ ast 50% | |||||
| Olivia KulykG | 19 | 9.3 | 2.8 | 0.5 | 1.4 |
| 10+ pts 43% · 3+ reb 50% · 2+ threes 37% | |||||
| Precious OmosholaF | 14 | 3.1 | 3.9 | 0.3 | 0.0 |
| 5+ pts 26% · 4+ reb 51% | |||||
Campbell
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jasmine FeltonG | 35 | 13.9 | 6.3 | 1.3 | 1.1 |
| 15+ pts 42% · 7+ reb 44% · 1+ threes 61% | |||||
| Jessica WoodsG | 28 | 3.2 | 2.9 | 1.3 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 28% · 3+ reb 51% · 2+ ast 36% | |||||
| Genesis SchneebergF | 26 | 9.5 | 6.2 | 1.0 | 0.1 |
| 10+ pts 45% · 6+ reb 54% · 2+ ast 27% | |||||
| Hana PredojevicF | 26 | 6.5 | 4.7 | 1.2 | 0.5 |
| 5+ pts 61% · 5+ reb 48% · 1+ threes 35% | |||||
| Emerson ThompsonG | 19 | 3.2 | 2.2 | 1.0 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 27% · 2+ reb 58% · 1+ threes 29% | |||||
| Amit ArieliG | 17 | 3.7 | 1.8 | 0.8 | 0.6 |
| 5+ pts 32% · 2+ reb 48% · 1+ threes 45% | |||||
| Kiaya DavisG | 17 | 5.0 | 1.8 | 1.0 | 0.6 |
| 5+ pts 46% · 2+ reb 49% · 1+ threes 40% | |||||
| Mikayla TabornF | 15 | 2.3 | 2.9 | 0.5 | 0.1 |
| 5+ pts 18% · 3+ reb 52% | |||||
Our own projections from each player's minutes and production, this opponent and the game's pace: not a sportsbook's lines. Under each name, the round numbers the player is about as likely as not to reach. How they have done
Win probability
Game chat
Loading the chat…