Game day
No over/under posted yet · our projected total 130.9
- Tip-off
A probability, not a promise. A 81% pick still loses about 2 times in 10.
Advantages Why Fordham can win
- Simulation: Fordham win 4,065 of 5,000 simulated games.
- Recent scoring margins: worth about 3.2 points to Fordham in our ratings.
- Home court: Fordham play at home, worth about 3.5 points in women's college basketball.
- Net rating (points per 100 possessions): Fordham 236th (-6.1), Niagara 361st (-34.0) of 364.
- Point differential per game: Fordham 236th (-4.3), Niagara 361st (-25.7) of 364.
- Team matchup: where Fordham can take advantage. Their offensive rebounding (29th of 364) meets the Niagara defensive rebounding (361st), so look for them to crash the glass for second chances. And their ball pressure (38th of 364) meets the Niagara ball security (360th): a chance to turn steals into easy points in transition.
- Star matchup: Best player against best player, Alexis Black (Fordham: 16.3 pts, 3.0 reb, 3.2 ast, Game Score 10.0) has the edge on Talia Dial (Niagara: 11.7 pts, 2.0 reb, 0.9 ast, Game Score 3.6).
Disadvantages Why Fordham may not
- Upset odds: Niagara win 935 of 5,000 simulations (19%). A 81% pick still loses about 2 times in 10.
- Strength of schedule: Niagara 149th (+0.2), Fordham 274th (-0.6) of 364.
- Range of outcomes: in the worst 10% of simulations Fordham lose by 6 or more.
- Season-long ratings: betting lines have rated Niagara about 0.7 points stronger over recent games.
- Weak spot: Fordham rank 337th of 364 in defensive rebounding (share of misses) (62.9%).
- Team matchup: where Niagara can push back. Their ball pressure (23rd of 364) meets the Fordham ball security (286th), so look for them to turn steals into easy points in transition. And their offensive rebounding (220th of 364) meets the Fordham defensive rebounding (337th): a chance to crash the glass for second chances.
- Star matchup: the key positions lean Fordham on paper, but Talia Dial (11.7 pts, 2.0 reb, 0.9 ast, Game Score 3.6) is the kind of player who can swing one game.
🥭 Mango Sliced Facts
Ask about this matchup. Answers come only from the numbers on this page.
Loading…
Sign in or create a free account to ask.
An AI reads this page for you and can get things wrong; the numbers above are the source. Not betting advice.
Team news
Loading the latest headlines...
Headlines from ESPN and CBS Sports, each linked to the full story. Injuries, lineups, suspensions and coaching news come first. We leave out rumors, gossip about players' private lives and betting promos.
The line and our numbers
| Market | AZMango | |
|---|---|---|
| Spread | No line yet | FOR -9.8 |
| Total points | n/a | 130.9 |
| Win chance | NIA n/a · FOR n/a | NIA 19% · FOR 81% |
| Moneyline | NIA +434 · FOR -434 (fair) |
No betting line has been posted for this game yet. Sportsbooks post lines for many women's college games only on game day, and smaller-conference games often get none at all. Books also take a line down for a while when a key player's status is unclear. We check ESPN's lines before each day's games and add the line as soon as there is one. Odds change all the time, so check a sportsbook before acting on any number here.
5,000 simulated games, possession by possession
- Typical score: Fordham 80, Niagara 70.
- 80% of simulations land between Niagara by 6 and Fordham by 26.
Still out?
Women's college basketball has no league-wide injury report, so we show what a fan can know before tip-off: regulars who sat out each team's last game. Our model counts them as likely out, exactly as it did in the backtest.
NIA Niagara
Every regular played last game.
FOR Fordham
Every regular played last game.
Check the team's own news before the game; players return and new absences appear at tip-off.
Also checked (ESPN and CBS Sports news): nothing beyond the report.
Side by side
| NIA | FOR | |
|---|---|---|
| 0-0 | Record | 0-0 |
| -34.0 361 | Net rating | -6.1 236 |
| 68.0 361 | Offensive rating | 85.3 259 |
| 102.0 334 | Defensive rating | 91.4 181 |
| +0.2 149 | Strength of schedule | -0.6 274 |
| 36.1% 363 | Effective FG% | 40.5% 333 |
| 52.5% 359 | Opponent eFG% | 45.4% 168 |
| 30.9 360 | Turnovers per 100 | 25.1 286 |
| 30.0% 220 | Offensive rebound % | 37.6% 29 |
| 25.9% 339 | 3-point % | 28.3% 283 |
| 75.6 37 | Pace | 70.8 197 |
Small numbers are ranks among 364 Division I teams (1 = best; pace 1 = fastest). Ratings are points per 100 possessions; strength of schedule is the average rating of opponents faced (2025-26 season and this season so far).
Last 2 meetings
| Date | Season | Score | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-11-26 | 2025-26 | Fordham 70 @ Niagara 47 | FOR |
| 2016-12-22 | 2016-17 | Niagara 69 @ Fordham 92 | FOR |
Your pick
Make your pick before kickoff and see how you stack up against the Mango. Challenge a friend on this game · All picks · Leaderboard
What if?
Change the game and see how the chances move. This starts from our number and shifts the expected margin, using how much real results scatter around the line (12 points in a typical NCAAW game).
Our number. Move the slider or flip a player.
Game chat
Sign in or create a free account to chat.
Be a good sport: no threats, hate, personal details or spam. Open the full chat
Basis: power ratings only (no betting line yet). 5,000 simulated games, checked against a walk-forward backtest of 11,204 Division I games since 2020-21. Model version 1. How it works