Norfolk State Spartans vs William & Mary Tribe basketball final score
Sun, Nov 8 · 6:00 PM ET · Kaplan Arena, Williamsburg, VA
Non-conferenceKaplan Arena, Williamsburg, VA
Norfolk St
2025-26: 15-17 · 8-7 conf
Efficiency #282
@
William & Mary
2025-26: 20-12 · 11-9 conf
Efficiency #133
Final
73104
Final score
Projected 70.5 – 86.0
NORF win 9%W&M win 91%
MarketClose
Spread
W&M −11.0
open W&M −7.5
Total
157.5
open 156.5
Our line
W&M −15.6
as of Sun, Nov 8 · 5:51 PM ET
Our play
How our line is built
each step, from an even game to our lineSpread
Even game
0.0
William & Maryrated 1.5 above average
+1.5
Norfolk Strated 9.8 below average
+9.8
Home court
+4.2
Our line
W&M −15.6
◂ Norfolk St sideWilliam & Mary side ▸
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the line by 0.1. The spread is seen from the home side: a plus moves it toward William & Mary. Our total joins once both teams have played 3 games.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 74.7, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, William & Mary is the faster team (73.6, #9 of 365) and Norfolk St the slower (69.1, #140). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
74.7
per team, 40 min
Market total
157.5
Market close · open 156.5
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
71.2#151
Norfolk St
74.2#25
William & Mary
How this game plays
points this game from the four factors, vs an average D-I matchupOur line
W&M −15.6
Four factors 3.4Not in these stats 12.2
From the four factors
William & Mary has the ball+3.2
Norfolk St has the ball−0.2
William & Mary has the ball
✓Shoots it welleFG% 54.3% #58 · NORF allows 51.7% #196+3.3
✗Few second chancesOR% 26.0% #324 · NORF allows 32.3% #270−1.7
✓Gets to the lineFTR 44.0% #9 · NORF allows 45.3% #351 · FT 74.9% #87+1.1
✓Takes care of the ballTO% 16.5% #169 · NORF forces 18.8% #56 · ~13 turnovers+0.5
Norfolk St has the ball
✗Coughs it upTO% 18.7% #310 · W&M forces 19.0% #48 · ~14 turnovers−0.8
✓Shoots it welleFG% 49.3% #277 · W&M allows 51.9% #205+0.3
✓Wins second chancesOR% 32.5% #108 · W&M allows 31.5% #229+0.2
✓Gets to the lineFTR 43.5% #13 · W&M allows 35.5% #195 · FT 68.1% #323+0.1
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersNorfolk Stoffense vsWilliam & Marydefense
Share of shots by zone
Norfolk St shoots
43.1
5.2
21.8
30.0
William & Mary allows
38.6
4.2
11.3
45.8
D-I average
38.0
7.9
12.4
41.6
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 55.3%#292 | 59.9%#222 | 58.0% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 36.1%#268 | 34.2%#48 | 38.0% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 36.5%#249 | 40.2%#249 | 34.9% |
| Three | 34.2%#157 | 33.1%#126 | 32.3% |
William & Maryoffense vsNorfolk Stdefense
Share of shots by zone
William & Mary shoots
43.8
4.6
8.6
43.0
Norfolk St allows
38.8
3.6
14.7
42.9
D-I average
38.0
7.9
12.4
41.6
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 64.0%#37 | 61.1%#273 | 58.0% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 32.0%#332 | 41.2%#213 | 38.0% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 39.7%#120 | 42.7%#327 | 34.9% |
| Three | 33.0%#233 | 32.0%#61 | 32.3% |
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 line · 2025-26 numbersNorfolk St
−0.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#183 of 365
Off reb %
32.5%
#108
Def reb %
67.7%
#270
Turnover %
18.7%
#310
Forced TO %
18.8%
#56
FT rate
43.5%
#13
FT allowed
45.3%
#351
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.7
Defensive rebounding−0.5
Ball security−1.3
Forcing turnovers+1.4
Foul shots drawn+2.2
Foul shots allowed−2.6
William & Mary
+2.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#83 of 365
Off reb %
26.0%
#324
Def reb %
68.5%
#229
Turnover %
16.5%
#169
Forced TO %
19.0%
#48
FT rate
44.0%
#9
FT allowed
35.5%
#195
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.4
Defensive rebounding−0.3
Ball security+0.2
Forcing turnovers+1.6
Foul shots drawn+2.3
Foul shots allowed−0.1
William & Mary has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.3 (#83 of 365) to Norfolk St’s −0.1 (#183).
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
Norfolk St2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | G | Jr | 6'4" | 3-3 | 31.7 | 16.3 | 4.3 | 3.3 | 1.7 | 43.1% | 25.0% | 1.3 | 85.7% | 28.0% | |
| 33 | G | Fr | 6'1" | 3-3 | 24.7 | 2.0 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 20.0% | 18.2% | 3.7 | — | 13.1% | |
| 6 | G | Sr | 6'6" | 3-3 | 24.0 | 11.0 | 3.3 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 46.7% | 31.6% | 6.3 | 83.3% | 27.7% | |
| 3 | G | Fr | 6'3" | 3-0 | 23.7 | 6.7 | 0.7 | 2.7 | 2.0 | 59.4% | 50.0% | 0.7 | 16.7% | 19.9% | |
| 23 | G | Fr | 6'3" | 3-3 | 22.3 | 14.0 | 3.7 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 48.8% | 25.0% | 4.0 | 37.5% | 41.3% | |
| 21 | F | Sr | 6'10" | 3-3 | 20.3 | 8.7 | 7.3 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 71.4% | — | 0.0 | 75.0% | 20.4% | |
| 13 | G | Fr | 6'5" | 3-0 | 16.3 | 1.7 | 2.3 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 25.0% | 33.3% | 1.0 | 50.0% | 12.4% | |
| 35 | G | Sr | 6'6" | 3-0 | 16.3 | 7.3 | 4.0 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 53.1% | 35.7% | 4.7 | 62.5% | 25.3% | |
| 15 | C | Fr | 6'9" | 3-0 | 15.0 | 3.3 | 3.0 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 55.6% | — | 0.0 | — | 13.8% | |
| 5 | F | Sr | 6'8" | 1-0 | 16.0 | 6.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 25.0% | 33.3% | 3.0 | 75.0% | 27.1% |
Trends
Results against the closing spread and total, last ten games, entering this gameNorfolk St
Against the spread
Season
12-15-1
Home
4-4-1
Road
7-8
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −3.6
Missed the spread 4 straightCovered 4 of 8 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
18-10
Home
6-3
Road
8-7
Last 10
7-3
avg vs total +7.5
Over 5 straightOver in 5 of 8 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 4 | Randolph Wildcats | H | W 78–71 | — | — | — | — | 103.4 | 94.2 | 75.4 |
| Nov 2 | Regent Regent Royals | H | W 68–45 | — | — | — | — | 106.2 | 70.3 | 64.0 |
| Mar 12 | SC State | N | L 82–88 | −8.5 | L−14.5 | 144.5 | O170 | 108.6 | 116.6 | 75.5 |
| Mar 5 | Howard | H | L 76–84 | +6.5 | L−1.5 | 148.5 | O160 | 109.8 | 121.4 | 69.2 |
| Mar 2 | Morgan St | A | L 84–90 | −3.5 | L−9.5 | 157.0 | O174 | 111.4 | 119.4 | 75.4 |
| Feb 28 | Coppin St | A | W 75–69 | −8.0 | L−2.0 | 141.5 | O144 | 113.6 | 104.5 | 66.0 |
| Feb 21 | SC State | H | W 90–71 | −10.0 | W+9.0 | 140.5 | O161 | 126.1 | 99.5 | 71.4 |
| Feb 16 | MD Eastern | A | W 70–66 | −2.0 | W+2.0 | 136.5 | U136 | 118.5 | 111.7 | 59.1 |
| Feb 14 | Delaware St | H | W 75–58 | −9.0 | W+8.0 | 134.0 | U133 | 119.1 | 92.1 | 63.0 |
| Feb 7 | NC Central | H | W 75–68 | −4.5 | W+2.5 | 148.5 | U143 | 104.5 | 94.8 | 71.7 |
William & Mary
Against the spread
Season
16-14
Home
6-5
Road
7-8
Last 10
3-7
avg cover −2.5
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 8 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
12-17-1
Home
5-6
Road
6-9
Last 10
3-6-1
avg vs total −0.3
Over in 2 of 8 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 2 | Bridgewater Eagles | H | W 80–66 | — | — | — | — | 110.5 | 91.1 | 72.4 |
| Mar 8 | Hofstra | N | L 61–92 | +2.5 | L−28.5 | 153.0 | P153 | 92.8 | 140.0 | 65.7 |
| Mar 7 | Elon | N | W 72–62 | −5.5 | W+4.5 | 163.5 | U134 | 106.4 | 91.6 | 67.7 |
| Mar 3 | Hampton | H | W 94–85 | −11.5 | L−2.5 | 154.0 | O179 | 130.3 | 117.9 | 72.1 |
| Feb 28 | NC A&T | A | W 91–88 | −7.0 | L−4.0 | 163.5 | O179 | 121.0 | 117.0 | 75.2 |
| Feb 26 | Northeastern | H | W 84–77 | −11.0 | L−4.0 | 164.5 | U161 | 105.1 | 96.4 | 79.9 |
| Feb 19 | Campbell | A | L 83–84 | −2.5 | L−3.5 | 167.5 | U167 | 111.8 | 113.1 | 74.3 |
| Feb 14 | Elon | H | L 78–81 | −8.0 | L−11.0 | 165.5 | U159 | 109.6 | 113.8 | 71.2 |
| Feb 12 | Northeastern | A | W 94–67 | −5.5 | W+21.5 | 167.5 | U161 | 135.0 | 96.2 | 69.7 |
| Feb 7 | Hampton | A | L 74–77 | −5.5 | L−8.5 | 152.0 | U151 | 103.6 | 107.7 | 71.5 |
Records vs the closing line describe the past; ten games is a small sample.
Team comparison
national rank toned left for away, right for homeNorfolk StWilliam & Mary
Efficiency
101.4
107.6
109.1
105.2
71.2
74.2
Shooting
49.3%
54.3%
48.4%
57.9%
34.2%
33.0%
68.1%
74.9%
43.5%
44.0%
Ball control & glass
18.7%
16.5%
18.8%
19.0%
32.5%
26.0%
32.3%
31.5%
10.7%
9.9%
10.8%
9.8%
Style
30.6%
42.8%
45.2%
43.3%
18.4%
19.6%
45.9%
63.8%
38.5%
43.8%
Roster
3.32
3.27
6'5.6"
6'5.4"
0.5%
0.0%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputNorfolk St
Returning minutes: 7.0%Returning production: 5.2%
Lost
- Anthony McComb III 34.2 mpg, 17.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Elijah Jamison 27.4 mpg, 14.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Devon Ellis 27.3 mpg, 11.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jordan Leaks 23.5 mpg, 5.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Keyontae Lewis 17.3 mpg, 5.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- My'kel Jenkins 15.9 mpg, 4.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Jahki Gupton from Saint Peter's · 24.5 mpg, 7.8 ppg last season
- Bahsil Laster from UT Arlington · 19.3 mpg, 7.3 ppg last season
- Brandon Gardner from Sacramento St · 8.0 mpg, 2.1 ppg last season
- J.C. Riley Jr. from N'Western St · 7.2 mpg, 2.3 ppg last season
- Chris Walker no D1 minutes last season
- Jamese Jordan no D1 minutes last season
Returns 7% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5. Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
William & Mary
Returning minutes: 0.4%Returning production: 0.2%
Lost
- Tunde Vahlberg Fasasi 26.8 mpg, 11.9 ppg · transferred to New Mexico
- Chase Lowe 23.4 mpg, 9.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Reese Miller 22.9 mpg, 11.3 ppg · transferred to UTEP
- Kyle Pulliam 22.9 mpg, 9.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Kilian Brockhoff 21.7 mpg, 10.7 ppg · transferred to E Michigan
- Jo'el Emanuel 21.4 mpg, 8.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Josh Baldwin from Cornell · 17.6 mpg, 6.9 ppg last season
- Tre Blassingame from Idaho · 16.4 mpg, 3.8 ppg last season
- Jesse McIntosh from South Dakota · 11.0 mpg, 4.7 ppg last season
- Stas Sivka from George Mason · 9.7 mpg, 2.0 ppg last season
- Nilavan Daniels from Providence · 5.9 mpg, 1.2 ppg last season
- ZZ Clark from Santa Barbara · 4.4 mpg, 1.5 ppg last season
Returns 0% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5 (3 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 | -9.5→-10.5-115 | 156.5→158.5o-105 u-115 | -575 | +425 |
| FanDuel | -9.5→-10.5-110 | 156.5→158.5o-110 u-110 | -630 | +450 |
| BetMGM | -9.5→-10.5-110 | 156.5→157.5o-115 u-105 | -600 | +425 |
| BetRivers | -9.5→-10.5-118 | 156.5→158.5o-117 u-107 | -625 | +425 |
| Caesars | -9.5→-10.5-110 | 156.5→158o-110 u-110 | -600 | +430 |
| Fanatics | -10→-10.5-110 | 156.5→158o-110 u-110 | -600 | +430 |
| BetOnline | -10→-11-105 | 156→158o-110 u-110 | — | — |
| Bovada | -9.5→-10.5-110 | 157.5o-110 u-110 | -600 | +425 |
| theScore Bet | -9.5→-10.5-115 | 157.5→159.5o-110 u-110 | -650 | +425 |
| Hard Rock | -9.5→-10.5-115 | 158.5o-115 u-105 | -650 | +425 |
| Kalshi | -9.5-122 | 157.5o-104 u+100 | -488 | +456 |
| Polymarket | -7.5→-10.5-104 | 156.5→157.5o-104 u+100 | -525 | +488 |
| Novig | -9.5→-10.5-106 | 156.5→157.5o-104 u-102 | -488 | +456 |
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 9 | 2026-27 | Norfolk St 0 – 0 William & Mary |
| Sat, Nov 8 | 2025-26 | William & Mary 81 – 78 Norfolk St |
More games on Sun, Nov 8
- Iona at St John's · 12:00 PM ET
- Arkansas vs Virginia · 1:00 PM ET
- Fairfield at Bryant · 1:00 PM ET
- Manhattan at Maine · 1:00 PM ET
- Sacred Heart at New Hampshire · 1:00 PM ET
- Marist at UMass Lowell · 1:00 PM ET
- SE Missouri at South Carolina · 1:00 PM ET
- Princeton at Siena · 1:00 PM ET
- Butler at Boise St · 2:00 PM ET
- Brown at Lehigh · 2:00 PM ET
- C Connecticut at Dartmouth · 2:00 PM ET
- Quinnipiac at Vermont · 2:00 PM ET
- Campbell at W Michigan · 2:00 PM ET
- Green Bay at St Thomas · 2:00 PM ET
- Merrimack at UAlbany · 2:00 PM ET
- Idaho St at Air Force · 3:00 PM ET
- Western KY at Tennessee Tech · 3:00 PM ET
- Southern at Drake · 3:00 PM ET
- Rider at Binghamton · 4:00 PM ET
- Saint Peter's at NJIT · 4:00 PM ET
- Saint Mary's vs Nevada · 4:30 PM ET
- Richmond vs Temple · 5:00 PM ET
- N Dakota St at Bakersfield · 6:00 PM ET
- Incarnate Word at UTEP · 7:00 PM ET
- Pitt vs Penn State · 8:00 PM ET
- California vs Houston · 8:30 PM ET
- UT Arlington at Hawai'i · 10:00 PM ET
- Wichita St vs USC · 11:00 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.