On Feb. 21, 2026 in Washington, No. 3 Duke upset top-ranked Michigan 68-63 in a neutral-site matchup that felt like a tournament preview. Cameron Boozer led Duke with 18 points while Yaxel Lendeborg scored 21 for Michigan in a tightly contested game at Capital One Arena. Duke improved to 25-2 and handed Michigan its first loss since Jan. 10, while both programs remain national contenders as the NCAA postseason approaches. The game featured intense defense, a decisive rebounding edge for Duke, and a late Boozer 3 that put the Blue Devils ahead for good.
Key Takeaways
- Cameron Boozer scored 18 points to pace Duke in a 68-63 win over No. 1 Michigan on Feb. 21, 2026 in Washington.
- Yaxel Lendeborg led Michigan with 21 points; both teams entered the game 25-1 and left 25-2 after the loss for the Wolverines.
- Duke dominated the glass, outrebounding Michigan 41-28, a margin that proved decisive in second-half possessions.
- Duke shot 6-of-25 from 3-point range for Michigan, who settled for perimeter attempts late and finished poorly from deep.
- Cameron Boozer’s go-ahead 3-pointer with 1:55 remaining pushed Duke to a six-point margin they would protect the rest of the way.
- The meeting was the programs’ first in 12 years; Duke now leads the all-time series 23-8 and is 7-0 on neutral courts versus Michigan.
- College GameDay set up at the arena and ticket demand spiked—upper-level tickets reached roughly $600, courtside went as high as $6,000.
Background
Michigan entered the game riding an 11-game winning streak and had been elevated to No. 1 in the AP Top 25 earlier in the week after Arizona’s slide. The Wildcats’ victory at No. 2 Houston the same day created a rare occurrence in which the Nos. 1 and 2 teams both lost on the same day for the first time since Feb. 8, 2025. Duke, ranked No. 3, sought to measure itself against a league-leading defense and a program that has returned to national prominence under coach Dusty May.
The match revived a long-dormant series between two bluebloods; the teams had not met since 2014, making Saturday’s matchup the first in 12 years. Historically the rivalry includes the 1992 national title game and a prolonged stretch of Michigan struggles against Duke—Michigan’s last win over the Blue Devils came Dec. 6, 2009 in Ann Arbor. Both programs bring NBA-caliber talent and depth, intensifying the national interest in a neutral-site preview that many viewed as an early Final Four-caliber test.
Main Event
Defense dominated early, and neither side led by more than five points in a physical first half. Duke carried a 35-33 advantage into the locker room after Patrick Ngongba II was fouled battling for a rebound with 0.8 seconds left and converted both free throws. From that point Duke maintained control and never relinquished the lead.
Cameron Boozer finished with 18 points and made the critical 3-pointer with 1:55 remaining that extended Duke’s lead to 64-58; Isaiah Evans added 14 points for Duke overall. Caleb Foster contributed 12 points and Ngongba scored 11 as Duke exploited openings against Michigan’s top-rated defense and manufactured high-value possessions in the second half.
Michigan’s offense was carried by Yaxel Lendeborg, who scored 21 points, but the Wolverines struggled from beyond the arc, converting only 6 of 25 attempts. Those long-range misses, combined with an overall rebounding deficit, limited Michigan’s second-chance opportunities and swing possessions late in the game.
Analysis & Implications
Duke’s rebounding advantage (41-28) was the game’s clearest statistical tilt and underscored a mismatch in interior positioning and toughness. Controlling the boards translated into more second-chance points and fewer transition opportunities for Michigan, which relies on efficient ball movement and perimeter balance to generate high-percentage offense.
The result offers different takeaways for each program. For Duke it is evidence that the Blue Devils can handle a top defense with a balanced attack and timely individual plays. For Michigan, the loss exposes questions about perimeter consistency and defensive rebounding against athletic frontcourts—issues that will matter come tournament time.
From a seeding and perception standpoint, the upset could influence selection committee narratives and media seeding chatter, particularly given the national spotlight and the AP poll volatility earlier that day. However, single non-conference neutral-site games are only one data point in a larger resume evaluation, so the larger postseason impact will depend on results in the coming weeks.
Comparison & Data
| Stat | Duke | Michigan |
|---|---|---|
| Final Score | 68 | 63 |
| Leading Scorer | Cameron Boozer (18) | Yaxel Lendeborg (21) |
| Rebounds | 41 | 28 |
| 3-Point Shooting | — | 6-for-25 |
| Team Records (postgame) | 25-2 | 25-2 |
The box-score narrative centers on rebounding and perimeter efficiency. Duke’s advantage on the glass created extra possessions and shorter shot clocks for Michigan, forcing the Wolverines into contested 3-point looks; Michigan’s 24% accuracy from deep (6-for-25) was far below its season standard. Both teams remain elite nationally in record and resume, but the specific statistical gaps from this game highlight clear areas for adjustment before conference tournaments and Selection Sunday.
Reactions & Quotes
After the game, Duke coach Jon Scheyer framed the win as a high-level competitive test and praised his team’s preparedness for a late-season atmosphere.
“Our guys were ready for a March-style challenge,”
Jon Scheyer, Duke head coach
Michigan coach Dusty May acknowledged the areas where his team fell short and noted that the loss will be instructive as the Wolverines prepare for the stretch run.
“We came up short on the glass and made late mistakes that a team like Duke will capitalize on,”
Dusty May, Michigan head coach
Fans and national analysts seized on the matchup as a measuring stick for both programs; the presence of ESPN’s College GameDay and high ticket prices underlined the national interest. Former NBA forward Carlos Boozer attended and watched his son deliver a late-game shot that decided the outcome.
“You could feel the tournament energy all night,”
A neutral-site fan in Washington
Unconfirmed
- Duke’s return to Capital One Arena for the East Regional is a projection tied to potential NCAA seeding and not yet confirmed by the NCAA selection process.
- Any immediate change in tournament seeding for either program will depend on results through the end of the regular season and conference tournaments; no official seed adjustments have been announced.
Bottom Line
The 68-63 result in Washington offers a clear demonstration that Duke can challenge and beat top-ranked opponents with balanced scoring and decisive rebounding. For Michigan, the loss exposes correctable vulnerabilities—chiefly defensive rebounding and 3-point consistency—that the Wolverines must address before March.
Both teams remain among the nation’s elite at 25-2, and this game will be weighted heavily in narrative terms as the season enters its final month. The result raises stakes for upcoming matchups and provides a useful data point for analysts, the selection committee, and fans tracking March positioning.
Sources
- ESPN recap (major sports news outlet)
- Duke Athletics (official team site)
- Michigan Athletics (official team site)