Abilene Christian Wildcats at Tarleton State Texans: Model Line and Edge

Mon, Jan 26, 7:00 PM ETWisdom Gym · at Tarleton St · Conference game

LineTAR -4.5no move

Total145.5down 2 from 147.5

Season records: Abilene Chrstn and Tarleton St
ACU	This season	TAR
7-9	Record	7-9
8-8	ATS	10-6
9-7	O/U	10-6

ATS = covered-didn’t-push · O/U = overs-unders

Model: projects TAR 77–71 · win probability TAR 70%

Line

TAR -4.5

no move since the open

Total

145.5

model 147.5 · Over by 2

Model edge

TAR by 1.5

model vs market

Public

—

No split yet for this game

The model has not beaten the closing line: with an edge of 3 or more it went 409-367 in 2025-26. Model record

What could decide it: TAR has more of the edges

ACU 1, TAR 3 · 2025-26 so far

TARBig

ACU offense vs TAR defense

Offense 298th of 366 against a defense 186th, on the model’s ratings

ACUSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: ACU 31.0%, TAR 31.5%. Defensive: ACU 70.9%, TAR 64.9%

TARSmall

Three-pointers

ACU hits 31.0% and allows 40.9%; TAR hits 32.5% and allows 34.9%. Threes are 32.8% and 24.2% of their shots

Context

Tempo

About 70 possessions: ACU plays 69.2 a game (167th fastest), TAR 71.2 (64th). Faster games mean more points

TARSmall

Home court

TAR at home. This season: TAR 4-2 at home, ACU 3-6 away

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: ACU 47.5 and allows 56.5; TAR 48.3 and allows 53.6

Even

Recent form

Last 5: ACU 2-3 ATS, margin -5.4; TAR 1-4 ATS, margin -2.2

Context

Schedule so far

ACU has played the 183rd-hardest schedule, TAR the 210th. A record against a soft schedule means less

Even

Turnovers

Turnover rate: ACU 20.8%, TAR 19.9%. Forced: ACU 23.4%, TAR 23.5%

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: ACU 25%, TAR 23%. Transfers in: ACU 3, TAR 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: ACU 41.7, TAR 41.9. Allowed: ACU 53.5, TAR 47.7

Even

TAR offense vs ACU defense

Offense 200th of 366 against a defense 200th, on the model’s ratings

Sorted by how lopsided each matchup is, from national ranks. Reasons to look, not picks: the market already knows most of this.

How games like this went

Division I games since 2023-24, closing lines

Situation	Games	Favorite won	Favorite covered	Went over
Home favorites of 3 to 6.5	3171	66%	50%	50%
Conference games at this spread	3906	66%	50%	49%
Games with a total of 145 to 149.5	3547	74%	49%	50%

A bet at standard prices needs 52.4% to break even, and most situations sit near 50%. Past rates, not a prediction.

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	TAR -4.5	TAR -6.1	TAR +1.6
Total	145.5	147.5	Over 2.0
Projected score	—	ACU 70.7 · TAR 76.8

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	TAR -3.5	—
1H total	69.1	—
1H projected score	ACU 32.8 · TAR 36.3	—

The 1st-half model is fitted from the full-game model and past halves. ESPN has no 1st-half lines for college games, so there is no market to compare it with.

ATS

2025-26, records before tip-off

	Season	Cover	Venue	Role
ACU WWLLL	8-8	50%	5-4	5-3
TAR WLLLL	10-6	63%	4-2	5-2

Venue/role: ACU away, as underdog; TAR home, as favorite. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

Over/under before tip-off

	O-U	Over %	SU
ACU OOOUU	9-7	56%	7-9
TAR OOOUU	10-6	63%	7-9

Squares: last 5 games (O over, U under), oldest first. Tap for the score and line.

Last 10 games

2025-26, before tip-off

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
ACU	4-6 40%	6-4 60%	8-2 80%
TAR	4-6 40%	5-5 50%	5-5 50%

Wins-losses (pushes last). Spread and over / under skip games without a line.

Recent meetings

Last 5 of 10 since 2021-22

ACU 5–5 TARSeries tied · 10 games since 2021-22 · ACU 4-6 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Jan 8, 2025-26	ACU 84 @ TAR 80	TAR -4.5	ACU W
Feb 27, 2024-25	ACU 52 @ TAR 67	TAR -1.5	TAR W
Jan 23, 2024-25	TAR 56 @ ACU 67	ACU -3.5	ACU W
Mar 20, 2023-24	ACU 59 @ TAR 86	TAR -6	TAR W
Feb 1, 2023-24	TAR 76 @ ACU 73	ACU -1.5	TAR W

ATS History · 2025-26

WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total

Abilene Chrstn

16 games played

Straight up

7-9

44% wins

Against the spread

8-8

50% covers · avg −3 pts vs the line

Over / Under

9-7

56% overs · avg −0.2 pts vs the total

Straight up

7-944%

W L L W L W W L L W L W W L L L

3 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

8-850%

L L L W L W W W W W L W W L L L

3 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

9-756%

U U U U O U O O O O O O O O U U

2 straight unders2 of last 4 over

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

Lines, results and totalsCover margin by game · points beyond the lineTotal margin by game · points over or under the total

Date	Opp	Result	Line	ATS	Total	O/U
Nov 6	vsOMA	W 73-71	-4.5	L −2.5	150.5	U 144
Nov 14	@SFA	L 66-76	+6.5	L −3.5	142.5	U 142
Nov 18	@TXST	L 49-63	+1.5	L −12.5	138.5	U 112
Nov 24	vsUTSA	W 61-50	-2.5	W +8.5	144.5	U 111
Nov 25	vsW&M	L 58-92	-1.5	L −35.5	147.5	O 150
Dec 2	@PEPP	W 71-63	-1.5	W +6.5	137.5	U 134
Dec 6	vsNMSU	W 77-69	+1.5	W +9.5	131.5	O 146
Dec 16	@ARIZ	L 62-96	+34.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 158
Dec 19	@BYU	L 67-85	+33.5	W +15.5	146.5	O 152
Dec 22	@TXSO	W 75-68	-4.5	W +2.5	138.5	O 143
Jan 1	vsUTU	L 64-79	-5.5	L −20.5	139.5	O 143
Jan 3	vsUVU	W 85-68	+7.5	W +24.5	139.5	O 153
Jan 8	@TAR	W 84-80	+4.5	W +8.5	140.5	O 164
Jan 10	@UTA	L 72-82	+3.5	L −6.5	134.5	O 154
Jan 15	vsCBU	L 58-74	-1.5	L −17.5	140.5	U 132
Jan 17	@SUU	L 52-74	-3.5	L −25.5	149.5	U 126

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

OMA

W 73-71

−2.5

SFA

L 66-76

−3.5

TXST

L 49-63

−12.5

UTSA

W 61-50

+8.5

W&M

L 58-92

−35.5

PEPP

W 71-63

+6.5

NMSU

W 77-69

+9.5

ARIZ

L 62-96

+0.5

BYU

L 67-85

+15.5

TXSO

W 75-68

+2.5

UTU

L 64-79

−20.5

UVU

W 85-68

+24.5

TAR

W 84-80

+8.5

UTA

L 72-82

−6.5

CBU

L 58-74

−17.5

SUU

L 52-74

−25.5

covered 8didn’t cover 8avg −3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

OMA

W 73-71

−6.5

SFA

L 66-76

−0.5

TXST

L 49-63

−26.5

UTSA

W 61-50

−33.5

W&M

L 58-92

+2.5

PEPP

W 71-63

−3.5

NMSU

W 77-69

+14.5

ARIZ

L 62-96

+12.5

BYU

L 67-85

+5.5

TXSO

W 75-68

+4.5

UTU

L 64-79

+3.5

UVU

W 85-68

+13.5

TAR

W 84-80

+23.5

UTA

L 72-82

+19.5

CBU

L 58-74

−8.5

SUU

L 52-74

−23.5

over 9under 7avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Tarleton St

16 games played

Straight up

7-9

44% wins

Against the spread

10-6

63% covers · avg +2.7 pts vs the line

Over / Under

10-6

63% overs · avg +11.8 pts vs the total

Straight up

7-944%

L L W W L W L W W W L W L L L L

4 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

10-663%

W L W W W W W W W W L W L L L L

4 straight misses ATS0 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

10-663%

O O O U O O U O U U O O O O U U

2 straight unders2 of last 4 over

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

Lines, results and totalsCover margin by game · points beyond the lineTotal margin by game · points over or under the total

Date	Opp	Result	Line	ATS	Total	O/U
Nov 3	@SMU	L 76-96	+21.5	W +1.5	144.5	O 172
Nov 5	@LSU	L 60-96	+15.5	L −20.5	148.5	O 156
Nov 8	vsAMCC	W 85-77	-3.5	W +4.5	142.5	O 162
Nov 11	vsMRMK	W 76-62	-4.5	W +9.5	142.5	U 138
Nov 14	@BAY	L 81-94	+23.5	W +10.5	149.5	O 175
Nov 20	@RICE	W 90-74	+4.5	W +20.5	146.5	O 164
Dec 1	@CIN	L 58-76	+24.5	W +6.5	142.5	U 134
Dec 16	@MVSU	W 88-64	-17.5	W +6.5	142.5	O 152
Dec 19	vsFAMU	W 78-54	-14.5	W +9.5	145.5	U 132
Dec 29	@UTA	W 69-63	+2.5	W +8.5	136.5	U 132
Jan 1	vsUVU	L 85-91	+5.5	L −0.5	144.5	O 176
Jan 3	vsCBU	W 81-76	-1.5	W +3.5	147.5	O 157
Jan 8	vsACU	L 80-84	-4.5	L −8.5	140.5	O 164
Jan 15	@SUU	L 105-106	-3.5	L −4.5	150.5	O 211
Jan 17	@UTU	L 71-75	+3.5	L −0.5	150.5	U 146
Jan 21	@UTA	L 64-71	+3.5	L −3.5	142.5	U 135

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

SMU

L 76-96

+1.5

LSU

L 60-96

−20.5

AMCC

W 85-77

+4.5

MRMK

W 76-62

+9.5

BAY

L 81-94

+10.5

RICE

W 90-74

+20.5

CIN

L 58-76

+6.5

MVSU

W 88-64

+6.5

FAMU

W 78-54

+9.5

UTA

W 69-63

+8.5

UVU

L 85-91

−0.5

CBU

W 81-76

+3.5

ACU

L 80-84

−8.5

SUU

L 105-106

−4.5

UTU

L 71-75

−0.5

UTA

L 64-71

−3.5

covered 10didn’t cover 6avg +2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

SMU

L 76-96

+27.5

LSU

L 60-96

+7.5

AMCC

W 85-77

+19.5

MRMK

W 76-62

−4.5

BAY

L 81-94

+25.5

RICE

W 90-74

+17.5

CIN

L 58-76

−8.5

MVSU

W 88-64

+9.5

FAMU

W 78-54

−13.5

UTA

W 69-63

−4.5

UVU

L 85-91

+31.5

CBU

W 81-76

+9.5

ACU

L 80-84

+23.5

SUU

L 105-106

+60.5

UTU

L 71-75

−4.5

UTA

L 64-71

−7.5

over 10under 6avg +11.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.

Abilene Chrstn has the better starters

Position by position: Abilene Chrstn 1, Tarleton St 0, even 4

Abilene ChrstnBetterTarleton St

G N. Bolanga TR11.6 pts · 5.9 reb · 2.3 ast Score 38

Even

G C. Blackwell TR10.7 pts · 2.8 reb · 2.9 ast Score 52

G Y. Rivera7.4 pts · 1.5 reb · 2.3 ast Score 41

Even

G F. Emmou TR7.3 pts · 1.8 reb · 1.3 ast Score 36

G I. Dye1.7 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.1 ast Not ranked

No call

G L. Kelly5.2 pts · 2.8 reb · 1.1 ast Score 41

G E. Boisdur TR1.3 pts · 0.4 reb · 0.3 ast Not ranked

No call

G T. Cope TR8.3 pts · 2.9 reb · 0.8 ast Score 47

F C. Hornecker5.2 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.1 ast Score 48

ACUSmall

F I. Harrell TR7.8 pts · 3.7 reb · 0.5 ast Score 23

Abilene ChrstnBetterTarleton St

ACU offense298th of 366 · -9.2

TARSmall

TAR defense186th of 366 · -4.3

ACU defense200th of 366 · -5.0

Even

TAR offense200th of 366 · -6.3

Backcourt-3.6 · 4 players

Even

Backcourt-3.3 · 4 players

Frontcourt-0.2 · 1 player

ACUSmall

Frontcourt-1.8 · 1 player

Bench-0.0 · 2 players

Even

Bench-0.5 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestACU betterTAR betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers

Projected starters: college teams publish no depth chart, so these come from minutes played, and a freshman or a new starter can change them. The score is the share of ranked players at the position that player is ahead of. Numbers are this season's once a player has 30 minutes, 2025-26's before that. Bench is the next five by minutes. Tap a player for the full numbers.

Depth chart

Projected rotation by position, starters outlined

Abilene Chrstn

Guards

N. Bolanga34 min · TRY. Rivera25 minI. Dye6 minE. Boisdur6 min · TRT. Pons5 min · TRI. Neyhart3 min

Forwards

C. Hornecker16 minV. Yimga MoukouriNewS. RowleyNewW. Marie-AnaisNew

Tarleton St

Guards

C. Blackwell31 min · TRF. Emmou23 min · TRL. Kelly21 minT. Cope21 min · TRK. Douglas16 minJ. Martinez2 min

Forwards

I. Harrell26 min · TRJ. Daniel19 min · TRJ. Hayes13 min · TRJ. Mani12 min · TRM. Vrabel7 minE. CarterNew

In order of minutes, from rosters as of today. ESPN lists players only as guards, forwards or centers, and no injury report exists for college basketball, so a player who is out may still show here.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams

ChartTable

Scoring

Points per game

ACU67.9 #313

TAR72.5 #231

Points per possession

ACU0.98 #340

TAR1.01 #309

Pace (possessions)

ACU69.2 #167

TAR71.2 #64

Shooting

Effective FG%

ACU47.5 #326

TAR48.3 #306

3-point %

ACU31.0 #319

TAR32.5 #256

3-point attempt rate

ACU32.8 #318

TAR24.2 #365

Free throw rate

ACU41.7 #34

TAR41.9 #33

Possessions

Turnover rate

ACU20.8 #356

TAR19.9 #348

Offensive rebound rate

ACU31.0 #164

TAR31.5 #141

Assists per game

ACU12.5 #249

TAR10.5 #349

Defense

Points allowed

ACU73.9 #151

TAR75.8 #211

Points allowed per possession

ACU1.07 #123

TAR1.07 #130

Opponent effective FG%

ACU56.5 #352

TAR53.6 #285

Opponent 3-point %

ACU40.9 #365

TAR34.9 #244

Turnovers forced

ACU23.4 #3

TAR23.5 #2

Defensive rebound rate

ACU70.9 #113

TAR64.9 #340

Steals per game

ACU9.6 #4

TAR9.7 #3

Blocks per game

ACU2.6 #298

TAR3.1 #206

ACU		TAR
Scoring
67.9 #313	Points per game	72.5 #231
0.98 #340	Points per possession	1.01 #309
69.2 #167	Pace (possessions)	71.2 #64
Shooting
47.5 #326	Effective FG%	48.3 #306
31.0 #319	3-point %	32.5 #256
32.8 #318	3-point attempt rate	24.2 #365
41.7 #34	Free throw rate	41.9 #33
Possessions
20.8 #356	Turnover rate	19.9 #348
31.0 #164	Offensive rebound rate	31.5 #141
12.5 #249	Assists per game	10.5 #349
Defense
73.9 #151	Points allowed	75.8 #211
1.07 #123	Points allowed per possession	1.07 #130
56.5 #352	Opponent effective FG%	53.6 #285
40.9 #365	Opponent 3-point %	34.9 #244
23.4 #3	Turnovers forced	23.5 #2
70.9 #113	Defensive rebound rate	64.9 #340
9.6 #4	Steals per game	9.7 #3
2.6 #298	Blocks per game	3.1 #206

From the box scores. A longer bar is a better national rank, on every row; the better team's bar is solid. A green rank is near the top of Division I, a red one near the bottom. Pace and 3-point rate are styles, so they have no better side.

Abilene Chrstn

7-9 overall · 2-4 in conference · United Athletic Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Southern Utah52–74
Lvs CA Baptist58–74
L@ UT Arlington72–82
W@ Tarleton St84–80
Wvs Utah Valley85–68

A week or more of rest.

Tarleton St

7-9 overall · 2-5 in conference · United Athletic Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ UT Arlington64–71
L@ Utah Tech71–75
L@ Southern Utah105–106
Lvs Abilene Chrstn80–84
Wvs CA Baptist81–76

5 days since their last game.

Abilene Chrstn @ Tarleton St

What could decide it: TAR has more of the edges

How games like this went

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

Abilene Chrstn

Tarleton St

Abilene Chrstn has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Abilene Chrstn

Tarleton St