Moody Center · at Texas
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | TEX | |
|---|---|---|
| 0-1 | Record | 0-0 |
| 1-0 | ATS | 0-0 |
| 1-0 | O/U | 0-0 |
ATS = covered-didn’t-push · O/U = overs-unders
Model: projects TEX 97–57 · win probability TEX 100%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.3
Model edge
—
No market line yet
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: TEX has more of the edges
GRAM 0, TEX 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
GRAM offense vs TEX defense
Offense 347th of 366 against a defense 17th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
GRAM has played the 355th-hardest schedule, TEX the 27th. A record against a soft schedule means less
TEX offense vs GRAM defense
Offense 7th of 366 against a defense 302nd, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: GRAM 30.3%, TEX 35.4%. Defensive: GRAM 67.5%, TEX 73.1%
Shooting
Effective FG%: GRAM 48.8 and allows 50.0; TEX 54.1 and allows 50.8
Home court
TEX at home. This season: TEX 0-0 at home, GRAM 0-0 away
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: GRAM 21.2%, TEX 15.0%. Forced: GRAM 20.8%, TEX 13.0%
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: GRAM plays 69.4 a game (155th fastest), TEX 68.7 (199th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: GRAM 41.1, TEX 44.2. Allowed: GRAM 40.0, TEX 39.6
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: GRAM 23%, TEX 14%. Transfers in: GRAM 4, TEX 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Three-pointers
GRAM hits 32.3% and allows 32.7%; TEX hits 35.1% and allows 34.7%. Threes are 38.1% and 35.8% of their shots
Market
Open → current
Spread
Open—
no open
Now—
Opening line not available
Total
Open—
no open
Now—
Moneyline
—
Pre-game lines only (ESPN, DraftKings first). After tip-off the line shown is the closing line.
Model vs market
| Market | Model | Model edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spread | — | TEX -39.8 | — |
| Total | — | 153.3 | — |
| Projected score | — | GRAM 56.8 · TEX 96.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | TEX -23.5 | — |
| 1H total | 71.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | GRAM 24.1 · TEX 47.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3-7 30% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | |
| 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Grambling
31 games played
Straight up
12-19
39% wins
Against the spread
15-16
48% covers · avg −0.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
10-21
32% overs · avg −4.1 pts vs the total
Game by game: lines, results and totals
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 | @ | L 62-102 | +33.5 | L −6.5 | 144.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 9 | @ | W 73-70 | +4.5 | W +7.5 | 152.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 13 | vs | W 75-70 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 148.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 68-78 | +6.5 | L −3.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 59-72 | +14.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 24 | @ | L 74-83 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 144.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 63-65 | +11.5 | W +9.5 | 148.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 8 | @ | L 60-68 | +8.5 | W +0.5 | 142.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 80-68 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 135.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 19 | vs | W 81-72 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 137.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 23 | @ | L 63-89 | +28.5 | W +2.5 | 153.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 76-72 | -7.5 | L −3.5 | 155.5 | U 148 |
| Jan 5 | vs | W 84-67 | -5.5 | W +11.5 | 146.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 65-74 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 144.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 12 | @ | L 84-91 | -1.5 | L −8.5 | 141.5 | O 175 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 53-71 | -1.5 | L −19.5 | 153.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 69-66 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 2 | @ | W 74-50 | -5.5 | W +18.5 | 143.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 64-67 | -6.5 | L −9.5 | 145.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 57-47 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | U 104 |
| Feb 9 | vs | L 58-66 | -4.5 | L −12.5 | 136.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 79-82 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 139.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 63-68 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 151.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 73-87 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 142.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 23 | vs | W 83-62 | -16.5 | W +4.5 | 136.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 26 | vs | L 71-76 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 144.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 59-66 | -4.5 | L −11.5 | 140.5 | U 125 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 63-77 | +2.5 | L −11.5 | 140.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 5 | @ | W 65-63 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | U 128 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 77-52 | -13.5 | W +11.5 | 135.5 | U 129 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 65-68 | -7.5 | L −10.5 | 139.5 | U 133 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
6
@
ISU
L 62-102
−6.5
9
@
HOW
W 73-70
+7.5
13
vs
USM
W 75-70
+2.5
18
@
USD
L 68-78
−3.5
21
@
CBU
L 59-72
+1.5
24
@
UCR
L 74-83
−5.5
2
@
TULN
L 63-65
+9.5
8
@
USM
L 60-68
+0.5
18
vs
NORF
W 80-68
+13.5
19
vs
HAMP
W 81-72
+10.5
23
@
OSU
L 63-89
+2.5
3
vs
PV
W 76-72
−3.5
5
vs
TXSO
W 84-67
+11.5
10
@
BCU
L 65-74
−5.5
12
@
FAMU
L 84-91
−8.5
17
vs
SOU
L 53-71
−19.5
31
@
JKST
W 69-66
+0.5
2
@
ALCN
W 74-50
+18.5
4
vs
UAPB
L 64-67
−9.5
7
vs
ALST
W 57-47
+5.5
9
vs
AAMU
L 58-66
−12.5
14
@
TXSO
L 79-82
−1.5
16
@
PV
L 63-68
−6.5
21
@
SOU
L 73-87
−8.5
23
vs
MVSU
W 83-62
+4.5
26
vs
BCU
L 71-76
−6.5
28
vs
FAMU
L 59-66
−11.5
3
@
AAMU
L 63-77
−11.5
5
@
ALST
W 65-63
+4.5
9
vs
MVSU
W 77-52
+11.5
10
vs
JKST
L 65-68
−10.5
covered 15didn’t cover 16avg −0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
6
@
ISU
L 62-102
+19.5
9
@
HOW
W 73-70
−9.5
13
vs
USM
W 75-70
−3.5
18
@
USD
L 68-78
−3.5
21
@
CBU
L 59-72
−13.5
24
@
UCR
L 74-83
+12.5
2
@
TULN
L 63-65
−20.5
8
@
USM
L 60-68
−14.5
18
vs
NORF
W 80-68
+12.5
19
vs
HAMP
W 81-72
+15.5
23
@
OSU
L 63-89
−1.5
3
vs
PV
W 76-72
−7.5
5
vs
TXSO
W 84-67
+4.5
10
@
BCU
L 65-74
−5.5
12
@
FAMU
L 84-91
+33.5
17
vs
SOU
L 53-71
−29.5
31
@
JKST
W 69-66
−13.5
2
@
ALCN
W 74-50
−19.5
4
vs
UAPB
L 64-67
−14.5
7
vs
ALST
W 57-47
−40.5
9
vs
AAMU
L 58-66
−12.5
14
@
TXSO
L 79-82
+21.5
16
@
PV
L 63-68
−20.5
21
@
SOU
L 73-87
+17.5
23
vs
MVSU
W 83-62
+8.5
26
vs
BCU
L 71-76
+2.5
28
vs
FAMU
L 59-66
−15.5
3
@
AAMU
L 63-77
−0.5
5
@
ALST
W 65-63
−16.5
9
vs
MVSU
W 77-52
−6.5
10
vs
JKST
L 65-68
−6.5
over 10under 21avg −4.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Texas
35 games played
Straight up
20-15
57% wins
Against the spread
20-15
57% covers · avg +0.6 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-15
57% overs · avg +2.7 pts vs the total
Game by game: lines, results and totals
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 4 | vs | L 60-75 | +10.5 | L −4.5 | 153.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 97-60 | -25.5 | W +11.5 | 153.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 93-58 | -31.5 | W +3.5 | 158.5 | U 151 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 71-55 | -31.5 | L −15.5 | 159.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 99-65 | -30.5 | W +3.5 | 143.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 86-87 | -6.5 | L −7.5 | 153.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 102-97 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 161.5 | O 199 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 69-88 | -3.5 | L −22.5 | 154.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 8 | vs | W 95-69 | -22.5 | W +3.5 | 158.5 | O 164 |
| Dec 12 | @ | L 63-71 | +11.5 | W +3.5 | 145.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 95-53 | -29.5 | W +12.5 | 152.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 94-71 | -33.5 | L −10.5 | 138.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 98-101 | -9.5 | L −12.5 | 157.5 | O 199 |
| Jan 6 | @ | L 71-85 | +12.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 92-88 | +11.5 | W +15.5 | 177.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 80-64 | +3.5 | W +19.5 | 163.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 70-74 | -4.5 | L −8.5 | 166.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 80-85 | +7.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 87-67 | -3.5 | W +16.5 | 168.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 28 | @ | L 82-88 | +6.5 | W +0.5 | 154.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 79-69 | -1.5 | W +8.5 | 155.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 3 | vs | W 84-75 | -13.5 | L −4.5 | 149.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 79-68 | -9.5 | W +1.5 | 145.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 85-68 | +2.5 | W +19.5 | 150.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 17 | vs | W 88-85 | -10.5 | L −7.5 | 150.5 | O 173 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 80-91 | +2.5 | L −8.5 | 162.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 25 | vs | L 71-84 | +6.5 | L −6.5 | 157.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 76-70 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 159.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 4 | @ | L 85-105 | +6.5 | L −13.5 | 163.5 | O 190 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 85-88 | -6.5 | L −9.5 | 154.5 | O 173 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 66-76 | -5.5 | L −15.5 | 147.5 | U 142 |
| Mar 17 | vs | W 68-66 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 157.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 19 | vs | W 79-71 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 156.5 | U 150 |
| Mar 21 | vs | W 74-68 | +5.5 | W +11.5 | 146.5 | U 142 |
| Mar 26 | vs | L 77-79 | +8.5 | W +6.5 | 146.5 | O 156 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
vs
DUKE
L 60-75
−4.5
8
vs
LAF
W 97-60
+11.5
12
vs
FDU
W 93-58
+3.5
15
vs
KC
W 71-55
−15.5
18
vs
RID
W 99-65
+3.5
24
vs
ASU
L 86-87
−7.5
26
vs
NCSU
W 102-97
+6.5
3
vs
UVA
L 69-88
−22.5
8
vs
SOU
W 95-69
+3.5
12
@
CONN
L 63-71
+3.5
16
vs
LEM
W 95-53
+12.5
22
vs
UMES
W 94-71
−10.5
3
vs
MSST
L 98-101
−12.5
6
@
TENN
L 71-85
−1.5
10
@
ALA
W 92-88
+15.5
14
vs
VAN
W 80-64
+19.5
17
vs
TA&M
L 70-74
−8.5
21
@
UK
L 80-85
+2.5
24
vs
UGA
W 87-67
+16.5
28
@
AUB
L 82-88
+0.5
31
@
OU
W 79-69
+8.5
3
vs
SC
W 84-75
−4.5
7
vs
MISS
W 79-68
+1.5
14
@
MIZ
W 85-68
+19.5
17
vs
LSU
W 88-85
−7.5
21
@
UGA
L 80-91
−8.5
25
vs
FLA
L 71-84
−6.5
28
@
TA&M
W 76-70
+8.5
4
@
ARK
L 85-105
−13.5
7
vs
OU
L 85-88
−9.5
11
vs
MISS
L 66-76
−15.5
17
vs
NCSU
W 68-66
+3.5
19
vs
BYU
W 79-71
+10.5
21
vs
GONZ
W 74-68
+11.5
26
vs
PUR
L 77-79
+6.5
covered 20didn’t cover 15avg +0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
vs
DUKE
L 60-75
−18.5
8
vs
LAF
W 97-60
+3.5
12
vs
FDU
W 93-58
−7.5
15
vs
KC
W 71-55
−33.5
18
vs
RID
W 99-65
+20.5
24
vs
ASU
L 86-87
+19.5
26
vs
NCSU
W 102-97
+37.5
3
vs
UVA
L 69-88
+2.5
8
vs
SOU
W 95-69
+5.5
12
@
CONN
L 63-71
−11.5
16
vs
LEM
W 95-53
−4.5
22
vs
UMES
W 94-71
+26.5
3
vs
MSST
L 98-101
+41.5
6
@
TENN
L 71-85
+2.5
10
@
ALA
W 92-88
+2.5
14
vs
VAN
W 80-64
−19.5
17
vs
TA&M
L 70-74
−22.5
21
@
UK
L 80-85
+12.5
24
vs
UGA
W 87-67
−14.5
28
@
AUB
L 82-88
+15.5
31
@
OU
W 79-69
−7.5
3
vs
SC
W 84-75
+9.5
7
vs
MISS
W 79-68
+1.5
14
@
MIZ
W 85-68
+2.5
17
vs
LSU
W 88-85
+22.5
21
@
UGA
L 80-91
+8.5
25
vs
FLA
L 71-84
−2.5
28
@
TA&M
W 76-70
−13.5
4
@
ARK
L 85-105
+26.5
7
vs
OU
L 85-88
+18.5
11
vs
MISS
L 66-76
−5.5
17
vs
NCSU
W 68-66
−23.5
19
vs
BYU
W 79-71
−6.5
21
vs
GONZ
W 74-68
−4.5
26
vs
PUR
L 77-79
+9.5
over 20under 15avg +2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Texas has the better starters
Position by position: Grambling 0, Texas 5, even 0
GramblingBetterTexas
G I. Howard13 pts · 1 reb · 4 ast
Score 18
→TEXBig
G I. Johnson TR16.9 pts · 2.9 reb · 3 ast
Score 98
G D. Pierce TR19 pts · 0 reb · 8 ast
Score 36
→TEXBig
G E. Freeman TR9.2 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 85
G B. Hardy TR3.2 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 2
→TEXBig
G M. Lewis TR14 pts · 2.6 reb · 2 ast
Score 86
F H. Washington TR4.4 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 2
→TEXBig
F D. Punch TR14.1 pts · 6.8 reb · 2 ast
Score 96
F M. Fitts2.8 pts · 2.2 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 17
→TEXBig
C M. Vokietaitis15.5 pts · 7 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 95
GramblingBetterTexas
GRAM offense347th of 366 · -12.0
→TEXBig
TEX defense17th of 366 · +6.2
GRAM defense302nd of 366 · -7.7
→TEXBig
TEX offense7th of 366 · +10.5
Backcourt-6.4 · 3 players
→TEXBig
Backcourt+8.6 · 3 players
Frontcourt-3.5 · 2 players
→TEXBig
Frontcourt+9.8 · 2 players
Bench-0.6 · 2 players
→TEXSmall
Bench+0.9 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestGRAM betterTEX betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
I. Howard31 minD. Pierce31 min · TRB. Hardy19 min · TRC. Perkins5 minK. LaytonNewT. BeyNew
Forwards
H. Washington17 min · TRM. Fitts10 minI. Miranda8 min · TRI. ErimsNew
Guards
I. Johnson31 min · TRE. Freeman27 min · TRM. Lewis27 min · TRA. Evans14 min · TRA. McDermott3 minB. OgdenNew
Forwards
D. Punch30 min · TRJ. ClarkNewM. SpearsNewC. ElkinsNew
Centers
M. Vokietaitis26 minL. ObiorahNew
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Matchup stats
2025-26 · rank among 365 teams
Scoring
Points per game
Points per possession
Pace (possessions)
Shooting
Effective FG%
3-point %
3-point attempt rate
Free throw rate
Possessions
Turnover rate
Offensive rebound rate
Assists per game
Defense
Points allowed
Points allowed per possession
Opponent effective FG%
Opponent 3-point %
Turnovers forced
Defensive rebound rate
Steals per game
Blocks per game
| Scoring | ||
|---|---|---|
| 69.0 #299 | Points per game | 81.7 #34 |
| 1.00 #331 | Points per possession | 1.19 #22 |
| 69.4 #155 | Pace (possessions) | 68.7 #199 |
| Shooting | ||
| 48.8 #295 | Effective FG% | 54.1 #65 |
| 32.3 #265 | 3-point % | 35.1 #107 |
| 38.1 #210 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.8 #254 |
| 41.1 #45 | Free throw rate | 44.2 #7 |
| Possessions | ||
| 21.2 #357 | Turnover rate | 15.0 #68 |
| 30.3 #188 | Offensive rebound rate | 35.4 #35 |
| 11.9 #292 | Assists per game | 12.1 #278 |
| Defense | ||
| 71.3 #83 | Points allowed | 76.1 #220 |
| 1.03 #51 | Points allowed per possession | 1.11 #235 |
| 50.0 #97 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.8 #144 |
| 32.7 #99 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.7 #230 |
| 20.8 #12 | Turnovers forced | 13.0 #356 |
| 67.5 #280 | Defensive rebound rate | 73.1 #35 |
| 7.7 #68 | Steals per game | 5.5 #298 |
| 2.7 #283 | Blocks per game | 2.9 #239 |
Grambling
12-19 in 2025-26 overall · 8-12 in conference · Southwestern Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Jackson St65–68
- Wvs Miss Valley St77–52
- W@ Alabama St65–63
- L@ Alabama A&M63–77
- Lvs Florida A&M59–66
A week or more of rest.
Texas
20-15 in 2025-26 overall · 9-10 in conference · Southeastern Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Purdue77–79
- Wvs Gonzaga74–68
- Wvs BYU79–71
- Wvs NC State68–66
- Lvs Ole Miss66–76
A week or more of rest.