KFC Yum! Center · at Louisville
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | LOU | |
|---|---|---|
| 0-0 | Record | 0-0 |
| 0-0 | ATS | 0-0 |
| 0-0 | O/U | 0-0 |
ATS = covered-didn’t-push · O/U = overs-unders
Model: projects LOU 80–78 · win probability LOU 59%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 158.0
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: LOU has more of the edges
TEX 0, LOU 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Three-pointers
TEX hits 35.1% and allows 34.7%; LOU hits 36.0% and allows 32.3%. Threes are 35.8% and 52.9% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: TEX 54.1 and allows 50.8; LOU 56.5 and allows 48.7
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: TEX plays 68.7 a game (199th fastest), LOU 71.0 (77th). Faster games mean more points
Home court
LOU at home. This season: LOU 0-0 at home, TEX 0-0 away
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: TEX 35.4%, LOU 32.8%. Defensive: TEX 73.1%, LOU 72.5%
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: TEX 15.0%, LOU 16.8%. Forced: TEX 13.0%, LOU 16.7%
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: TEX 44.2, LOU 33.1. Allowed: TEX 39.6, LOU 33.0
Context
Schedule so far
TEX has played the 27th-hardest schedule, LOU the 44th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
TEX offense vs LOU defense
Offense 7th of 366 against a defense 16th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: TEX 14%, LOU 12%. Transfers in: TEX 5, LOU 8. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
LOU offense vs TEX defense
Offense 15th of 366 against a defense 17th, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | LOU -2.5 | — |
| Total | — | 158.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | TEX 77.7 · LOU 80.3 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | LOU -1.4 | — |
| 1H total | 73.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | TEX 36.2 · LOU 37.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% | |
| 5-5 50% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
TEX 1–0 LOUTEX leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · TEX 0-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2023-24 | TEX 81 vs LOU 80 | LOU +17.5 | LOU W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
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
Louisville
35 games played
Straight up
24-11
69% wins
Against the spread
16-19
46% covers · avg +0.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-21
40% overs · avg −3.8 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 3 | vs | W 104-45 | -35.5 | W +23.5 | 159.5 | U 149 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 106-70 | -38.5 | L −2.5 | 165.5 | O 176 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 96-88 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 173.5 | O 184 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 106-81 | -31.5 | L −6.5 | 174.5 | O 187 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 74-64 | -8.5 | W +1.5 | 163.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 87-46 | -33.5 | W +7.5 | 162.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 104-47 | -44.5 | W +12.5 | 158.5 | U 151 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 80-89 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 166.5 | O 169 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 87-78 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 162.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 99-73 | -16.5 | W +9.5 | 162.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 62-83 | +4.5 | L −16.5 | 156.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 94-54 | -30.5 | W +9.5 | 166.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 30 | @ | W 90-70 | -7.5 | W +12.5 | 159.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 76-80 | -7.5 | L −11.5 | 157.5 | U 156 |
| Jan 6 | vs | L 73-84 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 161.5 | U 157 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 75-62 | -21.5 | L −8.5 | 150.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 13 | vs | L 70-79 | -4.5 | L −13.5 | 154.5 | U 149 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 100-59 | -7.5 | W +33.5 | 152.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 85-71 | -14.5 | L −0.5 | 160.5 | U 156 |
| Jan 26 | @ | L 52-83 | +8.5 | L −22.5 | 157.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 88-74 | -9.5 | W +4.5 | 163.5 | U 162 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 76-65 | -19.5 | L −8.5 | 155.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 88-80 | -9.5 | L −1.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 9 | vs | W 118-77 | -6.5 | W +34.5 | 161.5 | O 195 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 82-71 | -7.5 | W +3.5 | 162.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 85-95 | -4.5 | L −14.5 | 168.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 87-70 | -23.5 | L −6.5 | 167.5 | U 157 |
| Feb 23 | @ | L 74-77 | -3.5 | L −6.5 | 162.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 75-80 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 77-62 | -14.5 | W +0.5 | 159.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 92-89 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 155.5 | O 181 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 62-58 | -7.5 | L −3.5 | 164.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 73-78 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Mar 19 | vs | W 83-79 | -3.5 | W +0.5 | 160.5 | O 162 |
| Mar 21 | vs | L 69-77 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
SCST
W 104-45
+23.5
6
vs
JKST
W 106-70
−2.5
11
vs
UK
W 96-88
+2.5
15
vs
OHIO
W 106-81
−6.5
21
vs
CIN
W 74-64
+1.5
24
vs
EMU
W 87-46
+7.5
26
vs
NJIT
W 104-47
+12.5
3
@
ARK
L 80-89
−10.5
6
vs
IU
W 87-78
+5.5
13
vs
MEM
W 99-73
+9.5
16
@
TENN
L 62-83
−16.5
20
vs
MONT
W 94-54
+9.5
30
@
CAL
W 90-70
+12.5
2
@
STAN
L 76-80
−11.5
6
vs
DUKE
L 73-84
−9.5
10
vs
BC
W 75-62
−8.5
13
vs
UVA
L 70-79
−13.5
17
@
PITT
W 100-59
+33.5
24
vs
VT
W 85-71
−0.5
26
@
DUKE
L 52-83
−22.5
31
vs
SMU
W 88-74
+4.5
4
vs
ND
W 76-65
−8.5
7
@
WAKE
W 88-80
−1.5
9
vs
NCSU
W 118-77
+34.5
14
vs
BAY
W 82-71
+3.5
17
@
SMU
L 85-95
−14.5
21
vs
GT
W 87-70
−6.5
23
@
UNC
L 74-77
−6.5
28
@
CLEM
L 75-80
−7.5
3
vs
SYR
W 77-62
+0.5
7
@
MIA
W 92-89
+4.5
11
vs
SMU
W 62-58
−3.5
12
vs
MIA
L 73-78
−6.5
19
vs
USF
W 83-79
+0.5
21
vs
MSU
L 69-77
−2.5
covered 16didn’t cover 19avg +0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
SCST
W 104-45
−10.5
6
vs
JKST
W 106-70
+10.5
11
vs
UK
W 96-88
+10.5
15
vs
OHIO
W 106-81
+12.5
21
vs
CIN
W 74-64
−25.5
24
vs
EMU
W 87-46
−29.5
26
vs
NJIT
W 104-47
−7.5
3
@
ARK
L 80-89
+2.5
6
vs
IU
W 87-78
+2.5
13
vs
MEM
W 99-73
+9.5
16
@
TENN
L 62-83
−11.5
20
vs
MONT
W 94-54
−18.5
30
@
CAL
W 90-70
+0.5
2
@
STAN
L 76-80
−1.5
6
vs
DUKE
L 73-84
−4.5
10
vs
BC
W 75-62
−13.5
13
vs
UVA
L 70-79
−5.5
17
@
PITT
W 100-59
+6.5
24
vs
VT
W 85-71
−4.5
26
@
DUKE
L 52-83
−22.5
31
vs
SMU
W 88-74
−1.5
4
vs
ND
W 76-65
−14.5
7
@
WAKE
W 88-80
+5.5
9
vs
NCSU
W 118-77
+33.5
14
vs
BAY
W 82-71
−9.5
17
@
SMU
L 85-95
+11.5
21
vs
GT
W 87-70
−10.5
23
@
UNC
L 74-77
−11.5
28
@
CLEM
L 75-80
+8.5
3
vs
SYR
W 77-62
−20.5
7
@
MIA
W 92-89
+25.5
11
vs
SMU
W 62-58
−44.5
12
vs
MIA
L 73-78
−2.5
19
vs
USF
W 83-79
+1.5
21
vs
MSU
L 69-77
−5.5
over 14under 21avg −3.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
The starting fives are even
Position by position: Texas 0, Louisville 0, even 5
TexasBetterLouisville
G I. Johnson TR16.9 pts · 2.9 reb · 3 ast
Score 98
=Even
G J. Shelstad TR15.6 pts · 2.9 reb · 4.9 ast
Score 92
G E. Freeman TR9.2 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 85
=Even
G S. Trimble TR14 pts · 3.8 reb · 3 ast
Score 90
G M. Lewis TR14 pts · 2.6 reb · 2 ast
Score 86
=Even
G D. Montgomery TR13.4 pts · 4 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 92
F D. Punch TR14.1 pts · 6.8 reb · 2 ast
Score 96
=Even
F F. Bidunga TR13.3 pts · 9 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 99
C M. Vokietaitis15.5 pts · 7 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 95
=Even
F L. Wells TR15.1 pts · 7.1 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 85
TexasBetterLouisville
TEX offense7th of 366 · +10.5
=Even
LOU defense16th of 366 · +6.2
TEX defense17th of 366 · +6.2
=Even
LOU offense15th of 366 · +9.3
Backcourt+8.6 · 3 players
=Even
Backcourt+9.1 · 3 players
Frontcourt+9.8 · 2 players
=Even
Frontcourt+9.2 · 2 players
Bench+0.9 · 2 players
→LOUBig
Bench+4.1 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestTEX betterLOU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
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
Guards
J. Shelstad35 min · TRS. Trimble33 min · TRD. Montgomery31 min · TRA. Wooley23 minK. Knox22 min · TRW. Hanke1 min
Forwards
F. Bidunga32 min · TRL. Wells31 min · TRA. Folgueiras21 min · TRB. ZhangNew
Centers
G. Dynes12 min · TRO. EkezieNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 81.7 #34 | Points per game | 84.2 #18 |
| 1.19 #22 | Points per possession | 1.18 #29 |
| 68.7 #199 | Pace (possessions) | 71.0 #77 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.1 #65 | Effective FG% | 56.5 #14 |
| 35.1 #107 | 3-point % | 36.0 #58 |
| 35.8 #254 | 3-point attempt rate | 52.9 #4 |
| 44.2 #7 | Free throw rate | 33.1 #236 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.0 #68 | Turnover rate | 16.8 #184 |
| 35.4 #35 | Offensive rebound rate | 32.8 #93 |
| 12.1 #278 | Assists per game | 17.1 #23 |
| Defense | ||
| 76.1 #220 | Points allowed | 72.5 #119 |
| 1.11 #235 | Points allowed per possession | 1.02 #49 |
| 50.8 #144 | Opponent effective FG% | 48.7 #54 |
| 34.7 #230 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.3 #76 |
| 13.0 #356 | Turnovers forced | 16.7 #172 |
| 73.1 #35 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.5 #50 |
| 5.5 #298 | Steals per game | 6.8 #148 |
| 2.9 #239 | Blocks per game | 3.3 #179 |
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.
Louisville
24-11 in 2025-26 overall · 12-8 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Michigan St69–77
- Wvs South Florida83–79
- Lvs Miami73–78
- Wvs SMU62–58
- W@ Miami92–89
A week or more of rest.