Army Black Knights at UTSA Roadrunners: Model Line and Edge

Thu, Nov 26, 12:00 AM ETUTSA Convocation Center · at UTSA

#288ARMYArmy

#192UTSAUTSA

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Army and UTSA
ARMY	This season	UTSA
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 UTSA 80–72 · win probability UTSA 77%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 151.9

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: UTSA has more of the edges

ARMY 2, UTSA 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

Context

Schedule so far

ARMY has played the 302nd-hardest schedule, UTSA the 104th. A record against a soft schedule means less

UTSABig

UTSA offense vs ARMY defense

Offense 155th of 366 against a defense 304th, on the model’s ratings

ARMYBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: ARMY 29.6%, UTSA 30.2%. Defensive: ARMY 72.3%, UTSA 61.3%

UTSASmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: ARMY 26.8, UTSA 29.5. Allowed: ARMY 39.6, UTSA 33.3

ARMYSmall

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: ARMY 65%, UTSA 15%. Transfers in: ARMY 0, UTSA 9. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

UTSASmall

Home court

UTSA at home. This season: UTSA 0-0 at home, ARMY 0-0 away

Even

ARMY offense vs UTSA defense

Offense 271st of 366 against a defense 238th, on the model’s ratings

Even

Turnovers

Turnover rate: ARMY 17.2%, UTSA 17.4%. Forced: ARMY 15.4%, UTSA 14.7%

Context

Tempo

About 69 possessions: ARMY plays 68.6 a game (200th fastest), UTSA 69.6 (142nd). Faster games mean more points

Even

Three-pointers

ARMY hits 32.0% and allows 35.5%; UTSA hits 29.2% and allows 35.1%. Threes are 53.3% and 41.3% of their shots

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: ARMY 49.3 and allows 55.1; UTSA 44.8 and allows 53.3

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

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	—	UTSA -8.3	—
Total	—	151.9	—
Projected score	—	ARMY 71.8 · UTSA 80.1

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	UTSA -4.8	—
1H total	71.0	—
1H projected score	ARMY 33.1 · UTSA 37.9	—

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.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

ATS

2025-26 season

	Season	Cover	Venue	Role
ARMY WLLLL	12-18	40%	8-7	—
UTSA WLWLW	10-18	36%	5-7	—

Venue/role: ARMY away; UTSA home. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
ARMY OOOOU	17-13	57%	9-21
UTSA UOOUU	13-15	46%	3-25

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

Last 10 games

2025-26

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
ARMY	2-8 20%	1-9 10%	5-5 50%
UTSA	1-9 10%	6-4 60%	6-4 60%

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

Next 3 games

With how the last meeting with each opponent went

Army

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 28	vs RID	No recent meeting
Dec 2	vs UMBC	W63–60WU
Dec 5	@ UALB	W67–59WU

UTSA

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 29	@ SIUE	L60–77LU
Dec 5	@ USA	L58–82LU
Dec 8	@ SMU	W77–73WU

Last meeting: result, against the spread, over / under. Hover a result for its date.

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

ARMY 2–0 UTSAARMY leads · 2 games since 2021-22 · ARMY has won the last 2 meetings · ARMY 2-0 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Dec 29, 2024-25	UTSA 75 @ ARMY 78	ARMY +2.5	ARMY W
Dec 21, 2023-24	ARMY 63 @ UTSA 53	UTSA -6.5	ARMY W

ATS History · 2025-26

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

Army

30 games played

Straight up

9-21

30% wins

Against the spread

12-18

40% covers · avg −1.8 pts vs the line

Over / Under

17-13

57% overs · avg +3.5 pts vs the total

Straight up

9-2130%

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

4 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

12-1840%

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

4 straight misses ATS0 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

17-1357%

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

3 of last 4 overno streak

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 8	@STMN	L 76-83	+18.5	W +11.5	151.5	O 159
Nov 11	vsDUKE	L 59-114	+33.5	L −21.5	152.5	O 173
Nov 15	vsHARV	L 52-75	+6.5	L −16.5	146.5	U 127
Nov 18	@COR	L 73-86	+17.5	W +4.5	164.5	U 159
Nov 21	@MRST	L 65-76	+12.5	W +1.5	132.5	O 141
Nov 25	vsETAM	L 67-84	+2.5	L −14.5	143.5	O 151
Nov 26	@FDU	W 81-73	+4.5	W +12.5	152.5	O 154
Nov 29	vsMAN	W 81-78	+1.5	W +4.5	152.5	O 159
Dec 2	vsGW	L 70-84	+19.5	W +5.5	156.5	U 154
Dec 12	@UMBC	W 63-60	+7.5	W +10.5	146.5	U 123
Dec 23	vsBING	W 95-85	-12.5	L −2.5	140.5	O 180
Dec 31	@LEH	W 85-78	+5.5	W +12.5	146.5	O 163
Jan 3	vsCOLG	L 69-76	+7.5	W +0.5	147.5	U 145
Jan 7	vsL-MD	L 76-84	-4.5	L −12.5	146.5	O 160
Jan 10	@BU	L 91-100	+7.5	L −1.5	140.5	O 191
Jan 14	@HC	L 75-82	+4.5	L −2.5	142.5	O 157
Jan 18	vsAMER	L 67-78	+4.5	L −6.5	147.5	U 145
Jan 21	@BUCK	W 87-84	+4.5	W +7.5	144.5	O 171
Jan 24	@NAVY	L 56-84	+10.5	L −17.5	143.5	U 140
Jan 28	vsLEH	W 67-64	+1.5	W +4.5	147.5	U 131
Jan 31	vsHC	W 69-68	-2.5	L −1.5	144.5	U 137
Feb 4	@COLG	L 55-69	+10.5	L −3.5	150.5	U 124
Feb 7	vsLAF	L 60-63	+1.5	L −1.5	142.5	U 123
Feb 11	vsBU	L 68-85	+2.5	L −14.5	140.5	O 153
Feb 14	@AMER	L 63-75	+9.5	L −2.5	144.5	U 138
Feb 18	@L-MD	W 87-77	+4.5	W +14.5	149.5	O 164
Feb 21	vsNAVY	L 63-81	+8.5	L −9.5	139.5	O 144
Feb 25	vsBUCK	L 73-75	-2.5	L −4.5	142.5	O 148
Feb 28	@LAF	L 77-83	+3.5	L −2.5	144.5	O 160
Mar 3	@BUCK	L 55-65	+1.5	L −8.5	144.5	U 120

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

STMN

L 76-83

+11.5

DUKE

L 59-114

−21.5

HARV

L 52-75

−16.5

COR

L 73-86

+4.5

MRST

L 65-76

+1.5

ETAM

L 67-84

−14.5

FDU

W 81-73

+12.5

MAN

W 81-78

+4.5

L 70-84

+5.5

UMBC

W 63-60

+10.5

BING

W 95-85

−2.5

LEH

W 85-78

+12.5

COLG

L 69-76

+0.5

L-MD

L 76-84

−12.5

L 91-100

−1.5

L 75-82

−2.5

AMER

L 67-78

−6.5

BUCK

W 87-84

+7.5

NAVY

L 56-84

−17.5

LEH

W 67-64

+4.5

W 69-68

−1.5

COLG

L 55-69

−3.5

LAF

L 60-63

−1.5

L 68-85

−14.5

AMER

L 63-75

−2.5

L-MD

W 87-77

+14.5

NAVY

L 63-81

−9.5

BUCK

L 73-75

−4.5

LAF

L 77-83

−2.5

BUCK

L 55-65

−8.5

covered 12didn’t cover 18avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

STMN

L 76-83

+7.5

DUKE

L 59-114

+20.5

HARV

L 52-75

−19.5

COR

L 73-86

−5.5

MRST

L 65-76

+8.5

ETAM

L 67-84

+7.5

FDU

W 81-73

+1.5

MAN

W 81-78

+6.5

L 70-84

−2.5

UMBC

W 63-60

−23.5

BING

W 95-85

+39.5

LEH

W 85-78

+16.5

COLG

L 69-76

−2.5

L-MD

L 76-84

+13.5

L 91-100

+50.5

L 75-82

+14.5

AMER

L 67-78

−2.5

BUCK

W 87-84

+26.5

NAVY

L 56-84

−3.5

LEH

W 67-64

−16.5

W 69-68

−7.5

COLG

L 55-69

−26.5

LAF

L 60-63

−19.5

L 68-85

+12.5

AMER

L 63-75

−6.5

L-MD

W 87-77

+14.5

NAVY

L 63-81

+4.5

BUCK

L 73-75

+5.5

LAF

L 77-83

+15.5

BUCK

L 55-65

−24.5

over 17under 13avg +3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

UTSA

28 games played

Straight up

3-25

11% wins

Against the spread

10-18

36% covers · avg −3.9 pts vs the line

Over / Under

13-15

46% overs · avg −1.2 pts vs the total

Straight up

3-2511%

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

5 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

10-1836%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

13-1546%

U O O U U U U U O U O U U U O O O U O O U O O U 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 7	vsSIUE	L 60-77	-6.5	L −23.5	153.5	U 137
Nov 12	@TXST	L 69-80	+2.5	L −8.5	147.5	O 149
Nov 15	@DEN	W 84-79	+4.5	W +9.5	148.5	O 163
Nov 24	vsACU	L 50-61	+2.5	L −8.5	144.5	U 111
Nov 25	vsGASO	W 77-64	+3.5	W +16.5	160.5	U 141
Nov 30	vsUSA	L 58-82	+1.5	L −22.5	141.5	U 140
Dec 7	@ALA	L 55-97	+33.5	L −8.5	171.5	U 152
Dec 13	@COLO	L 64-88	+22.5	L −1.5	154.5	U 152
Dec 17	@USC	L 70-97	+25.5	L −1.5	157.5	O 167
Dec 22	vsSEA	L 68-71	+10.5	W +7.5	148.5	U 139
Dec 31	@FAU	L 70-110	+16.5	L −23.5	158.5	O 180
Jan 3	@TEM	L 57-76	+10.5	L −8.5	149.5	U 133
Jan 7	vsCLT	L 58-74	+6.5	L −9.5	145.5	U 132
Jan 10	vsTULN	L 52-85	+7.5	L −25.5	147.5	U 137
Jan 14	vsRICE	L 73-89	+6.5	L −9.5	144.5	O 162
Jan 18	@MEM	L 69-95	+20.5	L −5.5	147.5	O 164
Jan 21	@UNT	L 62-81	+15.5	L −3.5	138.5	O 143
Jan 24	vsTEM	L 64-70	+10.5	W +4.5	145.5	U 134
Jan 28	vsUAB	L 73-83	+12.5	W +2.5	155.5	O 156
Feb 4	@USF	L 88-109	+23.5	W +2.5	164.5	O 197
Feb 7	vsUNT	L 58-81	+10.5	L −12.5	141.5	U 139
Feb 11	@ECU	L 72-88	+10.5	L −5.5	150.5	O 160
Feb 15	@CLT	W 88-79	+13.5	W +22.5	148.5	O 167
Feb 18	vsFAU	L 52-60	+11.5	W +3.5	157.5	U 112
Feb 22	@TLSA	L 74-100	+21.5	L −4.5	159.5	O 174
Feb 25	vsECU	L 81-82	+4.5	W +3.5	153.5	O 163
Mar 1	vsWICH	L 67-84	+15.5	L −1.5	151.5	U 151
Mar 8	@RICE	L 71-80	+11.5	W +2.5	151.5	U 151

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

SIUE

L 60-77

−23.5

TXST

L 69-80

−8.5

DEN

W 84-79

+9.5

ACU

L 50-61

−8.5

GASO

W 77-64

+16.5

USA

L 58-82

−22.5

ALA

L 55-97

−8.5

COLO

L 64-88

−1.5

USC

L 70-97

−1.5

SEA

L 68-71

+7.5

FAU

L 70-110

−23.5

TEM

L 57-76

−8.5

CLT

L 58-74

−9.5

TULN

L 52-85

−25.5

RICE

L 73-89

−9.5

MEM

L 69-95

−5.5

UNT

L 62-81

−3.5

TEM

L 64-70

+4.5

UAB

L 73-83

+2.5

USF

L 88-109

+2.5

UNT

L 58-81

−12.5

ECU

L 72-88

−5.5

CLT

W 88-79

+22.5

FAU

L 52-60

+3.5

TLSA

L 74-100

−4.5

ECU

L 81-82

+3.5

WICH

L 67-84

−1.5

RICE

L 71-80

+2.5

covered 10didn’t cover 18avg −3.9 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

SIUE

L 60-77

−16.5

TXST

L 69-80

+1.5

DEN

W 84-79

+14.5

ACU

L 50-61

−33.5

GASO

W 77-64

−19.5

USA

L 58-82

−1.5

ALA

L 55-97

−19.5

COLO

L 64-88

−2.5

USC

L 70-97

+9.5

SEA

L 68-71

−9.5

FAU

L 70-110

+21.5

TEM

L 57-76

−16.5

CLT

L 58-74

−13.5

TULN

L 52-85

−10.5

RICE

L 73-89

+17.5

MEM

L 69-95

+16.5

UNT

L 62-81

+4.5

TEM

L 64-70

−11.5

UAB

L 73-83

+0.5

USF

L 88-109

+32.5

UNT

L 58-81

−2.5

ECU

L 72-88

+9.5

CLT

W 88-79

+18.5

FAU

L 52-60

−45.5

TLSA

L 74-100

+14.5

ECU

L 81-82

+9.5

WICH

L 67-84

−0.5

RICE

L 71-80

−0.5

over 13under 15avg −1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

UTSA has the better starters

Position by position: Army 1, UTSA 2, even 2

ArmyBetterUTSA

G R. Curry13.4 pts · 4.1 reb · 4.4 ast Score 57

ARMYBig

G D. Hayes8.7 pts · 1.8 reb · 1.8 ast Score 16

G K. McCarthy7.2 pts · 2.6 reb · 1.2 ast Score 13

UTSASmall

G J. Kelly TR8.3 pts · 3.9 reb · 0.6 ast Score 44

F J. Holloway10.7 pts · 3.6 reb · 2.1 ast Score 37

UTSABig

G D. Williams TR10 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.9 ast Score 72

F T. Laczkowski5.3 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.9 ast Score 38

Even

G P. Turner TR7 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.8 ast Score 31

F D. Benner1.4 pts · 0.6 reb · 0.4 ast Not ranked

No call

G I. Coleman TR6.4 pts · 3.8 reb · 0.8 ast Score 50

ArmyBetterUTSA

ARMY offense271st of 366 · -8.2

Even

UTSA defense238th of 366 · -6.2

ARMY defense304th of 366 · -7.8

UTSABig

UTSA offense155th of 366 · -4.7

Backcourt-3.1 · 2 players

ARMYSmall

Backcourt-5.4 · 5 players

Frontcourt-2.6 · 3 players

No call

FrontcourtNo numbers yet

Bench-1.0 · 5 players

ARMYSmall

Bench-3.5 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestARMY betterUTSA 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

Army

Guards

R. Curry34 minK. McCarthy24 minD. Watt5 minJ. Green3 minB. O'Keefe2 minJ. EllisNew

Forwards

J. Holloway29 minT. Laczkowski22 minD. Benner6 minN. Ikechi3 minD. Murans3 minH. RasmussenNew

Centers

P. HendersonNew

UTSA

Guards

D. Hayes31 minJ. Kelly27 min · TRD. Williams22 min · TRP. Turner20 min · TRI. Coleman19 min · TRS. Eberwein19 min · TR

Forwards

A. Smith5 min · TRC. OkpukparaNewM. BroxtonNewJ. PetersonNewK. TaylorNew

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.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams

ChartTable

Scoring

Points per game

ARMY70.8 #268

UTSA67.3 #329

Points per possession

ARMY1.03 #281

UTSA0.96 #348

Pace (possessions)

ARMY68.6 #200

UTSA69.6 #142

Shooting

Effective FG%

ARMY49.3 #279

UTSA44.8 #360

3-point %

ARMY32.0 #278

UTSA29.2 #351

3-point attempt rate

ARMY53.3 #3

UTSA41.3 #143

Free throw rate

ARMY26.8 #352

UTSA29.5 #320

Possessions

Turnover rate

ARMY17.2 #221

UTSA17.4 #231

Offensive rebound rate

ARMY29.6 #219

UTSA30.2 #191

Assists per game

ARMY14.5 #118

UTSA10.1 #357

Defense

Points allowed

ARMY79.0 #298

UTSA82.9 #345

Points allowed per possession

ARMY1.15 #321

UTSA1.20 #356

Opponent effective FG%

ARMY55.1 #334

UTSA53.3 #277

Opponent 3-point %

ARMY35.5 #285

UTSA35.1 #251

Turnovers forced

ARMY15.4 #257

UTSA14.7 #309

Defensive rebound rate

ARMY72.3 #54

UTSA61.3 #363

Steals per game

ARMY5.4 #307

UTSA6.3 #203

Blocks per game

ARMY1.6 #359

UTSA4.3 #52

ARMY		UTSA
Scoring
70.8 #268	Points per game	67.3 #329
1.03 #281	Points per possession	0.96 #348
68.6 #200	Pace (possessions)	69.6 #142
Shooting
49.3 #279	Effective FG%	44.8 #360
32.0 #278	3-point %	29.2 #351
53.3 #3	3-point attempt rate	41.3 #143
26.8 #352	Free throw rate	29.5 #320
Possessions
17.2 #221	Turnover rate	17.4 #231
29.6 #219	Offensive rebound rate	30.2 #191
14.5 #118	Assists per game	10.1 #357
Defense
79.0 #298	Points allowed	82.9 #345
1.15 #321	Points allowed per possession	1.20 #356
55.1 #334	Opponent effective FG%	53.3 #277
35.5 #285	Opponent 3-point %	35.1 #251
15.4 #257	Turnovers forced	14.7 #309
72.3 #54	Defensive rebound rate	61.3 #363
5.4 #307	Steals per game	6.3 #203
1.6 #359	Blocks per game	4.3 #52

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.

Army

9-21 in 2025-26 overall · 5-14 in conference · Patriot League

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Bucknell55–65
L@ Lafayette77–83
Lvs Bucknell73–75
Lvs Navy63–81
W@ Loyola MD87–77

A week or more of rest.

UTSA

3-25 in 2025-26 overall · 1-17 in conference · American Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Rice71–80
Lvs Wichita St67–84
Lvs East Carolina81–82
L@ Tulsa74–100
Lvs FAU52–60

A week or more of rest.

Army Black Knights at UTSA Roadrunners

What could decide it: UTSA has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

Army

UTSA

UTSA has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Army

UTSA