Jenny Craig Pavilion · at San Diego
LineNo line yet
Total—
 TAR | This season | USD |
|---|---|---|
| 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 USD 78–72 · win probability USD 69%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 149.6
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: USD has more of the edges
TAR 2, USD 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
USDBigThree-pointers
TAR hits 32.5% and allows 34.9%; USD hits 34.6% and allows 32.7%. Threes are 24.2% and 43.7% of their shots
TARBigFree throws
Free throw rate: TAR 41.9, USD 25.8. Allowed: TAR 47.7, USD 38.8
Context
Schedule so far
TAR has played the 212th-hardest schedule, USD the 130th. A record against a soft schedule means less
USDSmallUSD offense vs TAR defense
Offense 127th of 366 against a defense 186th, on the model’s ratings
TARSmallRebounding
Offensive rebound rate: TAR 31.5%, USD 28.1%. Defensive: TAR 64.9%, USD 65.5%
USDSmallHome court
USD at home. This season: USD 0-0 at home, TAR 0-0 away
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: TAR 48.3 and allows 53.6; USD 51.2 and allows 54.7
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: TAR plays 71.2 a game (64th fastest), USD 69.6 (139th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: TAR 23%, USD 7%. Transfers in: TAR 7, USD 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: TAR 19.9%, USD 17.6%. Forced: TAR 23.5%, USD 18.8%
Even
TAR offense vs USD defense
Offense 200th of 366 against a defense 189th, 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 | — | USD -5.7 | — |
| Total | — | 149.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | TAR 71.9 · USD 77.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | USD -3.3 | — |
| 1H total | 69.9 | — |
| 1H projected score | TAR 33.3 · USD 36.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| TAR | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% |
| USD | 2-8 20% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Tarleton St
28 games played
Straight up
10-18
36% wins
Against the spread
14-14
50% covers · avg +0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-13
54% overs · avg +4.8 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 | @ 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 | vs AMCC | W 85-77 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 142.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 11 | vs MRMK | 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 | vs FAMU | 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 | vs UVU | L 85-91 | +5.5 | L −0.5 | 144.5 | O 176 |
| Jan 3 | vs CBU | W 81-76 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 8 | vs ACU | 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 |
| Jan 29 | vsUVU | L 55-83 | +6.5 | L −21.5 | 154.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 31 | vsUTU | L 59-65 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 149.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 5 | @CBU | L 55-56 | +10.5 | W +9.5 | 138.5 | U 111 |
| Feb 7 | @SUU | W 62-59 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 149.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 14 | @ACU | L 59-73 | +3.5 | L −10.5 | 134.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 16 | vsACU | W 65-62 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 134.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 19 | vsSUU | W 78-74 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 144.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 21 | vsUTU | L 72-80 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 140.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 26 | @UVU | L 72-79 | +17.5 | W +10.5 | 141.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 28 | @CBU | L 67-82 | +8.5 | L −6.5 | 139.5 | O 149 |
| Mar 5 | vsUTA | L 60-65 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 136.5 | U 125 |
| Mar 11 | vsACU | L 78-84 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 134.5 | O 162 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@SMU
SMUL 76-96
+1.5
5
@LSU
LSUL 60-96
−20.5
8
vsAMCC
AMCCW 85-77
+4.5
11
vsMRMK
MRMKW 76-62
+9.5
14
@BAY
BAYL 81-94
+10.5
20
@RICE
RICEW 90-74
+20.5
1
@CIN
CINL 58-76
+6.5
16
@MVSU
MVSUW 88-64
+6.5
19
vsFAMU
FAMUW 78-54
+9.5
29
@UTA
UTAW 69-63
+8.5
1
vsUVU
UVUL 85-91
−0.5
3
vsCBU
CBUW 81-76
+3.5
8
vsACU
ACUL 80-84
−8.5
15
@SUU
SUUL 105-106
−4.5
17
@UTU
UTUL 71-75
−0.5
21
@UTA
UTAL 64-71
−3.5
29
vsUVU
UVUL 55-83
−21.5
31
vsUTU
UTUL 59-65
−7.5
5
@CBU
CBUL 55-56
+9.5
7
@SUU
SUUW 62-59
+1.5
14
@ACU
ACUL 59-73
−10.5
16
vsACU
ACUW 65-62
+4.5
19
vsSUU
SUUW 78-74
−0.5
21
vsUTU
UTUL 72-80
−9.5
26
@UVU
UVUL 72-79
+10.5
28
@CBU
CBUL 67-82
−6.5
5
vsUTA
UTAL 60-65
−6.5
11
vsACU
ACUL 78-84
−4.5
covered 14didn’t cover 14avg +0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@SMU
SMUL 76-96
+27.5
5
@LSU
LSUL 60-96
+7.5
8
vsAMCC
AMCCW 85-77
+19.5
11
vsMRMK
MRMKW 76-62
−4.5
14
@BAY
BAYL 81-94
+25.5
20
@RICE
RICEW 90-74
+17.5
1
@CIN
CINL 58-76
−8.5
16
@MVSU
MVSUW 88-64
+9.5
19
vsFAMU
FAMUW 78-54
−13.5
29
@UTA
UTAW 69-63
−4.5
1
vsUVU
UVUL 85-91
+31.5
3
vsCBU
CBUW 81-76
+9.5
8
vsACU
ACUL 80-84
+23.5
15
@SUU
SUUL 105-106
+60.5
17
@UTU
UTUL 71-75
−4.5
21
@UTA
UTAL 64-71
−7.5
29
vsUVU
UVUL 55-83
−16.5
31
vsUTU
UTUL 59-65
−25.5
5
@CBU
CBUL 55-56
−27.5
7
@SUU
SUUW 62-59
−28.5
14
@ACU
ACUL 59-73
−2.5
16
vsACU
ACUW 65-62
−7.5
19
vsSUU
SUUW 78-74
+7.5
21
vsUTU
UTUL 72-80
+11.5
26
@UVU
UVUL 72-79
+9.5
28
@CBU
CBUL 67-82
+9.5
5
vsUTA
UTAL 60-65
−11.5
11
vsACU
ACUL 78-84
+27.5
over 15under 13avg +4.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
San Diego
31 games played
Straight up
10-21
32% wins
Against the spread
16-15
52% covers · avg −0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-18
42% overs · avg +0.5 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 7 | vs IDST | L 68-71 | -4.5 | L −7.5 | 152.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 12 | vs IDHO | W 78-74 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 18 | vs GRAM | W 78-68 | -6.5 | W +3.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 21 | vs UCR | L 71-85 | -7.5 | L −21.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 25 | vsCBU | L 61-76 | +7.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 30 | @ LBSU | L 72-76 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 5 | @ SJSU | L 69-86 | +6.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 9 | vs USC | L 81-94 | +14.5 | W +1.5 | 158.5 | O 175 |
| Dec 13 | vs NAU | W 78-69 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 19 | @ UCSD | W 82-80 | +12.5 | W +14.5 | 156.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 22 | @ WASH | L 56-86 | +18.5 | L −11.5 | 159.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 28 | vs PAC | W 66-54 | +2.5 | W +14.5 | 150.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 30 | vs GONZ | L 93-99 | +29.5 | W +23.5 | 160.5 | O 192 |
| Jan 2 | @ SF | L 64-74 | +12.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 4 | @ SCU | L 70-98 | +17.5 | L −10.5 | 161.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 8 | vs PEPP | W 83-63 | -4.5 | W +15.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 10 | @PAC | L 70-77 | +8.5 | W +1.5 | 147.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 15 | @ SEA | L 64-75 | +9.5 | L −1.5 | 147.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 21 | vs WSU | W 96-92 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | O 188 |
| Jan 24 | vsSCU | L 73-85 | +13.5 | W +1.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 28 | @PEPP | W 92-88 | -2.5 | W +1.5 | 151.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 31 | vs ORST | L 76-78 | -3.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 4 | @ SMC | L 60-87 | +20.5 | L −6.5 | 148.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 7 | @ LMU | L 63-83 | +6.5 | L −13.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 11 | vs PORT | W 71-58 | -1.5 | W +11.5 | 150.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 15 | vsSF | L 79-92 | +5.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 21 | vsLMU | L 65-77 | +2.5 | L −9.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 25 | @ORST | L 82-92 | +6.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 28 | @PORT | L 74-87 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Mar 5 | vsLMU | W 66-62 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 145.5 | U 128 |
| Mar 6 | vsSEA | L 56-58 | +8.5 | W +6.5 | 139.5 | U 114 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
vsIDST
IDSTL 68-71
−7.5
12
vsIDHO
IDHOW 78-74
+5.5
18
vsGRAM
GRAMW 78-68
+3.5
21
vsUCR
UCRL 71-85
−21.5
25
vsCBU
CBUL 61-76
−7.5
30
@LBSU
LBSUL 72-76
−6.5
5
@SJSU
SJSUL 69-86
−10.5
9
vsUSC
USCL 81-94
+1.5
13
vsNAU
NAUW 78-69
+4.5
19
@UCSD
UCSDW 82-80
+14.5
22
@WASH
WASHL 56-86
−11.5
28
vsPAC
PACW 66-54
+14.5
30
vsGONZ
GONZL 93-99
+23.5
2
@SF
SFL 64-74
+2.5
4
@SCU
SCUL 70-98
−10.5
8
vsPEPP
PEPPW 83-63
+15.5
10
@PAC
PACL 70-77
+1.5
15
@SEA
SEAL 64-75
−1.5
21
vsWSU
WSUW 96-92
+5.5
24
vsSCU
SCUL 73-85
+1.5
28
@PEPP
PEPPW 92-88
+1.5
31
vsORST
ORSTL 76-78
−5.5
4
@SMC
SMCL 60-87
−6.5
7
@LMU
LMUL 63-83
−13.5
11
vsPORT
PORTW 71-58
+11.5
15
vsSF
SFL 79-92
−7.5
21
vsLMU
LMUL 65-77
−9.5
25
@ORST
ORSTL 82-92
−3.5
28
@PORT
PORTL 74-87
−10.5
5
vsLMU
LMUW 66-62
+9.5
6
vsSEA
SEAL 56-58
+6.5
covered 16didn’t cover 15avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
vsIDST
IDSTL 68-71
−13.5
12
vsIDHO
IDHOW 78-74
−3.5
18
vsGRAM
GRAMW 78-68
−3.5
21
vsUCR
UCRL 71-85
+3.5
25
vsCBU
CBUL 61-76
−9.5
30
@LBSU
LBSUL 72-76
+0.5
5
@SJSU
SJSUL 69-86
+10.5
9
vsUSC
USCL 81-94
+16.5
13
vsNAU
NAUW 78-69
−2.5
19
@UCSD
UCSDW 82-80
+5.5
22
@WASH
WASHL 56-86
−17.5
28
vsPAC
PACW 66-54
−30.5
30
vsGONZ
GONZL 93-99
+31.5
2
@SF
SFL 64-74
−14.5
4
@SCU
SCUL 70-98
+6.5
8
vsPEPP
PEPPW 83-63
−3.5
10
@PAC
PACL 70-77
−0.5
15
@SEA
SEAL 64-75
−8.5
21
vsWSU
WSUW 96-92
+35.5
24
vsSCU
SCUL 73-85
−4.5
28
@PEPP
PEPPW 92-88
+28.5
31
vsORST
ORSTL 76-78
+3.5
4
@SMC
SMCL 60-87
−1.5
7
@LMU
LMUL 63-83
−5.5
11
vsPORT
PORTW 71-58
−21.5
15
vsSF
SFL 79-92
+22.5
21
vsLMU
LMUL 65-77
−7.5
25
@ORST
ORSTL 82-92
+29.5
28
@PORT
PORTL 74-87
+12.5
5
vsLMU
LMUW 66-62
−17.5
6
vsSEA
SEAL 56-58
−25.5
over 13under 18avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
San Diego has the better starters
Position by position: Tarleton St 0, San Diego 3, even 2
Tarleton StBetterSan Diego
G C. Blackwell TR10.7 pts · 2.8 reb · 2.9 ast
Score 52
→USDSmall
G M. Worthy TR16.6 pts · 4.7 reb · 3 ast
Score 72
G F. Emmou TR7.3 pts · 1.8 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 36
→USDBig
G D. Hill TR14.2 pts · 4.5 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 92
G L. Kelly5.2 pts · 2.8 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 41
=Even
G D. Stromer TR6.4 pts · 2.7 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 29
G T. Cope TR8.3 pts · 2.9 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 47
=Even
F T. McMorris TR7.5 pts · 5.6 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 47
F I. Harrell TR7.8 pts · 3.7 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 23
→USDSmall
F A. Munoz TR12.7 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 56
Tarleton StBetterSan Diego
TAR offense200th of 366 · -6.3
=Even
USD defense189th of 366 · -4.4
TAR defense186th of 366 · -4.3
→USDSmall
USD offense127th of 366 · -3.5
Backcourt-3.3 · 4 players
→USDBig
Backcourt+2.0 · 3 players
Frontcourt-1.8 · 1 player
→USDSmall
Frontcourt-0.4 · 2 players
Bench-0.5 · 5 players
=Even
Bench+0.3 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestTAR betterUSD betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Tarleton StGuards
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
San DiegoGuards
M. Worthy35 min · TRD. Hill27 min · TRD. Stromer23 min · TRC. Versher2 minN. Del Bosque1 minB. RomanNew
Forwards
T. McMorris26 min · TRA. Munoz25 min · TRJ. Roberto Tanchyn19 min · TRS. Konneh13 min · TRA. Aviles11 minJ. HillNew
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Matchup stats
2025-26 · rank among 365 teams
Scoring
Points per game
TAR72.5 #231USD72.8 #228Points per possession
TAR1.01 #309USD1.05 #251Pace (possessions)
TAR71.2 #64USD69.6 #139Shooting
Effective FG%
TAR48.3 #306USD51.2 #1853-point %
TAR32.5 #256USD34.6 #1413-point attempt rate
TAR24.2 #365USD43.7 #96Free throw rate
TAR41.9 #33USD25.8 #358Possessions
Turnover rate
TAR19.9 #348USD17.6 #242Offensive rebound rate
TAR31.5 #141USD28.1 #262Assists per game
TAR10.5 #349USD15.4 #68Defense
Points allowed
TAR75.8 #211USD78.8 #290Points allowed per possession
TAR1.07 #130USD1.13 #286Opponent effective FG%
TAR53.6 #285USD54.7 #320Opponent 3-point %
TAR34.9 #244USD32.7 #100Turnovers forced
TAR23.5 #2USD18.8 #55Defensive rebound rate
TAR64.9 #340USD65.5 #328Steals per game
TAR9.7 #3USD7.7 #65Blocks per game
TAR3.1 #206USD2.6 #294| TAR | USD | |
|---|---|---|
| Scoring | ||
| 72.5 #231 | Points per game | 72.8 #228 |
| 1.01 #309 | Points per possession | 1.05 #251 |
| 71.2 #64 | Pace (possessions) | 69.6 #139 |
| Shooting | ||
| 48.3 #306 | Effective FG% | 51.2 #185 |
| 32.5 #256 | 3-point % | 34.6 #141 |
| 24.2 #365 | 3-point attempt rate | 43.7 #96 |
| 41.9 #33 | Free throw rate | 25.8 #358 |
| Possessions | ||
| 19.9 #348 | Turnover rate | 17.6 #242 |
| 31.5 #141 | Offensive rebound rate | 28.1 #262 |
| 10.5 #349 | Assists per game | 15.4 #68 |
| Defense | ||
| 75.8 #211 | Points allowed | 78.8 #290 |
| 1.07 #130 | Points allowed per possession | 1.13 #286 |
| 53.6 #285 | Opponent effective FG% | 54.7 #320 |
| 34.9 #244 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.7 #100 |
| 23.5 #2 | Turnovers forced | 18.8 #55 |
| 64.9 #340 | Defensive rebound rate | 65.5 #328 |
| 9.7 #3 | Steals per game | 7.7 #65 |
| 3.1 #206 | Blocks per game | 2.6 #294 |
Tarleton St
10-18 in 2025-26 overall · 5-14 in conference · United Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Abilene Chrstn78–84
- Lvs UT Arlington60–65
- L@ CA Baptist67–82
- L@ Utah Valley72–79
- Lvs Utah Tech72–80
A week or more of rest.
San Diego
10-21 in 2025-26 overall · 6-14 in conference · West Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Seattle U56–58
- Wvs LMU66–62
- L@ Portland74–87
- L@ Oregon St82–92
- Lvs LMU65–77
A week or more of rest.