Prairie View A&M Panthers at San Diego Toreros: Model Line and Edge

Fri, Dec 11, 9:30 PM ETJenny Craig Pavilion · at San Diego

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Prairie View and San Diego
PV	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 84–69 · win probability USD 91%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 152.3

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: USD has more of the edges

PV 2, USD 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

USDBig

USD offense vs PV defense

Offense 127th of 366 against a defense 359th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

PV has played the 331st-hardest schedule, USD the 130th. A record against a soft schedule means less

PVBig

Free throws

Free throw rate: PV 41.6, USD 25.8. Allowed: PV 42.6, USD 38.8

USDBig

Three-pointers

PV hits 32.9% and allows 35.0%; USD hits 34.6% and allows 32.7%. Threes are 30.6% and 43.7% of their shots

USDBig

PV offense vs USD defense

Offense 310th of 366 against a defense 189th, on the model’s ratings

PVSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: PV 15.8%, USD 17.6%. Forced: PV 19.0%, USD 18.8%

Context

Tempo

About 71 possessions: PV plays 72.7 a game (20th fastest), USD 69.6 (139th). Faster games mean more points

USDSmall

Home court

USD at home. This season: USD 0-0 at home, PV 0-0 away

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: PV 26.7%, USD 28.1%. Defensive: PV 64.6%, USD 65.5%

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: PV 47.4 and allows 50.9; USD 51.2 and allows 54.7

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: PV 6%, USD 7%. Transfers in: PV 5, USD 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

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	—	USD -15.1	—
Total	—	152.3	—
Projected score	—	PV 68.6 · USD 83.7

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	USD -8.8	—
1H total	71.2	—
1H projected score	PV 31.2 · USD 40	—

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
PV WWWWL	23-10	70%	11-5	—
USD LLLWW	16-15	52%	10-5	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
PV UUUUO	13-20	39%	15-18
USD UOOUU	13-18	42%	10-21

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
PV	8-2 80%	9-1 90%	2-8 20%
USD	2-8 20%	3-7 30%	4-6 40%

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

Prairie View

No more games listed yet.

San Diego

No more games listed yet.

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

ATS History · 2025-26

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

Prairie View

33 games played

Straight up

15-18

45% wins

Against the spread

23-10

70% covers · avg +2.6 pts vs the line

Over / Under

13-20

39% overs · avg −2 pts vs the total

Straight up

15-1845%

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

3 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

23-1070%

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

3 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

13-2039%

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

1 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	@WICH	L 62-105	+20.5	L −22.5	156.5	O 167
Nov 12	@OKST	L 67-94	+30.5	W +3.5	168.5	U 161
Nov 17	@MIZ	L 73-91	+35.5	W +17.5	166.5	U 164
Nov 22	vsUTM	L 68-69	+10.5	W +9.5	155.5	U 137
Nov 23	vsUNF	W 85-82	-3.5	L −0.5	160.5	O 167
Nov 30	@UNT	L 69-72	+16.5	W +13.5	141.5	U 141
Dec 13	@SDAK	L 85-97	+6.5	L −5.5	168.5	O 182
Dec 22	@LSU	L 90-104	+29.5	W +15.5	161.5	O 194
Dec 29	@TA&M	L 82-111	+29.5	W +0.5	177.5	O 193
Jan 3	@GRAM	L 72-76	+7.5	W +3.5	155.5	U 148
Jan 5	@SOU	W 89-85	+7.5	W +11.5	160.5	O 174
Jan 10	vsMVSU	W 70-69	-18.5	L −17.5	152.5	U 139
Jan 12	vsUAPB	W 73-61	-3.5	W +8.5	164.5	U 134
Jan 17	@JKST	L 78-82	+1.5	L −2.5	160.5	U 160
Jan 19	@ALCN	L 75-76	-2.5	L −3.5	152.5	U 151
Jan 24	vsALST	L 80-95	+1.5	L −13.5	158.5	O 175
Jan 27	vsAAMU	L 60-80	-2.5	L −22.5	152.5	U 140
Jan 31	vsTXSO	W 85-78	+1.5	W +8.5	157.5	O 163
Feb 7	@BCU	L 76-82	+10.5	W +4.5	157.5	O 158
Feb 9	@FAMU	L 96-100	+3.5	L −0.5	149.5	O 196
Feb 14	vsSOU	L 82-87	+5.5	W +0.5	159.5	O 169
Feb 16	vsGRAM	W 68-63	+1.5	W +6.5	151.5	U 131
Feb 19	@MVSU	W 72-62	-8.5	W +1.5	153.5	U 134
Feb 21	@UAPB	L 82-84	+3.5	W +1.5	159.5	O 166
Feb 26	vsJKST	W 85-76	-3.5	W +5.5	161.5	U 161
Feb 28	vsALCN	W 72-51	-4.5	W +16.5	150.5	U 123
Mar 5	@TXSO	W 70-59	+1.5	W +12.5	154.5	U 129
Mar 10	vsALCN	W 65-56	-6.5	W +2.5	142.5	U 121
Mar 11	vsBCU	W 71-67	+5.5	W +9.5	147.5	U 138
Mar 13	vsAAMU	W 74-55	+1.5	W +20.5	140.5	U 129
Mar 14	vsSOU	W 72-66	+3.5	W +9.5	145.5	U 138
Mar 18	vsLEH	W 67-55	+3.5	W +15.5	140.5	U 122
Mar 20	vsFLA	L 55-114	+35.5	L −23.5	154.5	O 169

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

WICH

L 62-105

−22.5

OKST

L 67-94

+3.5

MIZ

L 73-91

+17.5

UTM

L 68-69

+9.5

UNF

W 85-82

−0.5

UNT

L 69-72

+13.5

SDAK

L 85-97

−5.5

LSU

L 90-104

+15.5

TA&M

L 82-111

+0.5

GRAM

L 72-76

+3.5

SOU

W 89-85

+11.5

MVSU

W 70-69

−17.5

UAPB

W 73-61

+8.5

JKST

L 78-82

−2.5

ALCN

L 75-76

−3.5

ALST

L 80-95

−13.5

AAMU

L 60-80

−22.5

TXSO

W 85-78

+8.5

BCU

L 76-82

+4.5

FAMU

L 96-100

−0.5

SOU

L 82-87

+0.5

GRAM

W 68-63

+6.5

MVSU

W 72-62

+1.5

UAPB

L 82-84

+1.5

JKST

W 85-76

+5.5

ALCN

W 72-51

+16.5

TXSO

W 70-59

+12.5

ALCN

W 65-56

+2.5

BCU

W 71-67

+9.5

AAMU

W 74-55

+20.5

SOU

W 72-66

+9.5

LEH

W 67-55

+15.5

FLA

L 55-114

−23.5

covered 23didn’t cover 10avg +2.6 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

WICH

L 62-105

+10.5

OKST

L 67-94

−7.5

MIZ

L 73-91

−2.5

UTM

L 68-69

−18.5

UNF

W 85-82

+6.5

UNT

L 69-72

−0.5

SDAK

L 85-97

+13.5

LSU

L 90-104

+32.5

TA&M

L 82-111

+15.5

GRAM

L 72-76

−7.5

SOU

W 89-85

+13.5

MVSU

W 70-69

−13.5

UAPB

W 73-61

−30.5

JKST

L 78-82

−0.5

ALCN

L 75-76

−1.5

ALST

L 80-95

+16.5

AAMU

L 60-80

−12.5

TXSO

W 85-78

+5.5

BCU

L 76-82

+0.5

FAMU

L 96-100

+46.5

SOU

L 82-87

+9.5

GRAM

W 68-63

−20.5

MVSU

W 72-62

−19.5

UAPB

L 82-84

+6.5

JKST

W 85-76

−0.5

ALCN

W 72-51

−27.5

TXSO

W 70-59

−25.5

ALCN

W 65-56

−21.5

BCU

W 71-67

−9.5

AAMU

W 74-55

−11.5

SOU

W 72-66

−7.5

LEH

W 67-55

−18.5

FLA

L 55-114

+14.5

over 13under 20avg −2 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

Straight up

10-2132%

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

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

16-1552%

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

2 straight covers2 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

13-1842%

U U U O U O O O U O U U O U O U U U O U O O U U U 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	vsIDST	L 68-71	-4.5	L −7.5	152.5	U 139
Nov 12	vsIDHO	W 78-74	+1.5	W +5.5	155.5	U 152
Nov 18	vsGRAM	W 78-68	-6.5	W +3.5	149.5	U 146
Nov 21	vsUCR	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	vsUSC	L 81-94	+14.5	W +1.5	158.5	O 175
Dec 13	vsNAU	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	vsPAC	W 66-54	+2.5	W +14.5	150.5	U 120
Dec 30	vsGONZ	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	vsPEPP	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	vsWSU	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	vsORST	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	vsPORT	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

IDST

L 68-71

−7.5

IDHO

W 78-74

+5.5

GRAM

W 78-68

+3.5

UCR

L 71-85

−21.5

CBU

L 61-76

−7.5

LBSU

L 72-76

−6.5

SJSU

L 69-86

−10.5

USC

L 81-94

+1.5

NAU

W 78-69

+4.5

UCSD

W 82-80

+14.5

WASH

L 56-86

−11.5

PAC

W 66-54

+14.5

GONZ

L 93-99

+23.5

L 64-74

+2.5

SCU

L 70-98

−10.5

PEPP

W 83-63

+15.5

PAC

L 70-77

+1.5

SEA

L 64-75

−1.5

WSU

W 96-92

+5.5

SCU

L 73-85

+1.5

PEPP

W 92-88

+1.5

ORST

L 76-78

−5.5

SMC

L 60-87

−6.5

LMU

L 63-83

−13.5

PORT

W 71-58

+11.5

L 79-92

−7.5

LMU

L 65-77

−9.5

ORST

L 82-92

−3.5

PORT

L 74-87

−10.5

LMU

W 66-62

+9.5

SEA

L 56-58

+6.5

covered 16didn’t cover 15avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

IDST

L 68-71

−13.5

IDHO

W 78-74

−3.5

GRAM

W 78-68

−3.5

UCR

L 71-85

+3.5

CBU

L 61-76

−9.5

LBSU

L 72-76

+0.5

SJSU

L 69-86

+10.5

USC

L 81-94

+16.5

NAU

W 78-69

−2.5

UCSD

W 82-80

+5.5

WASH

L 56-86

−17.5

PAC

W 66-54

−30.5

GONZ

L 93-99

+31.5

L 64-74

−14.5

SCU

L 70-98

+6.5

PEPP

W 83-63

−3.5

PAC

L 70-77

−0.5

SEA

L 64-75

−8.5

WSU

W 96-92

+35.5

SCU

L 73-85

−4.5

PEPP

W 92-88

+28.5

ORST

L 76-78

+3.5

SMC

L 60-87

−1.5

LMU

L 63-83

−5.5

PORT

W 71-58

−21.5

L 79-92

+22.5

LMU

L 65-77

−7.5

ORST

L 82-92

+29.5

PORT

L 74-87

+12.5

LMU

W 66-62

−17.5

SEA

L 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: Prairie View 0, San Diego 2, even 3

Prairie ViewBetterSan Diego

G D. Williams TR7.8 pts · 2.9 reb · 1.3 ast Score 14

USDBig

G M. Worthy TR16.6 pts · 4.7 reb · 3 ast Score 72

G M. Eley TR13 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.7 ast Score 98

Even

G D. Hill TR14.2 pts · 4.5 reb · 2.3 ast Score 92

G S. Tidor TR4.1 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.3 ast Score 21

Even

G D. Stromer TR6.4 pts · 2.7 reb · 1.1 ast Score 29

G E. Mitchell2.4 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.4 ast Score 7

USDBig

F T. McMorris TR7.5 pts · 5.6 reb · 1.4 ast Score 47

F J. Wharton TR1.8 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.1 ast Not ranked

No call

F A. Munoz TR12.7 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.9 ast Score 56

Prairie ViewBetterSan Diego

PV offense310th of 366 · -9.7

USDSmall

USD defense189th of 366 · -4.4

PV defense359th of 366 · -10.4

USDBig

USD offense127th of 366 · -3.5

Backcourt-2.4 · 4 players

USDBig

Backcourt+2.0 · 3 players

Frontcourt-0.5 · 1 player

Even

Frontcourt-0.4 · 2 players

Bench+0.0 · 1 player

Even

Bench+0.3 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestPV betterUSD 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

Prairie View

Guards

D. Williams26 min · TRM. Eley19 min · TRS. Tidor12 min · TRE. Mitchell12 minJ. LeeNewM. BellNew

Forwards

J. Wharton7 min · TRJ. Fazande1 min · TRE. PageNewD. BynumNewB. AjieroNew

San Diego

Guards

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

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

PV74.8 #170

USD72.8 #228

Points per possession

PV1.03 #286

USD1.05 #251

Pace (possessions)

PV72.7 #20

USD69.6 #139

Shooting

Effective FG%

PV47.4 #330

USD51.2 #185

3-point %

PV32.9 #237

USD34.6 #141

3-point attempt rate

PV30.6 #348

USD43.7 #96

Free throw rate

PV41.6 #35

USD25.8 #358

Possessions

Turnover rate

PV15.8 #122

USD17.6 #242

Offensive rebound rate

PV26.7 #305

USD28.1 #262

Assists per game

PV10.8 #341

USD15.4 #68

Defense

Points allowed

PV78.9 #295

USD78.8 #290

Points allowed per possession

PV1.08 #182

USD1.13 #286

Opponent effective FG%

PV50.9 #149

USD54.7 #320

Opponent 3-point %

PV35.0 #247

USD32.7 #100

Turnovers forced

PV19.0 #49

USD18.8 #55

Defensive rebound rate

PV64.6 #344

USD65.5 #328

Steals per game

PV7.0 #127

USD7.7 #65

Blocks per game

PV4.9 #19

USD2.6 #294

PV		USD
Scoring
74.8 #170	Points per game	72.8 #228
1.03 #286	Points per possession	1.05 #251
72.7 #20	Pace (possessions)	69.6 #139
Shooting
47.4 #330	Effective FG%	51.2 #185
32.9 #237	3-point %	34.6 #141
30.6 #348	3-point attempt rate	43.7 #96
41.6 #35	Free throw rate	25.8 #358
Possessions
15.8 #122	Turnover rate	17.6 #242
26.7 #305	Offensive rebound rate	28.1 #262
10.8 #341	Assists per game	15.4 #68
Defense
78.9 #295	Points allowed	78.8 #290
1.08 #182	Points allowed per possession	1.13 #286
50.9 #149	Opponent effective FG%	54.7 #320
35.0 #247	Opponent 3-point %	32.7 #100
19.0 #49	Turnovers forced	18.8 #55
64.6 #344	Defensive rebound rate	65.5 #328
7.0 #127	Steals per game	7.7 #65
4.9 #19	Blocks per game	2.6 #294

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.

Prairie View

15-18 in 2025-26 overall · 13-9 in conference · Southwestern Athletic Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Florida55–114
Wvs Lehigh67–55
Wvs Southern72–66
Wvs Alabama A&M74–55
Wvs Bethune71–67

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.

Prairie View A&M Panthers at San Diego Toreros

What could decide it: USD has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Prairie View

San Diego

San Diego has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Prairie View

San Diego