Schollmaier Arena · at TCU
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | TCU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 TCU 89–60 · win probability TCU 99%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 149.5
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: TCU has more of the edges
SOU 0, TCU 9 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
SOU offense vs TCU defense
Offense 296th of 366 against a defense 27th, on the model’s ratings
TCU offense vs SOU defense
Offense 48th of 366 against a defense 309th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
SOU has played the 269th-hardest schedule, TCU the 29th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Free throws
Free throw rate: SOU 39.8, TCU 37.5. Allowed: SOU 42.9, TCU 30.4
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: SOU 2%, TCU 52%. Transfers in: SOU 8, TCU 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: SOU 31.4%, TCU 34.0%. Defensive: SOU 68.7%, TCU 70.9%
Shooting
Effective FG%: SOU 49.1 and allows 53.2; TCU 50.4 and allows 51.2
Turnovers
Turnover rate: SOU 16.6%, TCU 15.3%. Forced: SOU 18.6%, TCU 19.5%
Home court
TCU at home. This season: TCU 0-0 at home, SOU 0-0 away
Three-pointers
SOU hits 34.8% and allows 36.7%; TCU hits 33.2% and allows 33.5%. Threes are 32.0% and 36.8% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: SOU plays 72.3 a game (28th fastest), TCU 70.2 (108th). Faster games mean more points
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 | — | TCU -28.9 | — |
| Total | — | 149.5 | — |
| Projected score | — | SOU 60.3 · TCU 89.2 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | TCU -17.1 | — |
| 1H total | 69.9 | — |
| 1H projected score | SOU 26.4 · TCU 43.5 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% | |
| 7-3 70% | 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
SOU 0–1 TCUTCU leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · SOU 0-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 6, 2023-24 | SOU 75 @ TCU 108 | TCU -27.5 | TCU W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Southern
31 games played
Straight up
14-17
45% wins
Against the spread
12-19
39% covers · avg −1.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-11
65% 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 | @ | L 77-109 | +26.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 186 |
| Nov 5 | @ | L 82-100 | +24.5 | W +6.5 | 155.5 | O 182 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 93-99 | +23.5 | W +17.5 | 157.5 | O 192 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 66-80 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 150.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 29 | @ | W 75-73 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 8 | @ | L 69-95 | +22.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | O 164 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 83-86 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 142.5 | O 169 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 67-75 | +12.5 | W +4.5 | 155.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 67-111 | +26.5 | L −17.5 | 169.5 | O 178 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 55-90 | +33.5 | L −1.5 | 163.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 84-73 | -6.5 | W +4.5 | 153.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 5 | vs | L 85-89 | -7.5 | L −11.5 | 160.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 59-67 | -4.5 | L −12.5 | 153.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 12 | @ | W 77-73 | +3.5 | W +7.5 | 151.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 71-53 | +1.5 | W +19.5 | 153.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 74-75 | -9.5 | L −10.5 | 154.5 | U 149 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 80-69 | -20.5 | L −9.5 | 141.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 73-78 | -7.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 2 | @ | W 96-91 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 152.5 | O 187 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 81-68 | -6.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 9 | vs | W 69-68 | -6.5 | L −5.5 | 149.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 87-82 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 159.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 73-74 | -4.5 | L −5.5 | 151.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 87-73 | -5.5 | W +8.5 | 142.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 26 | vs | L 71-82 | -8.5 | L −19.5 | 147.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 79-82 | -2.5 | L −5.5 | 153.5 | O 161 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 71-64 | +1.5 | W +8.5 | 153.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 5 | @ | W 88-85 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 145.5 | O 173 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 84-81 | -4.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | O 165 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 73-70 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | O 143 |
| Mar 14 | vs | L 66-72 | -3.5 | L −9.5 | 145.5 | U 138 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
ARK
L 77-109
−5.5
5
@
MARQ
L 82-100
+6.5
18
@
WASH
L 93-99
+17.5
21
@
SJSU
L 66-80
−8.5
29
@
NWST
W 75-73
−1.5
8
@
TEX
L 69-95
−3.5
10
@
TXST
L 83-86
+0.5
16
@
CBU
L 67-75
+4.5
21
@
BAY
L 67-111
−17.5
29
@
ILL
L 55-90
−1.5
3
vs
TXSO
W 84-73
+4.5
5
vs
PV
L 85-89
−11.5
10
@
FAMU
L 59-67
−12.5
12
@
BCU
W 77-73
+7.5
17
@
GRAM
W 71-53
+19.5
24
vs
UAPB
L 74-75
−10.5
28
vs
MVSU
W 80-69
−9.5
31
@
ALCN
L 73-78
−12.5
2
@
JKST
W 96-91
−0.5
7
vs
AAMU
W 81-68
+6.5
9
vs
ALST
W 69-68
−5.5
14
@
PV
W 87-82
−0.5
16
@
TXSO
L 73-74
−5.5
21
vs
GRAM
W 87-73
+8.5
26
vs
FAMU
L 71-82
−19.5
28
vs
BCU
L 79-82
−5.5
3
@
ALST
W 71-64
+8.5
5
@
AAMU
W 88-85
+1.5
12
vs
UAPB
W 84-81
−1.5
13
vs
FAMU
W 73-70
+1.5
14
vs
PV
L 66-72
−9.5
covered 12didn’t cover 19avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
ARK
L 77-109
+35.5
5
@
MARQ
L 82-100
+26.5
18
@
WASH
L 93-99
+34.5
21
@
SJSU
L 66-80
−4.5
29
@
NWST
W 75-73
+3.5
8
@
TEX
L 69-95
+5.5
10
@
TXST
L 83-86
+26.5
16
@
CBU
L 67-75
−13.5
21
@
BAY
L 67-111
+8.5
29
@
ILL
L 55-90
−18.5
3
vs
TXSO
W 84-73
+3.5
5
vs
PV
L 85-89
+13.5
10
@
FAMU
L 59-67
−27.5
12
@
BCU
W 77-73
−1.5
17
@
GRAM
W 71-53
−29.5
24
vs
UAPB
L 74-75
−5.5
28
vs
MVSU
W 80-69
+7.5
31
@
ALCN
L 73-78
+3.5
2
@
JKST
W 96-91
+34.5
7
vs
AAMU
W 81-68
+5.5
9
vs
ALST
W 69-68
−12.5
14
@
PV
W 87-82
+9.5
16
@
TXSO
L 73-74
−4.5
21
vs
GRAM
W 87-73
+17.5
26
vs
FAMU
L 71-82
+5.5
28
vs
BCU
L 79-82
+7.5
3
@
ALST
W 71-64
−18.5
5
@
AAMU
W 88-85
+27.5
12
vs
UAPB
W 84-81
+13.5
13
vs
FAMU
W 73-70
+1.5
14
vs
PV
L 66-72
−7.5
over 20under 11avg +4.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
TCU
35 games played
Straight up
23-12
66% wins
Against the spread
19-16
54% covers · avg +0.6 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-20
43% overs · avg −0.3 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 | L 74-78 | -21.5 | L −25.5 | 149.5 | O 152 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 104-63 | -27.5 | W +13.5 | 153.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 78-65 | -18.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 14 | vs | L 63-67 | +7.5 | W +3.5 | 164.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 81-45 | -23.5 | W +12.5 | 150.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 84-80 | +11.5 | W +15.5 | 155.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 74-63 | +5.5 | W +16.5 | 157.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 5 | vs | L 85-87 | -6.5 | L −8.5 | 141.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 7 | @ | W 65-55 | -9.5 | W +0.5 | 135.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 15 | vs | W 69-65 | -19.5 | L −15.5 | 143.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 72-53 | -23.5 | L −4.5 | 147.5 | U 125 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 80-56 | -29.5 | L −5.5 | 142.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 115-64 | -30.5 | W +20.5 | 143.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 69-63 | -2.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 6 | @ | L 100-104 | +6.5 | W +2.5 | 143.5 | O 204 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 73-86 | +7.5 | L −5.5 | 157.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 70-76 | +13.5 | W +7.5 | 162.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 79-82 | -4.5 | L −7.5 | 154.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 20 | vs | W 68-65 | -8.5 | L −5.5 | 161.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 97-90 | +4.5 | W +11.5 | 147.5 | O 187 |
| Jan 28 | vs | L 70-79 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 139.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 1 | @ | L 61-87 | -1.5 | L −27.5 | 153.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 84-82 | -9.5 | L −7.5 | 155.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 10 | vs | W 62-55 | +7.5 | W +14.5 | 147.5 | U 117 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 95-92 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 156.5 | O 187 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 71-82 | -1.5 | L −12.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 60-54 | -4.5 | W +1.5 | 133.5 | U 114 |
| Feb 24 | vs | W 90-78 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 149.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 77-68 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 159.5 | U 145 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 73-65 | +8.5 | W +16.5 | 147.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 73-63 | -2.5 | W +7.5 | 140.5 | U 136 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 95-88 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 158.5 | O 183 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 73-78 | +4.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | O 151 |
| Mar 19 | vs | W 66-64 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 21 | vs | L 58-81 | +12.5 | L −10.5 | 140.5 | U 139 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
NOLA
L 74-78
−25.5
6
vs
SFPA
W 104-63
+13.5
10
vs
LAM
W 78-65
−5.5
14
vs
MICH
L 63-67
+3.5
19
vs
KC
W 81-45
+12.5
27
vs
FLA
W 84-80
+15.5
28
vs
WIS
W 74-63
+16.5
5
vs
ND
L 85-87
−8.5
7
@
UNT
W 65-55
+0.5
15
vs
UIW
W 69-65
−15.5
18
vs
ORU
W 72-53
−4.5
21
vs
FAMU
W 80-56
−5.5
29
vs
JKST
W 115-64
+20.5
3
vs
BAY
W 69-63
+3.5
6
@
KU
L 100-104
+2.5
10
vs
ARIZ
L 73-86
−5.5
14
@
BYU
L 70-76
+7.5
17
@
UTAH
L 79-82
−7.5
20
vs
OKST
W 68-65
−5.5
24
@
BAY
W 97-90
+11.5
28
vs
HOU
L 70-79
−0.5
1
@
COLO
L 61-87
−27.5
7
vs
KSU
W 84-82
−7.5
10
vs
ISU
W 62-55
+14.5
14
@
OKST
W 95-92
+1.5
17
@
UCF
L 71-82
−12.5
21
vs
WVU
W 60-54
+1.5
24
vs
ASU
W 90-78
+5.5
28
@
KSU
W 77-68
+5.5
3
@
TTU
W 73-65
+16.5
7
vs
CIN
W 73-63
+7.5
11
vs
OKST
W 95-88
−0.5
12
vs
KU
L 73-78
−0.5
19
vs
OSU
W 66-64
+4.5
21
vs
DUKE
L 58-81
−10.5
covered 19didn’t cover 16avg +0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
NOLA
L 74-78
+2.5
6
vs
SFPA
W 104-63
+13.5
10
vs
LAM
W 78-65
−4.5
14
vs
MICH
L 63-67
−34.5
19
vs
KC
W 81-45
−24.5
27
vs
FLA
W 84-80
+8.5
28
vs
WIS
W 74-63
−20.5
5
vs
ND
L 85-87
+30.5
7
@
UNT
W 65-55
−15.5
15
vs
UIW
W 69-65
−9.5
18
vs
ORU
W 72-53
−22.5
21
vs
FAMU
W 80-56
−6.5
29
vs
JKST
W 115-64
+35.5
3
vs
BAY
W 69-63
−22.5
6
@
KU
L 100-104
+60.5
10
vs
ARIZ
L 73-86
+1.5
14
@
BYU
L 70-76
−16.5
17
@
UTAH
L 79-82
+6.5
20
vs
OKST
W 68-65
−28.5
24
@
BAY
W 97-90
+39.5
28
vs
HOU
L 70-79
+9.5
1
@
COLO
L 61-87
−5.5
7
vs
KSU
W 84-82
+10.5
10
vs
ISU
W 62-55
−30.5
14
@
OKST
W 95-92
+30.5
17
@
UCF
L 71-82
−1.5
21
vs
WVU
W 60-54
−19.5
24
vs
ASU
W 90-78
+18.5
28
@
KSU
W 77-68
−14.5
3
@
TTU
W 73-65
−9.5
7
vs
CIN
W 73-63
−4.5
11
vs
OKST
W 95-88
+24.5
12
vs
KU
L 73-78
+4.5
19
vs
OSU
W 66-64
−15.5
21
vs
DUKE
L 58-81
−1.5
over 15under 20avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
TCU has the better starters
Position by position: Southern 0, TCU 5, even 0
SouthernBetterTCU
G J. Page TR12.3 pts · 2.2 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 42
→TCUBig
G G. Sykes TR19.7 pts · 3 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 89
G D. Dormu TR5.4 pts · 1.3 reb · 2 ast
Score 14
→TCUBig
G B. Harding8 pts · 2.9 reb · 5.6 ast
Score 67
G M. Ferguson TR5.2 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 9
→TCUBig
G M. Robinson10.9 pts · 4.7 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 85
F R. King TR4.7 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 42
→TCUSmall
G T. Toolson7.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 75
C I. Olajuwon TR3.7 pts · 2.9 reb · 0.1 ast
Score 20
→TCUBig
F X. Edmonds12.7 pts · 6.5 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 98
SouthernBetterTCU
SOU offense296th of 366 · -9.2
→TCUBig
TCU defense27th of 366 · +3.9
SOU defense309th of 366 · -8.0
→TCUBig
TCU offense48th of 366 · +3.8
Backcourt-5.4 · 3 players
→TCUBig
Backcourt+5.6 · 4 players
Frontcourt-1.5 · 2 players
→TCUBig
Frontcourt+4.4 · 1 player
Bench-3.3 · 4 players
→TCUBig
Bench+1.6 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestSOU betterTCU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Page30 min · TRD. Dormu19 min · TRM. Ferguson17 min · TRL. Larvadain11 min · TRS. Van Dorn3 min · TRJ. HunterNew
Forwards
R. King13 min · TRA. HallNew
Centers
I. Olajuwon14 min · TRN. Boyde11 min · TRL. Bell5 min
Guards
G. Sykes34 min · TRB. Harding32 minM. Robinson27 minT. Toolson21 minD. McElroy1 minG. MurphyNew
Forwards
X. Edmonds23 minD. Thomas17 min · TRL. Bamgboye17 min · TRR. HuntNewS. FlemingNewM. SojicNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 76.2 #136 | Points per game | 77.4 #109 |
| 1.06 #239 | Points per possession | 1.10 #127 |
| 72.3 #28 | Pace (possessions) | 70.2 #108 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.1 #287 | Effective FG% | 50.4 #221 |
| 34.8 #129 | 3-point % | 33.2 #220 |
| 32.0 #329 | 3-point attempt rate | 36.8 #233 |
| 39.8 #61 | Free throw rate | 37.5 #112 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.6 #169 | Turnover rate | 15.3 #90 |
| 31.4 #144 | Offensive rebound rate | 34.0 #67 |
| 13.9 #156 | Assists per game | 15.4 #71 |
| Defense | ||
| 80.2 #324 | Points allowed | 72.1 #107 |
| 1.11 #236 | Points allowed per possession | 1.02 #50 |
| 53.2 #274 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.2 #172 |
| 36.7 #339 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.5 #158 |
| 18.6 #67 | Turnovers forced | 19.5 #33 |
| 68.7 #217 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.9 #112 |
| 8.3 #26 | Steals per game | 7.7 #61 |
| 3.8 #97 | Blocks per game | 4.5 #39 |
Southern
14-17 in 2025-26 overall · 13-8 in conference · Southwestern Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Prairie View66–72
- Wvs Florida A&M73–70
- Wvs AR-Pine Bluff84–81
- W@ Alabama A&M88–85
- W@ Alabama St71–64
A week or more of rest.
TCU
23-12 in 2025-26 overall · 12-8 in conference · Big 12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Duke58–81
- Wvs Ohio State66–64
- Lvs Kansas73–78
- Wvs Oklahoma St95–88
- Wvs Cincinnati73–63
A week or more of rest.