Rutgers Scarlet Knights vs Houston Cougars: Model Line and Edge

Tue, Nov 17, 2:00 PM ETMichelob ULTRA Arena · Neutral site

#2HOUHouston AP #10

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Rutgers and Houston
RUTG	This season	HOU
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 HOU 83–64 · win probability HOU 95%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 147.8

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: HOU has more of the edges

RUTG 2, HOU 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

HOUBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: RUTG 47.2 and allows 53.0; HOU 51.9 and allows 46.2

RUTGBig

Free throws

Free throw rate: RUTG 36.3, HOU 26.3. Allowed: RUTG 31.7, HOU 38.7

HOUBig

Three-pointers

RUTG hits 32.4% and allows 35.6%; HOU hits 34.7% and allows 31.6%. Threes are 34.2% and 40.7% of their shots

HOUBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: RUTG 29.7%, HOU 35.7%. Defensive: RUTG 67.2%, HOU 69.7%

HOUSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: RUTG 14.9%, HOU 12.8%. Forced: RUTG 17.1%, HOU 20.7%

RUTGSmall

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: RUTG 58%, HOU 26%. Transfers in: RUTG 4, HOU 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

HOUSmall

RUTG offense vs HOU defense

Offense 58th of 366 against a defense 1st, on the model’s ratings

HOUSmall

HOU offense vs RUTG defense

Offense 10th of 366 against a defense 65th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Tempo

About 66 possessions: RUTG plays 67.5 a game (254th fastest), HOU 65.0 (346th). Faster games mean more points

Context

Schedule so far

RUTG has played the 50th-hardest schedule, HOU the 17th. A record against a soft schedule means less

Context

Neutral floor

No home court: the model takes it out of the line

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	—	HOU -19.0	—
Total	—	147.8	—
Projected score	—	RUTG 64.4 · HOU 83.4

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	HOU -11.2	—
1H total	69.1	—
1H projected score	RUTG 29 · HOU 40.2	—

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	Neutral	Role
RUTG WWWLL	17-17	50%	3-3	—
HOU WLWWL	19-18	51%	5-7	—

Venue/role: RUTG neutral site; HOU neutral site. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
RUTG OUOUU	19-15	56%	14-20
HOU UOUOU	15-22	41%	30-7

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
RUTG	5-5 50%	6-4 60%	5-5 50%
HOU	7-3 70%	5-5 50%	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

Rutgers

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 24	vs SHU	W88–50WU
Dec 1	@ IU	L59–82LU
Dec 9	vs MICH	L60–101LO

Houston

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 27	vs OAK	W78–45WU
Nov 29	vs QUC	No recent meeting
Dec 2	vs CARK	No recent meeting

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

Rutgers

34 games played

Straight up

14-20

41% wins

Against the spread

17-17

50% covers · avg −0.4 pts vs the line

Over / Under

19-15

56% overs · avg +2.5 pts vs the total

Straight up

14-2041%

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

2 straight losses2 of last 4 won

Against the spread

17-1750%

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

2 straight misses ATS2 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

19-1556%

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

2 straight unders1 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 5	vsRID	W 81-53	-18.5	W +9.5	139.5	U 134
Nov 10	vsME	W 72-60	-18.5	L −6.5	130.5	O 132
Nov 14	vsLEH	W 84-72	-18.5	L −6.5	136.5	O 156
Nov 18	vsAMER	W 80-71	-16.5	L −7.5	143.5	O 151
Nov 21	vsCCSU	L 54-67	-15.5	L −28.5	137.5	U 121
Nov 24	vsTENN	L 60-85	+14.5	L −10.5	141.5	O 145
Nov 25	vsND	L 63-68	+6.5	W +1.5	140.5	U 131
Nov 27	vsUNLV	W 80-65	+4.5	W +19.5	153.5	U 145
Dec 2	vsPUR	L 65-81	+13.5	L −2.5	146.5	U 146
Dec 6	@MICH	L 60-101	+25.5	L −15.5	153.5	O 161
Dec 13	@HALL	L 59-81	+13.5	L −8.5	136.5	O 140
Dec 20	vsPENN	W 70-69	-11.5	L −10.5	150.5	U 139
Dec 29	vsDSU	W 65-50	-20.5	L −5.5	135.5	U 115
Jan 2	vsOSU	L 73-80	+9.5	W +2.5	151.5	O 153
Jan 5	vsORE	W 88-85	+4.5	W +7.5	139.5	O 173
Jan 8	@ILL	L 55-81	+22.5	L −3.5	149.5	U 136
Jan 11	vsNU	W 77-75	+4.5	W +6.5	144.5	O 152
Jan 17	@WIS	L 87-96	+15.5	W +6.5	149.5	O 183
Jan 20	@IOWA	L 62-68	+17.5	W +11.5	140.5	U 130
Jan 23	vsIU	L 59-82	+7.5	L −15.5	147.5	U 141
Jan 27	vsMSU	L 79-88	+14.5	W +5.5	138.5	O 167
Jan 31	@USC	L 75-78	+11.5	W +8.5	146.5	O 153
Feb 3	@UCLA	L 66-98	+13.5	L −18.5	142.5	O 164
Feb 7	vsNEB	L 68-80	+12.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 148
Feb 15	vsMD	W 68-57	-2.5	W +8.5	144.5	U 125
Feb 18	@PSU	W 85-72	+4.5	W +17.5	148.5	O 157
Feb 21	@MINN	L 61-80	+8.5	L −10.5	136.5	O 141
Feb 24	vsWASH	L 72-79	+4.5	L −2.5	139.5	O 151
Mar 1	@MD	W 69-65	+4.5	W +8.5	143.5	U 134
Mar 5	@MSU	L 87-91	+20.5	W +16.5	141.5	O 178
Mar 8	vsPSU	W 74-62	-4.5	W +7.5	149.5	U 136
Mar 11	vsMINN	W 72-67	+6.5	W +11.5	135.5	O 139
Mar 12	vsUCLA	L 59-72	+10.5	L −2.5	141.5	U 131
Apr 2	vsCREI	L 69-82	+4.5	L −8.5	151.5	U 151

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

RID

W 81-53

+9.5

W 72-60

−6.5

LEH

W 84-72

−6.5

AMER

W 80-71

−7.5

CCSU

L 54-67

−28.5

TENN

L 60-85

−10.5

L 63-68

+1.5

UNLV

W 80-65

+19.5

PUR

L 65-81

−2.5

MICH

L 60-101

−15.5

HALL

L 59-81

−8.5

PENN

W 70-69

−10.5

DSU

W 65-50

−5.5

OSU

L 73-80

+2.5

ORE

W 88-85

+7.5

ILL

L 55-81

−3.5

W 77-75

+6.5

WIS

L 87-96

+6.5

IOWA

L 62-68

+11.5

L 59-82

−15.5

MSU

L 79-88

+5.5

USC

L 75-78

+8.5

UCLA

L 66-98

−18.5

NEB

L 68-80

+0.5

W 68-57

+8.5

PSU

W 85-72

+17.5

MINN

L 61-80

−10.5

WASH

L 72-79

−2.5

W 69-65

+8.5

MSU

L 87-91

+16.5

PSU

W 74-62

+7.5

MINN

W 72-67

+11.5

UCLA

L 59-72

−2.5

CREI

L 69-82

−8.5

covered 17didn’t cover 17avg −0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

RID

W 81-53

−5.5

W 72-60

+1.5

LEH

W 84-72

+19.5

AMER

W 80-71

+7.5

CCSU

L 54-67

−16.5

TENN

L 60-85

+3.5

L 63-68

−9.5

UNLV

W 80-65

−8.5

PUR

L 65-81

−0.5

MICH

L 60-101

+7.5

HALL

L 59-81

+3.5

PENN

W 70-69

−11.5

DSU

W 65-50

−20.5

OSU

L 73-80

+1.5

ORE

W 88-85

+33.5

ILL

L 55-81

−13.5

W 77-75

+7.5

WIS

L 87-96

+33.5

IOWA

L 62-68

−10.5

L 59-82

−6.5

MSU

L 79-88

+28.5

USC

L 75-78

+6.5

UCLA

L 66-98

+21.5

NEB

L 68-80

+2.5

W 68-57

−19.5

PSU

W 85-72

+8.5

MINN

L 61-80

+4.5

WASH

L 72-79

+11.5

W 69-65

−9.5

MSU

L 87-91

+36.5

PSU

W 74-62

−13.5

MINN

W 72-67

+3.5

UCLA

L 59-72

−10.5

CREI

L 69-82

−0.5

over 19under 15avg +2.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Houston

37 games played

Straight up

30-7

81% wins

Against the spread

19-18

51% covers · avg +0.6 pts vs the line

Over / Under

15-22

41% overs · avg −1 pts vs the total

Straight up

30-781%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

19-1851%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

15-2241%

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

2 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 3	vsLEH	W 75-57	-36.5	L −18.5	136.5	U 132
Nov 8	vsTOW	W 65-48	-26.5	L −9.5	130.5	U 113
Nov 12	vsOAK	W 78-45	-30.5	W +2.5	138.5	U 123
Nov 16	vsAUB	W 73-72	-7.5	L −6.5	140.5	O 145
Nov 20	vsRID	W 91-45	-40.5	W +5.5	134.5	O 136
Nov 24	vsSYR	W 78-74	-14.5	L −10.5	140.5	O 152
Nov 25	vsTENN	L 73-76	-2.5	L −5.5	136.5	O 149
Nov 26	vsND	W 66-56	-11.5	L −1.5	132.5	U 122
Dec 6	vsFSU	W 82-67	-12.5	W +2.5	148.5	O 149
Dec 10	vsJKST	W 80-38	-40.5	W +1.5	137.5	U 118
Dec 13	vsNOLA	W 99-57	-32.5	W +9.5	138.5	O 156
Dec 20	vsARK	W 94-85	-5.5	W +3.5	146.5	O 179
Dec 29	vsMTSU	W 69-60	-25.5	L −16.5	138.5	U 129
Jan 3	@CIN	W 67-60	-4.5	W +2.5	135.5	U 127
Jan 6	vsTTU	W 69-65	-7.5	L −3.5	142.5	U 134
Jan 10	@BAY	W 77-55	-2.5	W +19.5	142.5	U 132
Jan 13	vsWVU	W 77-48	-13.5	W +15.5	127.5	U 125
Jan 18	vsASU	W 103-73	-18.5	W +11.5	142.5	O 176
Jan 24	@TTU	L 86-90	-1.5	L −5.5	141.5	O 176
Jan 28	@TCU	W 79-70	-8.5	W +0.5	139.5	O 149
Jan 31	vsCIN	W 76-54	-13.5	W +8.5	135.5	U 130
Feb 4	vsUCF	W 79-55	-15.5	W +8.5	146.5	U 134
Feb 7	@BYU	W 77-66	-1.5	W +9.5	151.5	U 143
Feb 10	@UTAH	W 66-52	-16.5	L −2.5	142.5	U 118
Feb 14	vsKSU	W 78-64	-22.5	L −8.5	144.5	U 142
Feb 16	@ISU	L 67-70	+2.5	L −0.5	134.5	O 137
Feb 21	vsARIZ	L 66-73	-6.5	L −13.5	142.5	U 139
Feb 23	@KU	L 56-69	-2.5	L −15.5	138.5	U 125
Feb 28	vsCOLO	W 102-62	-20.5	W +19.5	139.5	O 164
Mar 4	vsBAY	W 77-64	-12.5	W +0.5	143.5	U 141
Mar 7	@OKST	W 82-75	-13.5	L −6.5	151.5	O 157
Mar 12	vsBYU	W 73-66	-9.5	L −2.5	146.5	U 139
Mar 13	vsKU	W 69-47	-5.5	W +16.5	139.5	U 116
Mar 14	vsARIZ	L 74-79	+1.5	L −3.5	138.5	O 153
Mar 19	vsIDHO	W 78-47	-24.5	W +6.5	137.5	U 125
Mar 21	vsTA&M	W 88-57	-10.5	W +20.5	142.5	O 145
Mar 26	vsILL	L 55-65	-2.5	L −12.5	141.5	U 120

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

LEH

W 75-57

−18.5

TOW

W 65-48

−9.5

OAK

W 78-45

+2.5

AUB

W 73-72

−6.5

RID

W 91-45

+5.5

SYR

W 78-74

−10.5

TENN

L 73-76

−5.5

W 66-56

−1.5

FSU

W 82-67

+2.5

JKST

W 80-38

+1.5

NOLA

W 99-57

+9.5

ARK

W 94-85

+3.5

MTSU

W 69-60

−16.5

CIN

W 67-60

+2.5

TTU

W 69-65

−3.5

BAY

W 77-55

+19.5

WVU

W 77-48

+15.5

ASU

W 103-73

+11.5

TTU

L 86-90

−5.5

TCU

W 79-70

+0.5

CIN

W 76-54

+8.5

UCF

W 79-55

+8.5

BYU

W 77-66

+9.5

UTAH

W 66-52

−2.5

KSU

W 78-64

−8.5

ISU

L 67-70

−0.5

ARIZ

L 66-73

−13.5

L 56-69

−15.5

COLO

W 102-62

+19.5

BAY

W 77-64

+0.5

OKST

W 82-75

−6.5

BYU

W 73-66

−2.5

W 69-47

+16.5

ARIZ

L 74-79

−3.5

IDHO

W 78-47

+6.5

TA&M

W 88-57

+20.5

ILL

L 55-65

−12.5

covered 19didn’t cover 18avg +0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

LEH

W 75-57

−4.5

TOW

W 65-48

−17.5

OAK

W 78-45

−15.5

AUB

W 73-72

+4.5

RID

W 91-45

+1.5

SYR

W 78-74

+11.5

TENN

L 73-76

+12.5

W 66-56

−10.5

FSU

W 82-67

+0.5

JKST

W 80-38

−19.5

NOLA

W 99-57

+17.5

ARK

W 94-85

+32.5

MTSU

W 69-60

−9.5

CIN

W 67-60

−8.5

TTU

W 69-65

−8.5

BAY

W 77-55

−10.5

WVU

W 77-48

−2.5

ASU

W 103-73

+33.5

TTU

L 86-90

+34.5

TCU

W 79-70

+9.5

CIN

W 76-54

−5.5

UCF

W 79-55

−12.5

BYU

W 77-66

−8.5

UTAH

W 66-52

−24.5

KSU

W 78-64

−2.5

ISU

L 67-70

+2.5

ARIZ

L 66-73

−3.5

L 56-69

−13.5

COLO

W 102-62

+24.5

BAY

W 77-64

−2.5

OKST

W 82-75

+5.5

BYU

W 73-66

−7.5

W 69-47

−23.5

ARIZ

L 74-79

+14.5

IDHO

W 78-47

−12.5

TA&M

W 88-57

+2.5

ILL

L 55-65

−21.5

over 15under 22avg −1 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Houston has the better starters

Position by position: Rutgers 0, Houston 3, even 2

RutgersBetterHouston

G R. Jones TR15 pts · 4.5 reb · 2.8 ast Score 69

HOUSmall

G C. Hadnot TR20.6 pts · 3.7 reb · 3.6 ast Score 95

G D. Smith TR20.6 pts · 5.3 reb · 1.1 ast Score 88

Even

G D. Thomas TR15.3 pts · 2.7 reb · 6.5 ast Score 99

G T. Francis17 pts · 2.3 reb · 2.9 ast Score 99

Even

F D. Gillespie TR17.9 pts · 11.4 reb · 1.8 ast Score 94

G J. Davis7.5 pts · 2.9 reb · 2.5 ast Score 72

HOUSmall

F B. East TR12.8 pts · 9.3 reb · 0.7 ast Score 92

G D. Buchanan8.1 pts · 3.9 reb · 1.7 ast Score 68

HOUSmall

F J. Tugler8.4 pts · 5.3 reb · 1.3 ast Score 96

RutgersBetterHouston

RUTG offense58th of 366 · +2.7

HOUSmall

HOU defense1st of 366 · +13.2

RUTG defense65th of 366 · +1.0

HOUSmall

HOU offense10th of 366 · +10.1

Backcourt+9.4 · 5 players

Even

Backcourt+10.0 · 2 players

FrontcourtNo numbers yet

No call

Frontcourt+11.5 · 3 players

Bench+0.3 · 5 players

HOUBig

Bench+3.6 · 4 players

Score, worst to bestRUTG betterHOU 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

Rutgers

Guards

R. Jones37 min · TRD. Smith34 min · TRT. Francis28 minJ. Davis26 minD. Buchanan24 minL. Mark16 min

Forwards

W. SydnorNewM. MiteoNewM. TonejcNew

Centers

C. Gurdak17 min · TRD. Buca13 min · TRG. Ware6 min

Houston

Guards

C. Hadnot35 min · TRD. Thomas29 min · TRC. Weaver21 min · TRM. Miller12 minK. Jefferson4 minB. JacksonNew

Forwards

D. Gillespie33 min · TRB. East24 min · TRJ. Tugler24 minC. McCarty12 min

Centers

A. DianeNewD. SilimanaNew

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

RUTG70.5 #273

HOU76.9 #119

Points per possession

RUTG1.04 #261

HOU1.18 #36

Pace (possessions)

RUTG67.5 #254

HOU65.0 #346

Shooting

Effective FG%

RUTG47.2 #331

HOU51.9 #150

3-point %

RUTG32.4 #261

HOU34.7 #134

3-point attempt rate

RUTG34.2 #291

HOU40.7 #153

Free throw rate

RUTG36.3 #143

HOU26.3 #355

Possessions

Turnover rate

RUTG14.9 #61

HOU12.8 #3

Offensive rebound rate

RUTG29.7 #217

HOU35.7 #32

Assists per game

RUTG12.2 #274

HOU14.6 #111

Defense

Points allowed

RUTG75.3 #199

HOU62.3 #1

Points allowed per possession

RUTG1.12 #267

HOU0.96 #5

Opponent effective FG%

RUTG53.0 #268

HOU46.2 #12

Opponent 3-point %

RUTG35.6 #287

HOU31.6 #49

Turnovers forced

RUTG17.1 #141

HOU20.7 #14

Defensive rebound rate

RUTG67.2 #292

HOU69.7 #173

Steals per game

RUTG6.1 #226

HOU7.5 #75

Blocks per game

RUTG3.4 #166

HOU3.8 #96

RUTG		HOU
Scoring
70.5 #273	Points per game	76.9 #119
1.04 #261	Points per possession	1.18 #36
67.5 #254	Pace (possessions)	65.0 #346
Shooting
47.2 #331	Effective FG%	51.9 #150
32.4 #261	3-point %	34.7 #134
34.2 #291	3-point attempt rate	40.7 #153
36.3 #143	Free throw rate	26.3 #355
Possessions
14.9 #61	Turnover rate	12.8 #3
29.7 #217	Offensive rebound rate	35.7 #32
12.2 #274	Assists per game	14.6 #111
Defense
75.3 #199	Points allowed	62.3 #1
1.12 #267	Points allowed per possession	0.96 #5
53.0 #268	Opponent effective FG%	46.2 #12
35.6 #287	Opponent 3-point %	31.6 #49
17.1 #141	Turnovers forced	20.7 #14
67.2 #292	Defensive rebound rate	69.7 #173
6.1 #226	Steals per game	7.5 #75
3.4 #166	Blocks per game	3.8 #96

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.

Rutgers

14-20 in 2025-26 overall · 7-15 in conference · Big Ten Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Creighton69–82
Lvs UCLA59–72
Wvs Minnesota72–67
Wvs Penn State74–62
L@ Michigan St87–91

A week or more of rest.

Houston

30-7 in 2025-26 overall · 16-5 in conference · Big 12 Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Illinois55–65
Wvs Texas A&M88–57
Wvs Idaho78–47
Lvs Arizona74–79
Wvs Kansas69–47

A week or more of rest.

Rutgers Scarlet Knights vs Houston Cougars

What could decide it: HOU has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Rutgers

Houston

Houston has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Rutgers

Houston