Northern Kentucky Norse at Texas A&M Aggies: Model Line and Edge

Fri, Nov 6, 8:00 PM ETReed Arena · at Texas A&M

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: N Kentucky and Texas A&M
NKU	This season	TA&M
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 TA&M 91–68 · win probability TA&M 98%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 159.3

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: TA&M has more of the edges

NKU 0, TA&M 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

Context

Schedule so far

NKU has played the 289th-hardest schedule, TA&M the 57th. A record against a soft schedule means less

TA&MBig

TA&M offense vs NKU defense

Offense 20th of 366 against a defense 249th, on the model’s ratings

TA&MBig

Three-pointers

NKU hits 33.6% and allows 36.6%; TA&M hits 35.9% and allows 31.8%. Threes are 44.9% and 46.2% of their shots

TA&MBig

NKU offense vs TA&M defense

Offense 209th of 366 against a defense 62nd, on the model’s ratings

TA&MSmall

Shooting

Effective FG%: NKU 53.2 and allows 54.2; TA&M 53.8 and allows 50.7

TA&MSmall

Home court

TA&M at home. This season: TA&M 0-0 at home, NKU 0-0 away

TA&MSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: NKU 16.3%, TA&M 14.7%. Forced: NKU 18.6%, TA&M 18.4%

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: NKU 35.9, TA&M 37.1. Allowed: NKU 37.2, TA&M 35.4

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: NKU 32.2%, TA&M 32.0%. Defensive: NKU 68.4%, TA&M 67.0%

Context

Tempo

About 72 possessions: NKU plays 71.5 a game (55th fastest), TA&M 73.5 (15th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: NKU 26%, TA&M 25%. Transfers in: NKU 4, TA&M 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	—	TA&M -23.5	—
Total	—	159.3	—
Projected score	—	NKU 67.9 · TA&M 91.4

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	TA&M -13.8	—
1H total	74.4	—
1H projected score	NKU 30.3 · TA&M 44.1	—

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
NKU WLWWL	13-18	42%	5-10	—
TA&M WWLWL	19-15	56%	9-9	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
NKU UOOOO	21-10	68%	17-14
TA&M OOUUO	19-15	56%	22-12

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
NKU	6-4 60%	4-6 40%	7-3 70%
TA&M	5-5 50%	4-6 40%	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

N Kentucky

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 10	@ SLU	No recent meeting
Nov 14	vs CMU	W90–66WO
Nov 23	vs GASO	No recent meeting

Texas A&M

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 9	vs ULM	W87–54WO
Nov 12	vs OKST	L63–87LU
Nov 16	vs SELA	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

N Kentucky

31 games played

Straight up

17-14

55% wins

Against the spread

13-18

42% covers · avg −0.4 pts vs the line

Over / Under

21-10

68% overs · avg +5.2 pts vs the total

Straight up

17-1455%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

13-1842%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

21-1068%

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

4 straight overs4 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 8	@TENN	L 56-95	+27.5	L −11.5	137.5	O 151
Nov 12	@ETSU	L 63-75	+6.5	L −5.5	142.5	U 138
Nov 20	@CMU	W 90-66	+4.5	W +28.5	146.5	O 156
Nov 24	vsEKU	W 82-71	-4.5	W +6.5	156.5	U 153
Nov 26	vsWOF	W 93-83	-3.5	W +6.5	149.5	O 176
Nov 29	vsBU	W 74-65	-7.5	W +1.5	143.5	U 139
Dec 3	vsCLE	W 95-80	-14.5	W +0.5	158.5	O 175
Dec 6	@PFW	L 77-79	+1.5	L −0.5	153.5	O 156
Dec 13	@BELL	W 80-76	-4.5	L −0.5	146.5	O 156
Dec 17	vsOAK	L 77-82	-3.5	L −8.5	163.5	U 159
Dec 21	vsCOFC	L 74-85	-5.5	L −16.5	153.5	O 159
Dec 29	@RMU	W 79-77	-1.5	W +0.5	149.5	O 156
Jan 1	vsIUIN	W 81-72	-13.5	L −4.5	176.5	U 153
Jan 4	vsYSU	W 94-79	-4.5	W +10.5	146.5	O 173
Jan 9	@MILW	W 85-67	+1.5	W +19.5	157.5	U 152
Jan 11	@GB	L 78-80	-4.5	L −6.5	144.5	O 158
Jan 15	vsDETM	W 96-71	-10.5	W +14.5	159.5	O 167
Jan 17	vsRMU	L 89-92	-7.5	L −10.5	153.5	O 181
Jan 24	@WRST	L 80-88	+1.5	L −6.5	155.5	O 168
Jan 30	@DETM	L 77-90	-5.5	L −18.5	161.5	O 167
Feb 1	@OAK	L 65-76	+3.5	L −7.5	166.5	U 141
Feb 4	vsGB	L 84-87	-7.5	L −10.5	149.5	O 171
Feb 7	vsMILW	W 67-62	-6.5	L −1.5	156.5	U 129
Feb 12	@IUIN	W 84-81	-5.5	L −2.5	164.5	O 165
Feb 18	vsPFW	W 87-71	-5.5	W +10.5	153.5	O 158
Feb 22	@YSU	L 58-64	+2.5	L −3.5	152.5	U 122
Feb 25	@CLE	W 81-70	-8.5	W +2.5	166.5	U 151
Feb 28	vsWRST	L 91-92	-3.5	L −4.5	153.5	O 183
Mar 4	@OAK	W 85-84	+1.5	W +2.5	161.5	O 169
Mar 8	vsGB	W 96-76	-3.5	W +16.5	146.5	O 172
Mar 9	vsWRST	L 90-103	-1.5	L −14.5	157.5	O 193

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

TENN

L 56-95

−11.5

ETSU

L 63-75

−5.5

CMU

W 90-66

+28.5

EKU

W 82-71

+6.5

WOF

W 93-83

+6.5

W 74-65

+1.5

CLE

W 95-80

+0.5

PFW

L 77-79

−0.5

BELL

W 80-76

−0.5

OAK

L 77-82

−8.5

COFC

L 74-85

−16.5

RMU

W 79-77

+0.5

IUIN

W 81-72

−4.5

YSU

W 94-79

+10.5

MILW

W 85-67

+19.5

L 78-80

−6.5

DETM

W 96-71

+14.5

RMU

L 89-92

−10.5

WRST

L 80-88

−6.5

DETM

L 77-90

−18.5

OAK

L 65-76

−7.5

L 84-87

−10.5

MILW

W 67-62

−1.5

IUIN

W 84-81

−2.5

PFW

W 87-71

+10.5

YSU

L 58-64

−3.5

CLE

W 81-70

+2.5

WRST

L 91-92

−4.5

OAK

W 85-84

+2.5

W 96-76

+16.5

WRST

L 90-103

−14.5

covered 13didn’t cover 18avg −0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

TENN

L 56-95

+13.5

ETSU

L 63-75

−4.5

CMU

W 90-66

+9.5

EKU

W 82-71

−3.5

WOF

W 93-83

+26.5

W 74-65

−4.5

CLE

W 95-80

+16.5

PFW

L 77-79

+2.5

BELL

W 80-76

+9.5

OAK

L 77-82

−4.5

COFC

L 74-85

+5.5

RMU

W 79-77

+6.5

IUIN

W 81-72

−23.5

YSU

W 94-79

+26.5

MILW

W 85-67

−5.5

L 78-80

+13.5

DETM

W 96-71

+7.5

RMU

L 89-92

+27.5

WRST

L 80-88

+12.5

DETM

L 77-90

+5.5

OAK

L 65-76

−25.5

L 84-87

+21.5

MILW

W 67-62

−27.5

IUIN

W 84-81

+0.5

PFW

W 87-71

+4.5

YSU

L 58-64

−30.5

CLE

W 81-70

−15.5

WRST

L 91-92

+29.5

OAK

W 85-84

+7.5

W 96-76

+25.5

WRST

L 90-103

+35.5

over 21under 10avg +5.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Texas A&M

34 games played

Straight up

22-12

65% wins

Against the spread

19-15

56% covers · avg +0.6 pts vs the line

Over / Under

19-15

56% overs · avg +1.7 pts vs the total

Straight up

22-1265%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

19-1556%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

19-1556%

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

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	vsNWST	W 98-68	-21.5	W +8.5	153.5	O 166
Nov 6	vsTXSO	W 104-70	-29.5	W +4.5	161.5	O 174
Nov 9	@OKST	L 63-87	-2.5	L −26.5	174.5	U 150
Nov 14	vsUCF	L 74-86	-10.5	L −22.5	172.5	U 160
Nov 18	vsMONT	W 86-81	-17.5	L −12.5	164.5	O 167
Nov 21	vsMAN	W 109-68	-23.5	W +17.5	162.5	O 177
Nov 25	vsMVSU	W 120-84	-42.5	L −6.5	154.5	O 204
Nov 28	vsFSU	W 95-59	+1.5	W +37.5	174.5	U 154
Dec 2	@PITT	W 81-73	-3.5	W +4.5	152.5	O 154
Dec 7	vsSMU	L 80-93	-1.5	L −14.5	164.5	O 173
Dec 14	vsJAX	W 112-75	-26.5	W +10.5	147.5	O 187
Dec 21	vsETAM	W 118-77	-28.5	W +12.5	166.5	O 195
Dec 29	vsPV	W 111-82	-29.5	L −0.5	177.5	O 193
Jan 3	vsLSU	W 75-72	-5.5	L −2.5	168.5	U 147
Jan 6	@AUB	W 90-88	+6.5	W +8.5	168.5	O 178
Jan 10	vsOU	W 83-76	-4.5	W +2.5	165.5	U 159
Jan 13	@TENN	L 82-87	+11.5	W +6.5	159.5	O 169
Jan 17	@TEX	W 74-70	+4.5	W +8.5	166.5	U 144
Jan 21	vsMSST	W 88-68	-8.5	W +11.5	163.5	U 156
Jan 24	vsSC	W 92-69	-10.5	W +12.5	155.5	O 161
Jan 31	@UGA	W 92-77	+4.5	W +19.5	173.5	U 169
Feb 4	@ALA	L 97-100	+8.5	W +5.5	180.5	O 197
Feb 7	vsFLA	L 67-86	+5.5	L −13.5	167.5	U 153
Feb 11	vsMIZ	L 85-86	-7.5	L −8.5	160.5	O 171
Feb 14	@VAN	L 69-82	+7.5	L −5.5	165.5	U 151
Feb 18	vsMISS	W 80-77	-9.5	L −6.5	157.5	U 157
Feb 21	@OU	W 75-71	-1.5	W +2.5	165.5	U 146
Feb 25	@ARK	L 84-99	+7.5	L −7.5	170.5	O 183
Feb 28	vsTEX	L 70-76	-2.5	L −8.5	159.5	U 146
Mar 3	vsUK	W 96-85	-1.5	W +9.5	162.5	O 181
Mar 7	@LSU	W 94-91	-2.5	W +0.5	161.5	O 185
Mar 12	vsOU	L 63-83	-2.5	L −22.5	162.5	U 146
Mar 19	vsSMC	W 63-50	+2.5	W +15.5	149.5	U 113
Mar 21	vsHOU	L 57-88	+10.5	L −20.5	142.5	O 145

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

NWST

W 98-68

+8.5

TXSO

W 104-70

+4.5

OKST

L 63-87

−26.5

UCF

L 74-86

−22.5

MONT

W 86-81

−12.5

MAN

W 109-68

+17.5

MVSU

W 120-84

−6.5

FSU

W 95-59

+37.5

PITT

W 81-73

+4.5

SMU

L 80-93

−14.5

JAX

W 112-75

+10.5

ETAM

W 118-77

+12.5

W 111-82

−0.5

LSU

W 75-72

−2.5

AUB

W 90-88

+8.5

W 83-76

+2.5

TENN

L 82-87

+6.5

TEX

W 74-70

+8.5

MSST

W 88-68

+11.5

W 92-69

+12.5

UGA

W 92-77

+19.5

ALA

L 97-100

+5.5

FLA

L 67-86

−13.5

MIZ

L 85-86

−8.5

VAN

L 69-82

−5.5

MISS

W 80-77

−6.5

W 75-71

+2.5

ARK

L 84-99

−7.5

TEX

L 70-76

−8.5

W 96-85

+9.5

LSU

W 94-91

+0.5

L 63-83

−22.5

SMC

W 63-50

+15.5

HOU

L 57-88

−20.5

covered 19didn’t cover 15avg +0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

NWST

W 98-68

+12.5

TXSO

W 104-70

+12.5

OKST

L 63-87

−24.5

UCF

L 74-86

−12.5

MONT

W 86-81

+2.5

MAN

W 109-68

+14.5

MVSU

W 120-84

+49.5

FSU

W 95-59

−20.5

PITT

W 81-73

+1.5

SMU

L 80-93

+8.5

JAX

W 112-75

+39.5

ETAM

W 118-77

+28.5

W 111-82

+15.5

LSU

W 75-72

−21.5

AUB

W 90-88

+9.5

W 83-76

−6.5

TENN

L 82-87

+9.5

TEX

W 74-70

−22.5

MSST

W 88-68

−7.5

W 92-69

+5.5

UGA

W 92-77

−4.5

ALA

L 97-100

+16.5

FLA

L 67-86

−14.5

MIZ

L 85-86

+10.5

VAN

L 69-82

−14.5

MISS

W 80-77

−0.5

W 75-71

−19.5

ARK

L 84-99

+12.5

TEX

L 70-76

−13.5

W 96-85

+18.5

LSU

W 94-91

+23.5

L 63-83

−16.5

SMC

W 63-50

−36.5

HOU

L 57-88

+2.5

over 19under 15avg +1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Texas A&M has the better starters

Position by position: N Kentucky 0, Texas A&M 4, even 1

N KentuckyBetterTexas A&M

G E. Elliott4.8 pts · 2.8 reb · 4.4 ast Score 3

TA&MBig

G P. Haggerty TR23.4 pts · 5.3 reb · 3.8 ast Score 98

G E. Acker TR5.7 pts · 1.3 reb · 1.6 ast Score 38

TA&MBig

G J. Pope TR13.1 pts · 2.1 reb · 1.7 ast Score 78

F N. Pagotto TR10.5 pts · 5.6 reb · 1 ast Score 68

TA&MSmall

G T. Archie TR14.2 pts · 1.9 reb · 2.8 ast Score 91

F W. Shortt TR6.6 pts · 4.4 reb · 0.7 ast Score 51

Even

G L. Walls TR7.9 pts · 2.3 reb · 1 ast Score 37

F D. Rakotonanahary3 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.4 ast Score 25

TA&MBig

F J. Shelley TR13.9 pts · 6.6 reb · 2.6 ast Score 76

N KentuckyBetterTexas A&M

NKU offense209th of 366 · -6.3

TA&MBig

TA&M defense62nd of 366 · +1.2

NKU defense249th of 366 · -6.5

TA&MBig

TA&M offense20th of 366 · +7.7

Backcourt-5.4 · 2 players

TA&MBig

Backcourt+8.6 · 4 players

Frontcourt-0.2 · 3 players

TA&MSmall

Frontcourt+1.7 · 1 player

Bench-2.4 · 3 players

TA&MBig

Bench+2.5 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestNKU betterTA&M 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

N Kentucky

Guards

E. Elliott29 minE. Acker19 min · TRB. Davis-Ray7 min · TRB. Darbyshire6 minJ. ApathjangNewW. FosterNew

Forwards

N. Pagotto27 min · TRW. Shortt20 min · TRD. Rakotonanahary12 minR. Tolliver6 minJ. RuizNewP. Otto MaeNew

Texas A&M

Guards

P. Haggerty35 min · TRJ. Pope29 min · TRT. Archie26 min · TRL. Walls24 min · TRJ. Reece24 min · TRJ. Green5 min

Forwards

J. Shelley32 min · TRM. Mgbako19 minZ. Clemence17 minC. Phillips17 min · TRJ. Vinson7 minC. McDermott4 min

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

NKU80.9 #47

TA&M86.1 #12

Points per possession

NKU1.13 #81

TA&M1.17 #43

Pace (possessions)

NKU71.5 #55

TA&M73.5 #15

Shooting

Effective FG%

NKU53.2 #93

TA&M53.8 #71

3-point %

NKU33.6 #193

TA&M35.9 #63

3-point attempt rate

NKU44.9 #71

TA&M46.2 #42

Free throw rate

NKU35.9 #158

TA&M37.1 #128

Possessions

Turnover rate

NKU16.3 #158

TA&M14.7 #48

Offensive rebound rate

NKU32.2 #117

TA&M32.0 #122

Assists per game

NKU15.5 #65

TA&M17.8 #11

Defense

Points allowed

NKU78.7 #284

TA&M78.9 #296

Points allowed per possession

NKU1.10 #225

TA&M1.08 #151

Opponent effective FG%

NKU54.2 #305

TA&M50.7 #141

Opponent 3-point %

NKU36.6 #333

TA&M31.8 #53

Turnovers forced

NKU18.6 #66

TA&M18.4 #81

Defensive rebound rate

NKU68.4 #236

TA&M67.0 #300

Steals per game

NKU8.3 #25

TA&M8.1 #34

Blocks per game

NKU3.5 #134

TA&M3.1 #210

NKU		TA&M
Scoring
80.9 #47	Points per game	86.1 #12
1.13 #81	Points per possession	1.17 #43
71.5 #55	Pace (possessions)	73.5 #15
Shooting
53.2 #93	Effective FG%	53.8 #71
33.6 #193	3-point %	35.9 #63
44.9 #71	3-point attempt rate	46.2 #42
35.9 #158	Free throw rate	37.1 #128
Possessions
16.3 #158	Turnover rate	14.7 #48
32.2 #117	Offensive rebound rate	32.0 #122
15.5 #65	Assists per game	17.8 #11
Defense
78.7 #284	Points allowed	78.9 #296
1.10 #225	Points allowed per possession	1.08 #151
54.2 #305	Opponent effective FG%	50.7 #141
36.6 #333	Opponent 3-point %	31.8 #53
18.6 #66	Turnovers forced	18.4 #81
68.4 #236	Defensive rebound rate	67.0 #300
8.3 #25	Steals per game	8.1 #34
3.5 #134	Blocks per game	3.1 #210

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.

N Kentucky

17-14 in 2025-26 overall · 12-11 in conference · Horizon League

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Wright St90–103
Wvs Green Bay96–76
W@ Oakland85–84
Lvs Wright St91–92
W@ Cleveland St81–70

A week or more of rest.

Texas A&M

22-12 in 2025-26 overall · 11-8 in conference · Southeastern Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Houston57–88
Wvs Saint Mary's63–50
Lvs Oklahoma63–83
W@ LSU94–91
Wvs Kentucky96–85

A week or more of rest.

Northern Kentucky Norse at Texas A&M Aggies

What could decide it: TA&M has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

N Kentucky

Texas A&M

Texas A&M has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

N Kentucky

Texas A&M