East Texas A&M Lions at Stephen F. Austin Lumberjacks: Model Line and Edge

Sat, Dec 5, 12:00 AM ETWilliam R. Johnson Coliseum · at SF Austin · Conference game

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: East Texas A&M and SF Austin
ETAM	This season	SFA
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 SFA 77–65 · win probability SFA 87%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 141.9

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: SFA has more of the edges

ETAM 0, SFA 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

SFABig

Three-pointers

ETAM hits 31.3% and allows 37.3%; SFA hits 35.8% and allows 30.3%. Threes are 46.2% and 39.8% of their shots

SFABig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: ETAM 25.7%, SFA 33.8%. Defensive: ETAM 67.2%, SFA 70.5%

SFABig

ETAM offense vs SFA defense

Offense 344th of 366 against a defense 156th, on the model’s ratings

SFABig

Shooting

Effective FG%: ETAM 49.2 and allows 52.9; SFA 51.7 and allows 47.7

SFABig

Turnovers

Turnover rate: ETAM 19.2%, SFA 14.2%. Forced: ETAM 17.0%, SFA 17.7%

Context

Schedule so far

ETAM has played the 265th-hardest schedule, SFA the 338th. A record against a soft schedule means less

SFASmall

SFA offense vs ETAM defense

Offense 252nd of 366 against a defense 317th, on the model’s ratings

SFASmall

Home court

SFA at home. This season: SFA 0-0 at home, ETAM 0-0 away

Context

Tempo

About 67 possessions: ETAM plays 68.5 a game (203rd fastest), SFA 66.4 (298th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: ETAM 7%, SFA 26%. Transfers in: ETAM 2, SFA 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: ETAM 32.0, SFA 30.1. Allowed: ETAM 34.5, SFA 31.1

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	—	SFA -12.7	—
Total	—	141.9	—
Projected score	—	ETAM 64.6 · SFA 77.3

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	SFA -7.4	—
1H total	66.4	—
1H projected score	ETAM 29.5 · SFA 36.9	—

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
ETAM WLLWL	14-16	47%	9-8	—
SFA WWLLW	23-9	72%	10-4	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
ETAM UOUUO	15-15	50%	9-21
SFA UOUOO	14-18	44%	26-6

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
ETAM	3-7 30%	5-5 50%	5-5 50%
SFA	7-3 70%	5-5 50%	6-4 60%

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

East Texas A&M

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 7	@ LAM	L61–82LO
Dec 15	@ CARK	W75–68WU

SF Austin

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 9	vs UTA	L61–66LU
Dec 12	@ LT	L49–56LU

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

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

ETAM 0–4 SFASFA leads · 4 games since 2021-22 · SFA has won the last 4 meetings · ETAM 3-1 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Feb 9, 2025-26	ETAM 70 @ SFA 74	SFA -16.5	ETAM W
Dec 29, 2025-26	SFA 75 @ ETAM 48	ETAM +4.5	SFA W
Feb 17, 2024-25	SFA 76 @ ETAM 74	ETAM +6.5	ETAM W
Jan 27, 2024-25	ETAM 72 @ SFA 79	SFA -9.5	ETAM W

ATS History · 2025-26

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

East Texas A&M

30 games played

Straight up

9-21

30% wins

Against the spread

14-16

47% covers · avg −1.6 pts vs the line

Over / Under

15-15

50% overs · avg −1.3 pts vs the total

Straight up

9-2130%

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

4 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

14-1647%

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

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

15-1550%

U O U U O O U O O O U U U O O U O U O U O U U O O U 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 5	@UNM	L 54-76	+22.5	W +0.5	143.5	U 130
Nov 10	@HAW	L 74-100	+18.5	L −7.5	145.5	O 174
Nov 14	@RICE	L 64-71	+10.5	W +3.5	146.5	U 135
Nov 24	@FDU	W 70-65	-3.5	W +1.5	149.5	U 135
Nov 25	vsARMY	W 84-67	-2.5	W +14.5	143.5	O 151
Dec 5	@CONN	L 59-83	+36.5	W +12.5	141.5	O 142
Dec 7	vsCARK	W 75-68	-2.5	W +4.5	145.5	U 143
Dec 12	@MCN	L 66-102	+20.5	L −15.5	142.5	O 168
Dec 15	@SELA	W 70-69	+4.5	W +5.5	137.5	O 139
Dec 21	@TA&M	L 77-118	+28.5	L −12.5	166.5	O 195
Dec 29	vsSFA	L 48-75	+4.5	L −22.5	146.5	U 123
Dec 31	vsLAM	L 62-69	+5.5	L −1.5	143.5	U 131
Jan 3	@NICH	L 58-80	+6.5	L −15.5	146.5	U 138
Jan 5	@NOLA	L 73-83	+6.5	L −3.5	150.5	O 156
Jan 10	vsRGV	W 77-69	+3.5	W +11.5	145.5	O 146
Jan 12	vsAMCC	L 50-61	+3.5	L −7.5	142.5	U 111
Jan 17	@HCU	L 70-81	+2.5	L −8.5	139.5	O 151
Jan 19	@UIW	W 80-58	+6.5	W +28.5	142.5	U 138
Jan 27	@LAM	L 61-82	+6.5	L −14.5	140.5	O 143
Jan 31	vsNICH	L 68-72	-1.5	L −5.5	146.5	U 140
Feb 2	vsNOLA	L 85-94	+1.5	L −7.5	151.5	O 179
Feb 4	@NWST	W 74-68	+3.5	W +9.5	143.5	U 142
Feb 7	vsNWST	W 52-48	-1.5	W +2.5	140.5	U 100
Feb 9	@SFA	L 70-74	+16.5	W +12.5	143.5	O 144
Feb 14	vsMCN	L 54-97	+13.5	L −29.5	142.5	O 151
Feb 16	vsSELA	W 70-53	-2.5	W +14.5	136.5	U 123
Feb 21	vsUIW	L 73-82	-3.5	L −12.5	145.5	O 155
Feb 23	vsHCU	L 68-69	-2.5	L −3.5	138.5	U 137
Feb 28	@RGV	L 55-63	+10.5	W +2.5	146.5	U 118
Mar 2	@AMCC	L 71-84	+7.5	L −5.5	136.5	O 155

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

UNM

L 54-76

+0.5

HAW

L 74-100

−7.5

RICE

L 64-71

+3.5

FDU

W 70-65

+1.5

ARMY

W 84-67

+14.5

CONN

L 59-83

+12.5

CARK

W 75-68

+4.5

MCN

L 66-102

−15.5

SELA

W 70-69

+5.5

TA&M

L 77-118

−12.5

SFA

L 48-75

−22.5

LAM

L 62-69

−1.5

NICH

L 58-80

−15.5

NOLA

L 73-83

−3.5

RGV

W 77-69

+11.5

AMCC

L 50-61

−7.5

HCU

L 70-81

−8.5

UIW

W 80-58

+28.5

LAM

L 61-82

−14.5

NICH

L 68-72

−5.5

NOLA

L 85-94

−7.5

NWST

W 74-68

+9.5

NWST

W 52-48

+2.5

SFA

L 70-74

+12.5

MCN

L 54-97

−29.5

SELA

W 70-53

+14.5

UIW

L 73-82

−12.5

HCU

L 68-69

−3.5

RGV

L 55-63

+2.5

AMCC

L 71-84

−5.5

covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −1.6 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

UNM

L 54-76

−13.5

HAW

L 74-100

+28.5

RICE

L 64-71

−11.5

FDU

W 70-65

−14.5

ARMY

W 84-67

+7.5

CONN

L 59-83

+0.5

CARK

W 75-68

−2.5

MCN

L 66-102

+25.5

SELA

W 70-69

+1.5

TA&M

L 77-118

+28.5

SFA

L 48-75

−23.5

LAM

L 62-69

−12.5

NICH

L 58-80

−8.5

NOLA

L 73-83

+5.5

RGV

W 77-69

+0.5

AMCC

L 50-61

−31.5

HCU

L 70-81

+11.5

UIW

W 80-58

−4.5

LAM

L 61-82

+2.5

NICH

L 68-72

−6.5

NOLA

L 85-94

+27.5

NWST

W 74-68

−1.5

NWST

W 52-48

−40.5

SFA

L 70-74

+0.5

MCN

L 54-97

+8.5

SELA

W 70-53

−13.5

UIW

L 73-82

+9.5

HCU

L 68-69

−1.5

RGV

L 55-63

−28.5

AMCC

L 71-84

+18.5

over 15under 15avg −1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

SF Austin

32 games played

Straight up

26-6

81% wins

Against the spread

23-9

72% covers · avg +2.9 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-18

44% overs · avg −0.9 pts vs the total

Straight up

26-681%

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

2 straight losses2 of last 4 won

Against the spread

23-972%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

14-1844%

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

2 straight overs3 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	vsARST	W 90-65	+1.5	W +26.5	155.5	U 155
Nov 11	@RICE	W 81-69	+2.5	W +14.5	149.5	O 150
Nov 14	vsACU	W 76-66	-6.5	W +3.5	142.5	U 142
Nov 18	@FRES	L 78-80	-2.5	L −4.5	146.5	O 158
Nov 21	@PEPP	W 63-60	-1.5	W +1.5	148.5	U 123
Nov 29	@UTA	L 61-66	+1.5	L −3.5	138.5	U 127
Dec 3	vsRGV	W 73-60	-6.5	W +6.5	143.5	U 133
Dec 7	vsULM	W 96-76	-19.5	W +0.5	142.5	O 172
Dec 17	vsAMCC	W 69-60	-6.5	W +2.5	139.5	U 129
Dec 29	@ETAM	W 75-48	-4.5	W +22.5	146.5	U 123
Dec 31	@NWST	W 74-64	-8.5	W +1.5	138.5	U 138
Jan 3	@SELA	W 73-63	-3.5	W +6.5	137.5	U 136
Jan 5	@MCN	L 64-66	+10.5	W +8.5	144.5	U 130
Jan 10	vsHCU	W 85-67	-12.5	W +5.5	137.5	O 152
Jan 12	vsUIW	W 56-46	-7.5	W +2.5	140.5	U 102
Jan 17	@NOLA	W 84-79	-6.5	L −1.5	147.5	O 163
Jan 19	@NICH	W 79-62	-4.5	W +12.5	144.5	U 141
Jan 24	@LAM	W 88-81	-4.5	W +2.5	136.5	O 169
Jan 27	vsNWST	W 69-67	-14.5	L −12.5	141.5	U 136
Jan 31	vsSELA	W 85-58	-9.5	W +17.5	135.5	O 143
Feb 2	vsMCN	W 67-60	+2.5	W +9.5	141.5	U 127
Feb 7	vsLAM	W 84-74	-8.5	W +1.5	138.5	O 158
Feb 9	vsETAM	W 74-70	-16.5	L −12.5	143.5	O 144
Feb 14	@RGV	W 66-57	-1.5	W +7.5	144.5	U 123
Feb 16	@AMCC	W 78-68	-5.5	W +4.5	135.5	O 146
Feb 21	vsNICH	W 81-78	-12.5	L −9.5	147.5	O 159
Feb 23	vsNOLA	L 73-77	-11.5	L −15.5	153.5	U 150
Feb 28	@HCU	W 77-56	-8.5	W +12.5	138.5	U 133
Mar 2	@UIW	W 76-68	-7.5	W +0.5	142.5	O 144
Mar 10	vsAMCC	W 60-58	-6.5	L −4.5	135.5	U 118
Mar 11	vsMCN	L 59-76	+3.5	L −13.5	134.5	O 135
Mar 17	@TLSA	L 84-89	+5.5	W +0.5	149.5	O 173

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

ARST

W 90-65

+26.5

RICE

W 81-69

+14.5

ACU

W 76-66

+3.5

FRES

L 78-80

−4.5

PEPP

W 63-60

+1.5

UTA

L 61-66

−3.5

RGV

W 73-60

+6.5

ULM

W 96-76

+0.5

AMCC

W 69-60

+2.5

ETAM

W 75-48

+22.5

NWST

W 74-64

+1.5

SELA

W 73-63

+6.5

MCN

L 64-66

+8.5

HCU

W 85-67

+5.5

UIW

W 56-46

+2.5

NOLA

W 84-79

−1.5

NICH

W 79-62

+12.5

LAM

W 88-81

+2.5

NWST

W 69-67

−12.5

SELA

W 85-58

+17.5

MCN

W 67-60

+9.5

LAM

W 84-74

+1.5

ETAM

W 74-70

−12.5

RGV

W 66-57

+7.5

AMCC

W 78-68

+4.5

NICH

W 81-78

−9.5

NOLA

L 73-77

−15.5

HCU

W 77-56

+12.5

UIW

W 76-68

+0.5

AMCC

W 60-58

−4.5

MCN

L 59-76

−13.5

TLSA

L 84-89

+0.5

covered 23didn’t cover 9avg +2.9 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

ARST

W 90-65

−0.5

RICE

W 81-69

+0.5

ACU

W 76-66

−0.5

FRES

L 78-80

+11.5

PEPP

W 63-60

−25.5

UTA

L 61-66

−11.5

RGV

W 73-60

−10.5

ULM

W 96-76

+29.5

AMCC

W 69-60

−10.5

ETAM

W 75-48

−23.5

NWST

W 74-64

−0.5

SELA

W 73-63

−1.5

MCN

L 64-66

−14.5

HCU

W 85-67

+14.5

UIW

W 56-46

−38.5

NOLA

W 84-79

+15.5

NICH

W 79-62

−3.5

LAM

W 88-81

+32.5

NWST

W 69-67

−5.5

SELA

W 85-58

+7.5

MCN

W 67-60

−14.5

LAM

W 84-74

+19.5

ETAM

W 74-70

+0.5

RGV

W 66-57

−21.5

AMCC

W 78-68

+10.5

NICH

W 81-78

+11.5

NOLA

L 73-77

−3.5

HCU

W 77-56

−5.5

UIW

W 76-68

+1.5

AMCC

W 60-58

−17.5

MCN

L 59-76

+0.5

TLSA

L 84-89

+23.5

over 14under 18avg −0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

The starting fives are even

Position by position: East Texas A&M 1, SF Austin 1, even 3

East Texas A&MBetterSF Austin

G A. Dodd TR14.3 pts · 5.3 reb · 4.1 ast Score 82

ETAMBig

G M. Russell TR15 pts · 3.9 reb · 2 ast Score 36

G E. Phelps1.3 pts · 0.7 reb · 1 ast Score 0

SFABig

G N. Chotikavanic9.6 pts · 2.8 reb · 0.7 ast Score 60

G K. Tolbert NEWNo Division I numbers yet Not ranked

No call

F E. Daniel TR3.7 pts · 3.3 reb · 0.3 ast Score 41

F J. Ford TR3.1 pts · 2.5 reb · 0.5 ast Not ranked

No call

F G. Alisas4.8 pts · 2.3 reb · 1.2 ast Score 52

F B. Aldridge NEWNo Division I numbers yet Not ranked

No call

F A. Reed TR2.7 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.1 ast Score 42

East Texas A&MBetterSF Austin

ETAM offense344th of 366 · -11.8

SFABig

SFA defense156th of 366 · -3.4

ETAM defense317th of 366 · -8.2

SFASmall

SFA offense252nd of 366 · -7.6

Backcourt-1.7 · 3 players

Even

Backcourt-1.9 · 2 players

Frontcourt-1.0 · 2 players

Even

Frontcourt-0.8 · 3 players

BenchNo numbers yet

No call

Bench-1.9 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestETAM betterSFA 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

East Texas A&M

Guards

A. Dodd32 min · TRE. Phelps15 minK. TolbertNewC. AdlamNewK. RobinsonNewG. SkorjancNew

Forwards

J. Ford10 min · TRB. AldridgeNewY. VidalNewM. DiakiteNewC. DinuNewM. CarrioNew

SF Austin

Guards

M. Russell36 min · TRN. Chotikavanic23 minC. Green7 minM. Scurry7 minA. Simmons4 min · TRB. Melvin3 min

Forwards

E. Daniel14 min · TRG. Alisas14 minA. Reed11 min · TRK. Pearson8 min · TR

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

ETAM67.1 #331

SFA74.9 #166

Points per possession

ETAM0.98 #342

SFA1.13 #88

Pace (possessions)

ETAM68.5 #203

SFA66.4 #298

Shooting

Effective FG%

ETAM49.2 #282

SFA51.7 #160

3-point %

ETAM31.3 #313

SFA35.8 #71

3-point attempt rate

ETAM46.2 #43

SFA39.8 #176

Free throw rate

ETAM32.0 #257

SFA30.1 #306

Possessions

Turnover rate

ETAM19.2 #330

SFA14.2 #29

Offensive rebound rate

ETAM25.7 #328

SFA33.8 #74

Assists per game

ETAM14.6 #109

SFA13.1 #209

Defense

Points allowed

ETAM76.0 #218

SFA66.7 #20

Points allowed per possession

ETAM1.11 #240

SFA1.00 #29

Opponent effective FG%

ETAM52.9 #261

SFA47.7 #35

Opponent 3-point %

ETAM37.3 #347

SFA30.3 #11

Turnovers forced

ETAM17.0 #156

SFA17.7 #116

Defensive rebound rate

ETAM67.2 #288

SFA70.5 #131

Steals per game

ETAM6.7 #150

SFA6.9 #136

Blocks per game

ETAM3.1 #196

SFA3.7 #118

ETAM		SFA
Scoring
67.1 #331	Points per game	74.9 #166
0.98 #342	Points per possession	1.13 #88
68.5 #203	Pace (possessions)	66.4 #298
Shooting
49.2 #282	Effective FG%	51.7 #160
31.3 #313	3-point %	35.8 #71
46.2 #43	3-point attempt rate	39.8 #176
32.0 #257	Free throw rate	30.1 #306
Possessions
19.2 #330	Turnover rate	14.2 #29
25.7 #328	Offensive rebound rate	33.8 #74
14.6 #109	Assists per game	13.1 #209
Defense
76.0 #218	Points allowed	66.7 #20
1.11 #240	Points allowed per possession	1.00 #29
52.9 #261	Opponent effective FG%	47.7 #35
37.3 #347	Opponent 3-point %	30.3 #11
17.0 #156	Turnovers forced	17.7 #116
67.2 #288	Defensive rebound rate	70.5 #131
6.7 #150	Steals per game	6.9 #136
3.1 #196	Blocks per game	3.7 #118

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.

East Texas A&M

9-21 in 2025-26 overall · 6-16 in conference · Southland Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Texas A&M-CC71–84
L@ UT Rio Grande55–63
Lvs Hou Christian68–69
Lvs Incarnate Word73–82
Wvs SE Louisiana70–53

A week or more of rest.

SF Austin

26-6 in 2025-26 overall · 21-3 in conference · Southland Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Tulsa84–89
Lvs McNeese59–76
Wvs Texas A&M-CC60–58
W@ Incarnate Word76–68
W@ Hou Christian77–56

A week or more of rest.

East Texas A&M Lions at Stephen F. Austin Lumberjacks

What could decide it: SFA has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

East Texas A&M

SF Austin

The starting fives are even

Depth chart

Matchup stats

East Texas A&M

SF Austin