Cajundome · at Louisiana
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | UL | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UL 69–67 · win probability UL 57%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 136.5
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: AMCC has more of the edges
AMCC 5, UL 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Three-pointers
AMCC hits 35.0% and allows 31.6%; UL hits 33.6% and allows 35.6%. Threes are 31.4% and 40.5% of their shots
AMCC offense vs UL defense
Offense 303rd of 366 against a defense 157th, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: AMCC 31.7%, UL 28.4%. Defensive: AMCC 71.2%, UL 67.7%
Free throws
Free throw rate: AMCC 41.1, UL 28.7. Allowed: AMCC 46.3, UL 45.8
UL offense vs AMCC defense
Offense 292nd of 366 against a defense 176th, on the model’s ratings
Shooting
Effective FG%: AMCC 49.5 and allows 50.1; UL 47.1 and allows 52.6
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: AMCC 19%, UL 59%. Transfers in: AMCC 4, UL 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Turnovers
Turnover rate: AMCC 19.4%, UL 16.8%. Forced: AMCC 19.0%, UL 18.3%
Home court
UL at home. This season: UL 0-0 at home, AMCC 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 65 possessions: AMCC plays 66.9 a game (284th fastest), UL 64.1 (359th). Faster games mean more points
Context
Schedule so far
AMCC has played the 245th-hardest schedule, UL the 226th. A record against a soft schedule means less
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 | — | UL -1.9 | — |
| Total | — | 136.5 | — |
| Projected score | — | AMCC 67.3 · UL 69.2 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UL -1.0 | — |
| 1H total | 63.9 | — |
| 1H projected score | AMCC 31.4 · UL 32.5 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% | 6-4 60% | |
| 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Texas A&M-CC
29 games played
Straight up
14-15
48% wins
Against the spread
16-13
55% covers · avg +1.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% overs · avg −1.9 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 6 | @ | L 58-69 | +23.5 | W +12.5 | 160.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 77-85 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 46-77 | +25.5 | L −5.5 | 145.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 16 | @ | L 69-85 | +20.5 | W +4.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 67-88 | +13.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 57-49 | +3.5 | W +11.5 | 136.5 | U 106 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 60-69 | +6.5 | L −2.5 | 139.5 | U 129 |
| Dec 29 | vs | L 71-76 | -5.5 | L −10.5 | 137.5 | O 147 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 83-69 | -4.5 | W +9.5 | 142.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 63-59 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 137.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 5 | @ | W 81-65 | -3.5 | W +12.5 | 132.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 78-79 | -5.5 | L −6.5 | 138.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 12 | @ | W 61-50 | -3.5 | W +7.5 | 142.5 | U 111 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 68-56 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 130.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 19 | vs | L 53-69 | +9.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 79-71 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 136.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 26 | vs | L 55-64 | -2.5 | L −11.5 | 135.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 73-71 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 135.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 2 | vs | L 69-71 | -4.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 83-76 | +1.5 | W +8.5 | 137.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 9 | @ | L 78-84 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 76-63 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 135.5 | O 139 |
| Feb 16 | vs | L 68-78 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 135.5 | O 146 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 54-70 | +14.5 | L −1.5 | 139.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 23 | @ | W 73-68 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 130.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 71-59 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 134.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 2 | vs | W 84-71 | -7.5 | W +5.5 | 136.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 74-61 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 58-60 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 135.5 | U 118 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
6
@
SMU
L 58-69
+12.5
8
@
TAR
L 77-85
−4.5
11
@
KU
L 46-77
−5.5
16
@
OKST
L 69-85
+4.5
28
@
XAV
L 67-88
−7.5
6
@
LAM
W 57-49
+11.5
17
@
SFA
L 60-69
−2.5
29
vs
NICH
L 71-76
−10.5
31
vs
NOLA
W 83-69
+9.5
3
@
RGV
W 63-59
+6.5
5
@
HCU
W 81-65
+12.5
10
@
NWST
L 78-79
−6.5
12
@
ETAM
W 61-50
+7.5
17
vs
SELA
W 68-56
+6.5
19
vs
MCN
L 53-69
−6.5
24
@
UIW
W 79-71
+9.5
26
vs
RGV
L 55-64
−11.5
31
vs
HCU
W 73-71
−5.5
2
vs
UIW
L 69-71
−6.5
7
@
NICH
W 83-76
+8.5
9
@
NOLA
L 78-84
−7.5
14
vs
LAM
W 76-63
+10.5
16
vs
SFA
L 68-78
−4.5
21
@
MCN
L 54-70
−1.5
23
@
SELA
W 73-68
+3.5
28
vs
NWST
W 71-59
+6.5
2
vs
ETAM
W 84-71
+5.5
9
vs
NOLA
W 74-61
+10.5
10
vs
SFA
L 58-60
+4.5
covered 16didn’t cover 13avg +1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
6
@
SMU
L 58-69
−33.5
8
@
TAR
L 77-85
+19.5
11
@
KU
L 46-77
−22.5
16
@
OKST
L 69-85
−0.5
28
@
XAV
L 67-88
+8.5
6
@
LAM
W 57-49
−30.5
17
@
SFA
L 60-69
−10.5
29
vs
NICH
L 71-76
+9.5
31
vs
NOLA
W 83-69
+9.5
3
@
RGV
W 63-59
−15.5
5
@
HCU
W 81-65
+13.5
10
@
NWST
L 78-79
+18.5
12
@
ETAM
W 61-50
−31.5
17
vs
SELA
W 68-56
−6.5
19
vs
MCN
L 53-69
−18.5
24
@
UIW
W 79-71
+13.5
26
vs
RGV
L 55-64
−16.5
31
vs
HCU
W 73-71
+8.5
2
vs
UIW
L 69-71
−0.5
7
@
NICH
W 83-76
+21.5
9
@
NOLA
L 78-84
+15.5
14
vs
LAM
W 76-63
+3.5
16
vs
SFA
L 68-78
+10.5
21
@
MCN
L 54-70
−15.5
23
@
SELA
W 73-68
+10.5
28
vs
NWST
W 71-59
−4.5
2
vs
ETAM
W 84-71
+18.5
9
vs
NOLA
W 74-61
−12.5
10
vs
SFA
L 58-60
−17.5
over 14under 15avg −1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Louisiana
33 games played
Straight up
11-22
33% wins
Against the spread
15-18
45% covers · avg −0.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-18
45% overs · avg −0.2 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 64-75 | +4.5 | L −6.5 | 141.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 58-52 | -3.5 | W +2.5 | 135.5 | U 110 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 62-66 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 135.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 62-88 | +15.5 | L −10.5 | 134.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 66-93 | +20.5 | L −6.5 | 139.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 43-80 | +19.5 | L −17.5 | 140.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 24 | @ | L 56-77 | +9.5 | L −11.5 | 136.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 45-51 | -5.5 | L −11.5 | 136.5 | U 96 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 55-65 | +10.5 | W +0.5 | 129.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 63-70 | +12.5 | W +5.5 | 130.5 | O 133 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 44-65 | +9.5 | L −11.5 | 126.5 | U 109 |
| Dec 18 | @ | L 54-62 | +11.5 | W +3.5 | 132.5 | U 116 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 76-62 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 136.5 | O 138 |
| Dec 28 | vs | W 63-54 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 126.5 | U 117 |
| Dec 31 | vs | L 58-63 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 127.5 | U 121 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 67-74 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 129.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 85-79 | -7.5 | L −1.5 | 139.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 70-90 | +9.5 | L −10.5 | 136.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 54-59 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 133.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 59-56 | +9.5 | W +12.5 | 129.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 58-72 | +9.5 | L −4.5 | 124.5 | O 130 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 82-72 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 129.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 69-60 | +2.5 | W +11.5 | 144.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 64-61 | +9.5 | W +12.5 | 132.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 85-80 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 134.5 | O 165 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 65-69 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 132.5 | O 134 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 72-83 | +6.5 | L −4.5 | 135.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 62-79 | +8.5 | L −8.5 | 144.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 67-54 | +3.5 | W +16.5 | 134.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 24 | @ | L 59-78 | +11.5 | L −7.5 | 134.5 | O 137 |
| Feb 27 | @ | L 58-81 | +13.5 | L −9.5 | 146.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 84-75 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 134.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 72-87 | +6.5 | L −8.5 | 134.5 | O 159 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
BALL
L 64-75
−6.5
7
vs
SELA
W 58-52
+2.5
11
vs
TULN
L 62-66
+1.5
14
@
MCN
L 62-88
−10.5
18
@
STAN
L 66-93
−6.5
21
@
SCU
L 43-80
−17.5
24
@
UCD
L 56-77
−11.5
28
vs
JKST
L 45-51
−11.5
3
@
LAM
L 55-65
+0.5
6
vs
UNCW
L 63-70
+5.5
13
@
LT
L 44-65
−11.5
18
@
USM
L 54-62
+3.5
20
@
ULM
W 76-62
+12.5
28
vs
NORF
W 63-54
+5.5
31
vs
USA
L 58-63
−1.5
3
vs
USM
L 67-74
−3.5
8
vs
ULM
W 85-79
−1.5
10
vs
TROY
L 70-90
−10.5
14
@
TXST
L 54-59
+3.5
17
@
USA
W 59-56
+12.5
22
@
APP
L 58-72
−4.5
29
vs
GAST
W 82-72
+11.5
31
vs
GASO
W 69-60
+11.5
4
@
JMU
W 64-61
+12.5
7
vs
CMU
W 85-80
+2.5
12
vs
CCU
L 65-69
−2.5
16
@
ODU
L 72-83
−4.5
19
vs
ARST
L 62-79
−8.5
21
vs
TXST
W 67-54
+16.5
24
@
TROY
L 59-78
−7.5
27
@
ARST
L 58-81
−9.5
3
vs
GAST
W 84-75
+10.5
4
vs
JMU
L 72-87
−8.5
covered 15didn’t cover 18avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
BALL
L 64-75
−2.5
7
vs
SELA
W 58-52
−25.5
11
vs
TULN
L 62-66
−7.5
14
@
MCN
L 62-88
+15.5
18
@
STAN
L 66-93
+19.5
21
@
SCU
L 43-80
−17.5
24
@
UCD
L 56-77
−3.5
28
vs
JKST
L 45-51
−40.5
3
@
LAM
L 55-65
−9.5
6
vs
UNCW
L 63-70
+2.5
13
@
LT
L 44-65
−17.5
18
@
USM
L 54-62
−16.5
20
@
ULM
W 76-62
+1.5
28
vs
NORF
W 63-54
−9.5
31
vs
USA
L 58-63
−6.5
3
vs
USM
L 67-74
+11.5
8
vs
ULM
W 85-79
+24.5
10
vs
TROY
L 70-90
+23.5
14
@
TXST
L 54-59
−20.5
17
@
USA
W 59-56
−14.5
22
@
APP
L 58-72
+5.5
29
vs
GAST
W 82-72
+24.5
31
vs
GASO
W 69-60
−15.5
4
@
JMU
W 64-61
−7.5
7
vs
CMU
W 85-80
+30.5
12
vs
CCU
L 65-69
+1.5
16
@
ODU
L 72-83
+19.5
19
vs
ARST
L 62-79
−3.5
21
vs
TXST
W 67-54
−13.5
24
@
TROY
L 59-78
+2.5
27
@
ARST
L 58-81
−7.5
3
vs
GAST
W 84-75
+24.5
4
vs
JMU
L 72-87
+24.5
over 15under 18avg −0.2 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: Texas A&M-CC 2, Louisiana 2, even 1
Texas A&M-CCBetterLouisiana
G J. Mizell TR5 pts · 3.3 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 12
→ULSmall
G D. Lavergne9.9 pts · 3.3 reb · 2.8 ast
Score 40
G S. Robinson TR14.6 pts · 2.8 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 76
←AMCCBig
G M. Cooper5.9 pts · 2.7 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 1
G I. Lewis TR5.9 pts · 2 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 10
→ULBig
G T. Middleton TR12.4 pts · 3.5 reb · 3 ast
Score 49
G D. Michelini-Jackson4.3 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 34
=No call
G J. Keller17 pts · 2 reb · 3 ast
Not ranked
F B. Basil TR8.7 pts · 6 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 53
←AMCCSmall
F J. Harris TR9.3 pts · 6.3 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 34
Texas A&M-CCBetterLouisiana
AMCC offense303rd of 366 · -9.4
→ULBig
UL defense157th of 366 · -3.4
AMCC defense176th of 366 · -4.0
←AMCCSmall
UL offense292nd of 366 · -9.0
Backcourt-5.9 · 4 players
=Even
Backcourt-6.4 · 4 players
Frontcourt-0.1 · 1 player
←AMCCSmall
Frontcourt-1.2 · 1 player
Bench-1.2 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-0.5 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestAMCC betterUL betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Mizell28 min · TRS. Robinson28 min · TRI. Lewis22 min · TRD. Michelini-Jackson17 minB. Wheatfall11 minC. Horton6 min
Forwards
B. Basil23 min · TRD. MukunaNewK. WallaceNewC. WorshamNew
Centers
J. Ambrose5 minL. FoonNew
Guards
D. Lavergne30 minM. Cooper30 minT. Middleton30 min · TRJ. Keller30 minL. Myers2 minD. WareNew
Forwards
J. Harris27 min · TRD. Pounds18 min · TRT. Jones17 minJ. Evans11 minR. OlajuwonNewT. DuncanNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 68.5 #305 | Points per game | 63.7 #354 |
| 1.03 #296 | Points per possession | 0.99 #333 |
| 66.9 #284 | Pace (possessions) | 64.1 #359 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.5 #270 | Effective FG% | 47.1 #334 |
| 35.0 #122 | 3-point % | 33.6 #189 |
| 31.4 #334 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.5 #160 |
| 41.1 #46 | Free throw rate | 28.7 #334 |
| Possessions | ||
| 19.4 #336 | Turnover rate | 16.8 #185 |
| 31.7 #138 | Offensive rebound rate | 28.4 #251 |
| 12.1 #280 | Assists per game | 10.3 #354 |
| Defense | ||
| 69.4 #52 | Points allowed | 70.7 #69 |
| 1.04 #67 | Points allowed per possession | 1.10 #227 |
| 50.1 #104 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.6 #247 |
| 31.6 #48 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.6 #286 |
| 19.0 #48 | Turnovers forced | 18.3 #85 |
| 71.2 #95 | Defensive rebound rate | 67.7 #272 |
| 7.0 #125 | Steals per game | 5.8 #257 |
| 2.6 #290 | Blocks per game | 3.5 #141 |
Texas A&M-CC
14-15 in 2025-26 overall · 14-10 in conference · Southland Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs SF Austin58–60
- Wvs LSU N Orleans74–61
- Wvs East Texas A&M84–71
- Wvs N'Western St71–59
- W@ SE Louisiana73–68
A week or more of rest.
Louisiana
11-22 in 2025-26 overall · 8-12 in conference · Sun Belt Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs James Madison72–87
- Wvs Georgia St84–75
- L@ Arkansas St58–81
- L@ Troy59–78
- Wvs Texas St67–54
A week or more of rest.