Strahan Arena at the University Events Center · at Texas St
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | TXST | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 TXST 80–67 · win probability TXST 88%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 147.0
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: TXST has more of the edges
RGV 2, TXST 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Three-pointers
RGV hits 36.8% and allows 30.4%; TXST hits 32.2% and allows 35.7%. Threes are 43.7% and 24.6% of their shots
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: RGV 28.2%, TXST 33.9%. Defensive: RGV 67.9%, TXST 71.6%
RGV offense vs TXST defense
Offense 297th of 366 against a defense 112th, on the model’s ratings
Shooting
Effective FG%: RGV 54.8 and allows 47.8; TXST 50.0 and allows 52.0
TXST offense vs RGV defense
Offense 105th of 366 against a defense 265th, on the model’s ratings
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: RGV 9%, TXST 69%. Transfers in: RGV 3, TXST 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Turnovers
Turnover rate: RGV 18.5%, TXST 18.7%. Forced: RGV 16.2%, TXST 18.5%
Free throws
Free throw rate: RGV 28.9, TXST 34.0. Allowed: RGV 39.0, TXST 39.0
Home court
TXST at home. This season: TXST 0-0 at home, RGV 0-0 away
Context
Schedule so far
RGV has played the 274th-hardest schedule, TXST the 298th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: RGV plays 67.3 a game (268th fastest), TXST 68.2 (223rd). 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 | — | TXST -13.4 | — |
| Total | — | 147.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | RGV 66.8 · TXST 80.2 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | TXST -7.8 | — |
| 1H total | 68.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | RGV 30.5 · TXST 38.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% | |
| 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | 4-6 40% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
UT Rio Grande
31 games played
Straight up
17-14
55% wins
Against the spread
18-13
58% covers · avg +4.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-18
42% overs · avg −1.5 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 81-96 | +24.5 | W +9.5 | 154.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 8 | @ | W 95-72 | -1.5 | W +21.5 | 160.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 65-85 | +16.5 | L −3.5 | 161.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 22 | @ | L 67-74 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 149.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 24 | @ | L 73-87 | +33.5 | W +19.5 | 164.5 | U 160 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 60-73 | +6.5 | L −6.5 | 143.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 63-50 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 151.5 | U 113 |
| Dec 11 | vs | L 50-58 | -4.5 | L −12.5 | 145.5 | U 108 |
| Dec 16 | @ | W 83-72 | +3.5 | W +14.5 | 139.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 29 | vs | L 69-85 | -6.5 | L −22.5 | 152.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 31 | vs | L 69-71 | -3.5 | L −5.5 | 145.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 59-63 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 137.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 5 | vs | W 80-67 | -1.5 | W +11.5 | 146.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 69-77 | -3.5 | L −11.5 | 145.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 12 | @ | L 63-64 | -2.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 79-76 | +9.5 | W +12.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 19 | vs | W 68-65 | -5.5 | L −2.5 | 135.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 68-51 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 140.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 26 | @ | W 64-55 | +2.5 | W +11.5 | 135.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 106-93 | -1.5 | W +11.5 | 140.5 | O 199 |
| Feb 2 | vs | W 74-57 | -9.5 | W +7.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 95-76 | -1.5 | W +17.5 | 151.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 9 | @ | W 92-72 | -3.5 | W +16.5 | 147.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 57-66 | +1.5 | L −7.5 | 144.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 16 | vs | W 70-65 | -6.5 | L −1.5 | 141.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 96-75 | -4.5 | W +16.5 | 138.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 23 | @ | L 68-75 | +11.5 | W +4.5 | 146.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 63-55 | -10.5 | L −2.5 | 146.5 | U 118 |
| Mar 2 | vs | W 74-62 | -9.5 | W +2.5 | 139.5 | U 136 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 86-68 | -5.5 | W +12.5 | 143.5 | O 154 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 80-84 | +8.5 | W +4.5 | 140.5 | O 164 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
BAY
L 81-96
+9.5
8
@
SUU
W 95-72
+21.5
11
@
BOIS
L 65-85
−3.5
22
@
MOST
L 67-74
−3.5
24
@
ILL
L 73-87
+19.5
3
@
SFA
L 60-73
−6.5
7
vs
APSU
W 63-50
+10.5
11
vs
UTA
L 50-58
−12.5
16
@
LAM
W 83-72
+14.5
29
vs
NOLA
L 69-85
−22.5
31
vs
NICH
L 69-71
−5.5
3
vs
AMCC
L 59-63
−6.5
5
vs
UIW
W 80-67
+11.5
10
@
ETAM
L 69-77
−11.5
12
@
NWST
L 63-64
−3.5
17
vs
MCN
W 79-76
+12.5
19
vs
SELA
W 68-65
−2.5
24
@
HCU
W 68-51
+14.5
26
@
AMCC
W 64-55
+11.5
31
@
UIW
W 106-93
+11.5
2
vs
HCU
W 74-57
+7.5
7
@
NOLA
W 95-76
+17.5
9
@
NICH
W 92-72
+16.5
14
vs
SFA
L 57-66
−7.5
16
vs
LAM
W 70-65
−1.5
21
@
SELA
W 96-75
+16.5
23
@
MCN
L 68-75
+4.5
28
vs
ETAM
W 63-55
−2.5
2
vs
NWST
W 74-62
+2.5
9
vs
NICH
W 86-68
+12.5
10
vs
MCN
L 80-84
+4.5
covered 18didn’t cover 13avg +4.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
BAY
L 81-96
+22.5
8
@
SUU
W 95-72
+6.5
11
@
BOIS
L 65-85
−11.5
22
@
MOST
L 67-74
−8.5
24
@
ILL
L 73-87
−4.5
3
@
SFA
L 60-73
−10.5
7
vs
APSU
W 63-50
−38.5
11
vs
UTA
L 50-58
−37.5
16
@
LAM
W 83-72
+15.5
29
vs
NOLA
L 69-85
+1.5
31
vs
NICH
L 69-71
−5.5
3
vs
AMCC
L 59-63
−15.5
5
vs
UIW
W 80-67
+0.5
10
@
ETAM
L 69-77
+0.5
12
@
NWST
L 63-64
−16.5
17
vs
MCN
W 79-76
+8.5
19
vs
SELA
W 68-65
−2.5
24
@
HCU
W 68-51
−21.5
26
@
AMCC
W 64-55
−16.5
31
@
UIW
W 106-93
+58.5
2
vs
HCU
W 74-57
−10.5
7
@
NOLA
W 95-76
+19.5
9
@
NICH
W 92-72
+16.5
14
vs
SFA
L 57-66
−21.5
16
vs
LAM
W 70-65
−6.5
21
@
SELA
W 96-75
+32.5
23
@
MCN
L 68-75
−3.5
28
vs
ETAM
W 63-55
−28.5
2
vs
NWST
W 74-62
−3.5
9
vs
NICH
W 86-68
+10.5
10
vs
MCN
L 80-84
+23.5
over 13under 18avg −1.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Texas St
30 games played
Straight up
17-13
57% wins
Against the spread
14-16
47% covers · avg −0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-14
53% overs · avg +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 48-83 | +5.5 | L −29.5 | 146.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 71-79 | +12.5 | W +4.5 | 146.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 80-69 | -2.5 | W +8.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 77-67 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 63-49 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 138.5 | U 112 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 65-56 | -5.5 | W +3.5 | 131.5 | U 121 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 52-66 | +7.5 | L −6.5 | 136.5 | U 118 |
| Nov 29 | vs | L 74-78 | -6.5 | L −10.5 | 135.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 72-77 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 133.5 | O 149 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 86-83 | -3.5 | L −0.5 | 142.5 | O 169 |
| Dec 17 | vs | L 70-89 | +4.5 | L −14.5 | 151.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 67-65 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 136.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 80-100 | +8.5 | L −11.5 | 145.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 84-79 | -10.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 70-80 | +2.5 | L −7.5 | 144.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 82-83 | +11.5 | W +10.5 | 156.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 59-54 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 133.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 74-67 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 70-72 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | O 142 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 57-82 | +5.5 | L −19.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 72-68 | +3.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 81-64 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 143.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 77-71 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 151.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 77-61 | -6.5 | W +9.5 | 146.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 74-62 | +5.5 | W +17.5 | 140.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 95-84 | -14.5 | L −3.5 | 149.5 | O 179 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 90-82 | +3.5 | W +11.5 | 137.5 | O 172 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 54-67 | -3.5 | L −16.5 | 134.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 27 | vs | W 60-57 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 135.5 | U 117 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 77-81 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 140.5 | O 158 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
BGSU
L 48-83
−29.5
8
@
TULN
L 71-79
+4.5
12
vs
UTSA
W 80-69
+8.5
15
vs
TXSO
W 77-67
+5.5
18
vs
ACU
W 63-49
+12.5
21
vs
LR
W 65-56
+3.5
28
vs
SEA
L 52-66
−6.5
29
vs
LEH
L 74-78
−10.5
3
@
RICE
L 72-77
−1.5
10
vs
SOU
W 86-83
−0.5
17
vs
ARST
L 70-89
−14.5
20
vs
USA
W 67-65
−1.5
31
@
TROY
L 80-100
−11.5
3
@
ULM
W 84-79
−5.5
8
@
USM
L 70-80
−7.5
10
@
ARST
L 82-83
+10.5
14
vs
UL
W 59-54
−3.5
17
vs
USM
W 74-67
+4.5
22
@
CCU
L 70-72
−0.5
24
@
JMU
L 57-82
−19.5
28
vs
MRSH
W 72-68
+7.5
31
vs
ODU
W 81-64
+14.5
4
@
GASO
W 77-71
+10.5
7
vs
WMU
W 77-61
+9.5
11
vs
TROY
W 74-62
+17.5
14
vs
ULM
W 95-84
−3.5
19
@
USA
W 90-82
+11.5
21
@
UL
L 54-67
−16.5
27
vs
APP
W 60-57
+4.5
6
vs
USM
L 77-81
−5.5
covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
BGSU
L 48-83
−15.5
8
@
TULN
L 71-79
+3.5
12
vs
UTSA
W 80-69
+1.5
15
vs
TXSO
W 77-67
−0.5
18
vs
ACU
W 63-49
−26.5
21
vs
LR
W 65-56
−10.5
28
vs
SEA
L 52-66
−18.5
29
vs
LEH
L 74-78
+16.5
3
@
RICE
L 72-77
+15.5
10
vs
SOU
W 86-83
+26.5
17
vs
ARST
L 70-89
+7.5
20
vs
USA
W 67-65
−4.5
31
@
TROY
L 80-100
+34.5
3
@
ULM
W 84-79
+12.5
8
@
USM
L 70-80
+5.5
10
@
ARST
L 82-83
+8.5
14
vs
UL
W 59-54
−20.5
17
vs
USM
W 74-67
+0.5
22
@
CCU
L 70-72
+1.5
24
@
JMU
L 57-82
−4.5
28
vs
MRSH
W 72-68
−7.5
31
vs
ODU
W 81-64
+1.5
4
@
GASO
W 77-71
−3.5
7
vs
WMU
W 77-61
−8.5
11
vs
TROY
W 74-62
−4.5
14
vs
ULM
W 95-84
+29.5
19
@
USA
W 90-82
+34.5
21
@
UL
L 54-67
−13.5
27
vs
APP
W 60-57
−18.5
6
vs
USM
L 77-81
+17.5
over 16under 14avg +2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Texas St has the better starters
Position by position: UT Rio Grande 0, Texas St 2, even 3
UT Rio GrandeBetterTexas St
G D. Pryor TR2.9 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 41
→TXSTSmall
G M. Drone14 pts · 3.3 reb · 2.9 ast
Score 56
G A. Wright2.8 pts · 1.6 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 2
→TXSTBig
G Q. House TR15.1 pts · 3.4 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 84
G J. Posey TR4.8 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 75
=Even
G K. Younger TR15.1 pts · 4.3 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 76
G B. Knight TR2.4 pts · 0.5 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F D. Hall15.7 pts · 7.8 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 94
G L. Ramirez0 pts · 1 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F P. Djobet TR17.5 pts · 6.6 reb · 2 ast
Score 89
UT Rio GrandeBetterTexas St
RGV offense297th of 366 · -9.2
→TXSTBig
TXST defense112th of 366 · -1.4
RGV defense265th of 366 · -6.8
→TXSTBig
TXST offense105th of 366 · -1.4
Backcourt-4.0 · 5 players
→TXSTBig
Backcourt+2.5 · 3 players
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
=No call
Frontcourt+7.5 · 2 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-0.3 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestRGV betterTXST betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
D. Pryor18 min · TRA. Wright15 minJ. Posey12 min · TRB. Knight8 min · TRL. Ramirez2 minJ. BlairNew
Forwards
T. WrightNewJ. HillNewB. CrawfordNewK. CorbittNew
Guards
M. Drone31 minQ. House31 min · TRK. Younger29 min · TRK. Gumbs28 minD. Pernell22 minC. Steger11 min · TR
Forwards
D. Hall30 minP. Djobet30 min · TRR. Jessamy27 min · TRK. GrandisonNewD. AbisogunNewK. SandersNew
Centers
R. Fields16 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 73.7 #210 | Points per game | 71.9 #247 |
| 1.10 #137 | Points per possession | 1.06 #230 |
| 67.3 #268 | Pace (possessions) | 68.2 #223 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.8 #44 | Effective FG% | 50.0 #238 |
| 36.8 #35 | 3-point % | 32.2 #271 |
| 43.7 #95 | 3-point attempt rate | 24.6 #364 |
| 28.9 #332 | Free throw rate | 34.0 #211 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.5 #296 | Turnover rate | 18.7 #309 |
| 28.2 #257 | Offensive rebound rate | 33.9 #68 |
| 15.7 #58 | Assists per game | 12.7 #239 |
| Defense | ||
| 70.6 #67 | Points allowed | 72.5 #117 |
| 1.05 #86 | Points allowed per possession | 1.06 #106 |
| 47.8 #38 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.0 #210 |
| 30.4 #16 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.7 #293 |
| 16.2 #210 | Turnovers forced | 18.5 #75 |
| 67.9 #266 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.6 #81 |
| 5.9 #243 | Steals per game | 7.9 #41 |
| 2.8 #266 | Blocks per game | 3.6 #120 |
UT Rio Grande
17-14 in 2025-26 overall · 15-9 in conference · Southland Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs McNeese80–84
- Wvs Nicholls86–68
- Wvs N'Western St74–62
- Wvs East Texas A&M63–55
- L@ McNeese68–75
A week or more of rest.
Texas St
17-13 in 2025-26 overall · 11-8 in conference · Pac-12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Southern Miss77–81
- Wvs App State60–57
- L@ Louisiana54–67
- W@ South Alabama90–82
- Wvs UL Monroe95–84
A week or more of rest.