Mitchell Center · at South Alabama
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | USA | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 USA 73–71 · win probability USA 58%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 143.7
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: USA has more of the edges
JXST 2, USA 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Turnovers
Turnover rate: JXST 17.0%, USA 13.1%. Forced: JXST 16.2%, USA 18.0%
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: JXST 29.8%, USA 25.0%. Defensive: JXST 72.0%, USA 68.6%
Free throws
Free throw rate: JXST 43.1, USA 38.5. Allowed: JXST 38.7, USA 25.4
USA offense vs JXST defense
Offense 242nd of 366 against a defense 172nd, on the model’s ratings
Shooting
Effective FG%: JXST 49.7 and allows 49.6; USA 52.6 and allows 50.1
Home court
USA at home. This season: USA 0-0 at home, JXST 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: JXST 0%, USA 21%. Transfers in: JXST 8, USA 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
JXST offense vs USA defense
Offense 245th of 366 against a defense 212th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Three-pointers
JXST hits 35.7% and allows 33.3%; USA hits 34.5% and allows 33.1%. Threes are 38.1% and 36.5% of their shots
Context
Schedule so far
JXST has played the 196th-hardest schedule, USA the 223rd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: JXST plays 66.3 a game (302nd fastest), USA 67.1 (277th). 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 | — | USA -2.3 | — |
| Total | — | 143.7 | — |
| Projected score | — | JXST 70.7 · USA 73 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | USA -1.3 | — |
| 1H total | 67.2 | — |
| 1H projected score | JXST 33 · USA 34.2 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3-7 30% | 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | |
| 5-5 50% | 7-3 70% | 6-4 60% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
JXST 1–4 USAUSA leads · 5 games since 2021-22 · USA has won the last 2 meetings · JXST 3-2 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2025-26 | USA 71 @ JXST 65 | JXST -2.5 | USA W |
| Dec 8, 2024-25 | JXST 74 @ USA 76 | USA -4.5 | JXST W |
| Nov 30, 2023-24 | USA 52 @ JXST 70 | JXST -2.5 | JXST W |
| Dec 21, 2022-23 | JXST 66 @ USA 71 | USA -8.5 | JXST W |
| Dec 4, 2021-22 | USA 74 @ JXST 64 | JXST -3.5 | USA W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Jax State
29 games played
Straight up
12-17
41% wins
Against the spread
13-16
45% covers · avg +0 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-12
59% overs · avg +0.3 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 14 | vs | W 74-67 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 139.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 19 | vs | L 65-71 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 135.5 | O 136 |
| Nov 24 | @ | L 63-74 | +4.5 | L −6.5 | 155.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 43-56 | +3.5 | L −9.5 | 142.5 | U 99 |
| Dec 1 | vs | L 66-73 | -6.5 | L −13.5 | 134.5 | O 139 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 73-77 | -3.5 | L −7.5 | 139.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 17 | vs | L 59-62 | -2.5 | L −5.5 | 142.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 81-75 | +9.5 | W +15.5 | 134.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 78-67 | +2.5 | W +13.5 | 142.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 2 | @ | W 67-64 | -4.5 | L −1.5 | 126.5 | O 131 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 69-78 | +9.5 | W +0.5 | 134.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 71-64 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 82-88 | +5.5 | L −0.5 | 149.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 14 | vs | L 62-77 | -1.5 | L −16.5 | 150.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 64-60 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 127.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 23 | vs | W 75-58 | +1.5 | W +18.5 | 133.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 78-74 | +3.5 | W +7.5 | 148.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 67-74 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 135.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 5 | @ | W 71-66 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 140.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 77-58 | +1.5 | W +20.5 | 149.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 64-69 | -6.5 | L −11.5 | 134.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 70-79 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 139.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 71-77 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 132.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 78-82 | +6.5 | W +2.5 | 147.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 80-70 | -7.5 | W +2.5 | 133.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 78-81 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 139.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 5 | @ | L 75-77 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 64-61 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 139.5 | U 125 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 63-68 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
14
vs
CCU
W 74-67
−0.5
19
vs
USA
L 65-71
−8.5
24
@
ARST
L 63-74
−6.5
26
vs
NDSU
L 43-56
−9.5
1
vs
UNA
L 66-73
−13.5
13
@
GAST
L 73-77
−7.5
17
vs
EKU
L 59-62
−5.5
20
@
ETSU
W 81-75
+15.5
29
vs
WKU
W 78-67
+13.5
2
@
DEL
W 67-64
−1.5
4
@
LIB
L 69-78
+0.5
7
vs
FIU
W 71-64
+5.5
10
@
KENN
L 82-88
−0.5
14
vs
SHSU
L 62-77
−16.5
17
vs
LT
W 64-60
−0.5
23
vs
MTSU
W 75-58
+18.5
28
@
FIU
W 78-74
+7.5
31
@
MOST
L 67-74
−2.5
5
@
WKU
W 71-66
+9.5
7
vs
KENN
W 77-58
+20.5
11
vs
UTEP
L 64-69
−11.5
14
vs
NMSU
L 70-79
−10.5
18
@
LT
L 71-77
−3.5
21
@
SHSU
L 78-82
+2.5
26
vs
DEL
W 80-70
+2.5
28
vs
LIB
L 78-81
+0.5
5
@
NMSU
L 75-77
+4.5
7
@
UTEP
W 64-61
+1.5
10
vs
NMSU
L 63-68
−3.5
covered 13didn’t cover 16avg +0 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
14
vs
CCU
W 74-67
+1.5
19
vs
USA
L 65-71
+0.5
24
@
ARST
L 63-74
−18.5
26
vs
NDSU
L 43-56
−43.5
1
vs
UNA
L 66-73
+4.5
13
@
GAST
L 73-77
+10.5
17
vs
EKU
L 59-62
−21.5
20
@
ETSU
W 81-75
+21.5
29
vs
WKU
W 78-67
+2.5
2
@
DEL
W 67-64
+4.5
4
@
LIB
L 69-78
+12.5
7
vs
FIU
W 71-64
−15.5
10
@
KENN
L 82-88
+20.5
14
vs
SHSU
L 62-77
−11.5
17
vs
LT
W 64-60
−3.5
23
vs
MTSU
W 75-58
−0.5
28
@
FIU
W 78-74
+3.5
31
@
MOST
L 67-74
+5.5
5
@
WKU
W 71-66
−3.5
7
vs
KENN
W 77-58
−14.5
11
vs
UTEP
L 64-69
−1.5
14
vs
NMSU
L 70-79
+9.5
18
@
LT
L 71-77
+15.5
21
@
SHSU
L 78-82
+12.5
26
vs
DEL
W 80-70
+16.5
28
vs
LIB
L 78-81
+19.5
5
@
NMSU
L 75-77
+6.5
7
@
UTEP
W 64-61
−14.5
10
vs
NMSU
L 63-68
−10.5
over 17under 12avg +0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
South Alabama
31 games played
Straight up
19-12
61% wins
Against the spread
17-14
55% covers · avg +1.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-15
52% overs · avg +2.3 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 | @ | W 76-74 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 150.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 76-70 | -18.5 | L −12.5 | 141.5 | O 146 |
| Nov 13 | vs | W 66-64 | -5.5 | L −3.5 | 142.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 72-62 | -18.5 | L −8.5 | 133.5 | O 134 |
| Nov 19 | @ | W 71-65 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 135.5 | O 136 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 72-80 | +7.5 | L −0.5 | 149.5 | O 152 |
| Nov 30 | @ | W 82-58 | -1.5 | W +22.5 | 141.5 | U 140 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 77-75 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 135.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 5 | @ | L 65-91 | +7.5 | L −18.5 | 143.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 14 | vs | L 57-58 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 135.5 | U 115 |
| Dec 17 | @ | W 96-92 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 148.5 | O 188 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 65-67 | +3.5 | W +1.5 | 136.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 31 | @ | W 63-58 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 127.5 | U 121 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 49-59 | +9.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | U 108 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 87-71 | -2.5 | W +13.5 | 148.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 91-87 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 154.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 56-59 | -9.5 | L −12.5 | 129.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 90-83 | +4.5 | W +11.5 | 138.5 | O 173 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 53-48 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 139.5 | U 101 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 69-67 | -5.5 | L −3.5 | 140.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 57-65 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 131.5 | U 122 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 81-69 | -3.5 | W +8.5 | 145.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 84-78 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 135.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 92-88 | +8.5 | W +12.5 | 149.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 80-84 | +6.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 82-90 | -3.5 | L −11.5 | 137.5 | O 172 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 65-54 | +2.5 | W +13.5 | 142.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 89-54 | -14.5 | W +20.5 | 153.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 27 | vs | L 55-68 | -4.5 | L −17.5 | 141.5 | U 123 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 85-94 | -4.5 | L −13.5 | 149.5 | O 179 |
| Mar 17 | @ | L 67-78 | +18.5 | W +7.5 | 151.5 | U 145 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
TOL
W 76-74
+4.5
6
vs
ALCN
W 76-70
−12.5
13
vs
CMU
W 66-64
−3.5
15
vs
COPP
W 72-62
−8.5
19
@
JXST
W 71-65
+8.5
21
@
UAB
L 72-80
−0.5
30
@
UTSA
W 82-58
+22.5
2
vs
NMSU
W 77-75
+4.5
5
@
ETSU
L 65-91
−18.5
14
vs
UNT
L 57-58
−2.5
17
@
ULM
W 96-92
−5.5
20
@
TXST
L 65-67
+1.5
31
@
UL
W 63-58
+1.5
3
@
TROY
L 49-59
−0.5
10
vs
GASO
W 87-71
+13.5
15
vs
ARST
W 91-87
+8.5
17
vs
UL
L 56-59
−12.5
22
@
JMU
W 90-83
+11.5
29
vs
CCU
W 53-48
+1.5
31
vs
GAST
W 69-67
−3.5
4
@
APP
L 57-65
−2.5
7
vs
BUF
W 81-69
+8.5
12
@
USM
W 84-78
+7.5
14
@
ARST
W 92-88
+12.5
16
@
MRSH
L 80-84
+2.5
19
vs
TXST
L 82-90
−11.5
21
vs
TROY
W 65-54
+13.5
25
vs
ULM
W 89-54
+20.5
27
vs
USM
L 55-68
−17.5
6
vs
GASO
L 85-94
−13.5
17
@
AUB
L 67-78
+7.5
covered 17didn’t cover 14avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
TOL
W 76-74
−0.5
6
vs
ALCN
W 76-70
+4.5
13
vs
CMU
W 66-64
−12.5
15
vs
COPP
W 72-62
+0.5
19
@
JXST
W 71-65
+0.5
21
@
UAB
L 72-80
+2.5
30
@
UTSA
W 82-58
−1.5
2
vs
NMSU
W 77-75
+16.5
5
@
ETSU
L 65-91
+12.5
14
vs
UNT
L 57-58
−20.5
17
@
ULM
W 96-92
+39.5
20
@
TXST
L 65-67
−4.5
31
@
UL
W 63-58
−6.5
3
@
TROY
L 49-59
−40.5
10
vs
GASO
W 87-71
+9.5
15
vs
ARST
W 91-87
+23.5
17
vs
UL
L 56-59
−14.5
22
@
JMU
W 90-83
+34.5
29
vs
CCU
W 53-48
−38.5
31
vs
GAST
W 69-67
−4.5
4
@
APP
L 57-65
−9.5
7
vs
BUF
W 81-69
+4.5
12
@
USM
W 84-78
+26.5
14
@
ARST
W 92-88
+30.5
16
@
MRSH
L 80-84
+13.5
19
vs
TXST
L 82-90
+34.5
21
vs
TROY
W 65-54
−23.5
25
vs
ULM
W 89-54
−10.5
27
vs
USM
L 55-68
−18.5
6
vs
GASO
L 85-94
+29.5
17
@
AUB
L 67-78
−6.5
over 16under 15avg +2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
South Alabama has the better starters
Position by position: Jax State 0, South Alabama 1, even 4
Jax StateBetterSouth Alabama
G J. Stiemke TR9.7 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 28
=No call
G A. Goldstein NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
G C. Lockett TR9.2 pts · 2.9 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 49
=No call
G A. Lewis NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
F N. Cunningham TR5.1 pts · 1.1 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 38
=No call
G J. Langsy NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
F M. Hill TR2.2 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.1 ast
Score 7
→USABig
F P. Law13.1 pts · 5.7 reb · 1 ast
Score 86
F B. Walker TR4.7 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.5 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F S. Williams6 pts · 4.2 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 84
Jax StateBetterSouth Alabama
JXST offense245th of 366 · -7.4
=Even
USA defense212th of 366 · -5.4
JXST defense172nd of 366 · -3.9
←JXSTSmall
USA offense242nd of 366 · -7.3
Backcourt-2.6 · 2 players
=No call
BackcourtNo numbers yet
Frontcourt-0.9 · 3 players
→USABig
Frontcourt+3.5 · 2 players
Bench+0.3 · 3 players
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestJXST betterUSA betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Stiemke28 min · TRC. Lockett25 min · TRL. Horner9 min · TRG. GondrezickNewJ. VickNewN. HernandezNew
Forwards
N. Cunningham13 min · TRM. Hill10 min · TRB. Walker9 min · TRE. Croley5 min · TRK. Polk1 min · TRA. CurryNew
Guards
A. GoldsteinNewA. LewisNewJ. LangsyNewS. ShoptawNewD. WilliamsNewD. RomanNew
Forwards
P. Law26 minS. Williams15 minL. KunzewitschNewO. KenneyNewR. WilliamsNewD. HueittNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 69.9 #287 | Points per game | 73.2 #218 |
| 1.05 #241 | Points per possession | 1.10 #139 |
| 66.3 #302 | Pace (possessions) | 67.1 #277 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.7 #253 | Effective FG% | 52.6 #120 |
| 35.7 #76 | 3-point % | 34.5 #146 |
| 38.1 #209 | 3-point attempt rate | 36.5 #237 |
| 43.1 #21 | Free throw rate | 38.5 #89 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.0 #204 | Turnover rate | 13.1 #8 |
| 29.8 #208 | Offensive rebound rate | 25.0 #341 |
| 11.6 #310 | Assists per game | 11.9 #287 |
| Defense | ||
| 70.6 #66 | Points allowed | 71.3 #85 |
| 1.06 #120 | Points allowed per possession | 1.06 #100 |
| 49.6 #85 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.1 #105 |
| 33.3 #141 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.1 #133 |
| 16.2 #208 | Turnovers forced | 18.0 #96 |
| 72.0 #67 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.6 #222 |
| 5.8 #252 | Steals per game | 7.9 #46 |
| 3.0 #233 | Blocks per game | 2.2 #330 |
Jax State
12-17 in 2025-26 overall · 10-11 in conference · Conference USA
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs New Mexico St63–68
- W@ UTEP64–61
- L@ New Mexico St75–77
- Lvs Liberty78–81
- Wvs Delaware80–70
A week or more of rest.
South Alabama
19-12 in 2025-26 overall · 11-8 in conference · Sun Belt Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Auburn67–78
- Lvs GA Southern85–94
- Lvs Southern Miss55–68
- Wvs UL Monroe89–54
- Wvs Troy65–54
A week or more of rest.