Incarnate Word Cardinals at UTEP Miners: Model Line and Edge

Sun, Nov 8, 6:00 PM ETDon Haskins Center · at UTEP

#190UTEPUTEP

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Incarnate Word and UTEP
UIW	This season	UTEP
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 UTEP 76–68 · win probability UTEP 74%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 144.3

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: UTEP has more of the edges

UIW 2, UTEP 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

Context

Schedule so far

UIW has played the 285th-hardest schedule, UTEP the 163rd. A record against a soft schedule means less

UTEPBig

UIW offense vs UTEP defense

Offense 291st of 366 against a defense 173rd, on the model’s ratings

UIWBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: UIW 32.1%, UTEP 26.2%. Defensive: UIW 68.0%, UTEP 67.2%

UTEPSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: UIW 17.1%, UTEP 17.4%. Forced: UIW 15.8%, UTEP 18.0%

UTEPSmall

UTEP offense vs UIW defense

Offense 226th of 366 against a defense 280th, on the model’s ratings

UTEPSmall

Home court

UTEP at home. This season: UTEP 0-0 at home, UIW 0-0 away

UIWSmall

Three-pointers

UIW hits 36.1% and allows 34.4%; UTEP hits 33.9% and allows 34.0%. Threes are 39.1% and 40.3% of their shots

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: UIW 17%, UTEP 0%. Transfers in: UIW 5, UTEP 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: UIW 50.2 and allows 54.5; UTEP 48.3 and allows 51.5

Context

Tempo

About 66 possessions: UIW plays 65.4 a game (335th fastest), UTEP 66.6 (291st). Faster games mean more points

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: UIW 34.0, UTEP 33.4. Allowed: UIW 41.6, UTEP 42.0

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	—	UTEP -7.5	—
Total	—	144.3	—
Projected score	—	UIW 68.4 · UTEP 75.9

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	UTEP -4.3	—
1H total	67.5	—
1H projected score	UIW 31.6 · UTEP 35.9	—

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
UIW LWLWL	10-18	36%	4-10	—
UTEP WLLWL	13-15	46%	6-7	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
UIW UOUUO	14-14	50%	9-19
UTEP UOOOU	13-15	46%	8-20

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
UIW	3-7 30%	3-7 30%	4-6 40%
UTEP	4-6 40%	6-4 60%	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

Incarnate Word

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 11	@ UCD	No recent meeting
Nov 18	@ TXST	L57–75LO
Nov 25	@ HAW	No recent meeting

UTEP

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 12	vs NMSU	L63–67WU
Nov 15	vs FAMU	W67–53WU
Nov 19	@ NMSU	L63–67WU

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

Incarnate Word

28 games played

Straight up

9-19

32% wins

Against the spread

10-18

36% covers · avg −2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-14

50% overs · avg +1.4 pts vs the total

Straight up

9-1932%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

10-1836%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

14-1450%

O U O O U U O U O O U O U U O U O O O U U U 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 3	@CSU	L 64-98	+10.5	L −23.5	147.5	O 162
Nov 16	@IU	L 61-69	+28.5	W +20.5	157.5	U 130
Nov 20	vsUSI	W 87-81	-9.5	L −3.5	145.5	O 168
Nov 22	vsHPU	L 80-91	+12.5	W +1.5	160.5	O 171
Dec 1	vsMCN	W 71-67	+10.5	W +14.5	145.5	U 138
Dec 6	@NICH	L 67-74	-1.5	L −8.5	145.5	U 141
Dec 8	@NOLA	L 83-84	-1.5	L −2.5	148.5	O 167
Dec 15	@TCU	L 65-69	+19.5	W +15.5	143.5	U 134
Dec 21	vsNAU	W 90-66	-6.5	W +17.5	140.5	O 156
Dec 30	vsSELA	W 79-70	-6.5	W +2.5	135.5	O 149
Jan 3	vsHCU	W 73-56	-6.5	W +10.5	141.5	U 129
Jan 5	@RGV	L 67-80	+1.5	L −11.5	146.5	O 147
Jan 10	@LAM	L 51-63	+1.5	L −10.5	140.5	U 114
Jan 12	@SFA	L 46-56	+7.5	L −2.5	140.5	U 102
Jan 17	vsNWST	W 76-74	-8.5	L −6.5	141.5	O 150
Jan 19	vsETAM	L 58-80	-6.5	L −28.5	142.5	U 138
Jan 24	vsAMCC	L 71-79	-1.5	L −9.5	136.5	O 150
Jan 27	@HCU	L 75-81	-1.5	L −7.5	140.5	O 156
Jan 31	vsRGV	L 93-106	+1.5	L −11.5	140.5	O 199
Feb 2	@AMCC	W 71-69	+4.5	W +6.5	140.5	U 140
Feb 7	@MCN	L 64-81	+16.5	L −0.5	145.5	U 145
Feb 9	@SELA	L 62-74	+1.5	L −10.5	137.5	U 136
Feb 14	vsNICH	L 83-91	-2.5	L −10.5	148.5	O 174
Feb 16	vsNOLA	L 64-78	-2.5	L −16.5	154.5	U 142
Feb 21	@ETAM	W 82-73	+3.5	W +12.5	145.5	O 155
Feb 23	@NWST	L 49-54	+1.5	L −3.5	138.5	U 103
Feb 28	vsLAM	W 72-60	-1.5	W +10.5	138.5	U 132
Mar 2	vsSFA	L 68-76	+7.5	L −0.5	142.5	O 144

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

CSU

L 64-98

−23.5

L 61-69

+20.5

USI

W 87-81

−3.5

HPU

L 80-91

+1.5

MCN

W 71-67

+14.5

NICH

L 67-74

−8.5

NOLA

L 83-84

−2.5

TCU

L 65-69

+15.5

NAU

W 90-66

+17.5

SELA

W 79-70

+2.5

HCU

W 73-56

+10.5

RGV

L 67-80

−11.5

LAM

L 51-63

−10.5

SFA

L 46-56

−2.5

NWST

W 76-74

−6.5

ETAM

L 58-80

−28.5

AMCC

L 71-79

−9.5

HCU

L 75-81

−7.5

RGV

L 93-106

−11.5

AMCC

W 71-69

+6.5

MCN

L 64-81

−0.5

SELA

L 62-74

−10.5

NICH

L 83-91

−10.5

NOLA

L 64-78

−16.5

ETAM

W 82-73

+12.5

NWST

L 49-54

−3.5

LAM

W 72-60

+10.5

SFA

L 68-76

−0.5

covered 10didn’t cover 18avg −2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

CSU

L 64-98

+14.5

L 61-69

−27.5

USI

W 87-81

+22.5

HPU

L 80-91

+10.5

MCN

W 71-67

−7.5

NICH

L 67-74

−4.5

NOLA

L 83-84

+18.5

TCU

L 65-69

−9.5

NAU

W 90-66

+15.5

SELA

W 79-70

+13.5

HCU

W 73-56

−12.5

RGV

L 67-80

+0.5

LAM

L 51-63

−26.5

SFA

L 46-56

−38.5

NWST

W 76-74

+8.5

ETAM

L 58-80

−4.5

AMCC

L 71-79

+13.5

HCU

L 75-81

+15.5

RGV

L 93-106

+58.5

AMCC

W 71-69

−0.5

MCN

L 64-81

−0.5

SELA

L 62-74

−1.5

NICH

L 83-91

+25.5

NOLA

L 64-78

−12.5

ETAM

W 82-73

+9.5

NWST

L 49-54

−35.5

LAM

W 72-60

−6.5

SFA

L 68-76

+1.5

over 14under 14avg +1.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

UTEP

28 games played

Straight up

8-20

29% wins

Against the spread

13-15

46% covers · avg −1.7 pts vs the line

Over / Under

13-15

46% overs · avg −1.4 pts vs the total

Straight up

8-2029%

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

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

13-1546%

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

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

13-1546%

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

3 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 11	vsLMU	L 58-71	-1.5	L −14.5	144.5	U 129
Nov 15	@USU	L 51-75	+16.5	L −7.5	149.5	U 126
Nov 24	vsW&M	L 63-74	+2.5	L −8.5	159.5	U 137
Nov 25	vsUAB	L 59-75	+8.5	L −7.5	146.5	U 134
Dec 7	@SEA	L 68-75	+12.5	W +5.5	136.5	O 143
Dec 13	@HAW	L 61-66	+12.5	W +7.5	138.5	U 127
Dec 21	vsNORF	L 71-72	-10.5	L −11.5	136.5	O 143
Dec 22	vsNDSU	W 76-66	+2.5	W +12.5	139.5	O 142
Dec 29	@LT	L 63-75	+2.5	L −9.5	130.5	O 138
Jan 2	@MOST	L 55-79	+3.5	L −20.5	131.5	O 134
Jan 4	@FIU	L 64-76	+6.5	L −5.5	152.5	U 140
Jan 8	vsMTSU	W 83-80	+3.5	W +6.5	137.5	O 163
Jan 10	vsWKU	L 56-68	+3.5	L −8.5	144.5	U 124
Jan 15	@DEL	W 70-69	+1.5	W +2.5	125.5	O 139
Jan 17	@LIB	L 69-80	+13.5	W +2.5	137.5	O 149
Jan 22	vsFIU	W 83-77	+1.5	W +7.5	151.5	O 160
Jan 24	vsMOST	L 57-62	+1.5	L −3.5	139.5	U 119
Jan 28	vsLT	L 59-69	-2.5	L −12.5	130.5	U 128
Jan 31	vsDEL	W 70-55	-6.5	W +8.5	128.5	U 125
Feb 4	@SHSU	L 66-70	+10.5	W +6.5	145.5	U 136
Feb 7	vsNMSU	W 91-88	+1.5	W +4.5	138.5	O 179
Feb 11	@JXST	W 69-64	+6.5	W +11.5	134.5	U 133
Feb 14	vsLIB	L 64-73	+6.5	L −2.5	139.5	U 137
Feb 21	@NMSU	L 63-67	+7.5	W +3.5	142.5	U 130
Feb 26	@MTSU	L 67-77	+8.5	L −1.5	139.5	O 144
Feb 28	@WKU	L 65-97	+9.5	L −22.5	145.5	O 162
Mar 5	vsKENN	W 78-71	+3.5	W +10.5	148.5	O 149
Mar 7	vsJXST	L 61-64	+1.5	L −1.5	139.5	U 125

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

LMU

L 58-71

−14.5

USU

L 51-75

−7.5

W&M

L 63-74

−8.5

UAB

L 59-75

−7.5

SEA

L 68-75

+5.5

HAW

L 61-66

+7.5

NORF

L 71-72

−11.5

NDSU

W 76-66

+12.5

L 63-75

−9.5

MOST

L 55-79

−20.5

FIU

L 64-76

−5.5

MTSU

W 83-80

+6.5

WKU

L 56-68

−8.5

DEL

W 70-69

+2.5

LIB

L 69-80

+2.5

FIU

W 83-77

+7.5

MOST

L 57-62

−3.5

L 59-69

−12.5

DEL

W 70-55

+8.5

SHSU

L 66-70

+6.5

NMSU

W 91-88

+4.5

JXST

W 69-64

+11.5

LIB

L 64-73

−2.5

NMSU

L 63-67

+3.5

MTSU

L 67-77

−1.5

WKU

L 65-97

−22.5

KENN

W 78-71

+10.5

JXST

L 61-64

−1.5

covered 13didn’t cover 15avg −1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

LMU

L 58-71

−15.5

USU

L 51-75

−23.5

W&M

L 63-74

−22.5

UAB

L 59-75

−12.5

SEA

L 68-75

+6.5

HAW

L 61-66

−11.5

NORF

L 71-72

+6.5

NDSU

W 76-66

+2.5

L 63-75

+7.5

MOST

L 55-79

+2.5

FIU

L 64-76

−12.5

MTSU

W 83-80

+25.5

WKU

L 56-68

−20.5

DEL

W 70-69

+13.5

LIB

L 69-80

+11.5

FIU

W 83-77

+8.5

MOST

L 57-62

−20.5

L 59-69

−2.5

DEL

W 70-55

−3.5

SHSU

L 66-70

−9.5

NMSU

W 91-88

+40.5

JXST

W 69-64

−1.5

LIB

L 64-73

−2.5

NMSU

L 63-67

−12.5

MTSU

L 67-77

+4.5

WKU

L 65-97

+16.5

KENN

W 78-71

+0.5

JXST

L 61-64

−14.5

over 13under 15avg −1.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

UTEP has the better starters

Position by position: Incarnate Word 0, UTEP 1, even 4

Incarnate WordBetterUTEP

G I. Habib14.4 pts · 3.5 reb · 2.7 ast Score 36

Even

G L. Moeller TR11.1 pts · 3.7 reb · 3.7 ast Score 46

G M. Conner TR7.8 pts · 3.4 reb · 6.2 ast Score 19

Even

G J. Whiting TR10.8 pts · 3.4 reb · 2.4 ast Score 31

G B. McCreesh TR7.4 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.6 ast Score 40

UTEPSmall

G R. Miller TR12.3 pts · 2.6 reb · 2.5 ast Score 66

F D. Goodwin TR4.3 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.6 ast Not ranked

No call

G R. Jackson TR6.7 pts · 2.9 reb · 0.6 ast Score 53

F G. Erheriene TR0.8 pts · 0.7 reb · 0 ast Not ranked

No call

F R. Cason TR3.9 pts · 3.4 reb · 0.3 ast Score 43

Incarnate WordBetterUTEP

UIW offense291st of 366 · -9.0

UTEPSmall

UTEP defense173rd of 366 · -3.9

UIW defense280th of 366 · -7.0

UTEPSmall

UTEP offense226th of 366 · -6.9

Backcourt-5.7 · 3 players

UTEPSmall

Backcourt-3.1 · 4 players

Frontcourt-1.2 · 2 players

Even

Frontcourt-0.4 · 1 player

Bench-0.1 · 2 players

UIWSmall

Bench-1.1 · 2 players

Score, worst to bestUIW betterUTEP 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

Incarnate Word

Guards

I. Habib33 minM. Conner30 min · TRB. McCreesh28 min · TRD. Barbee2 minJ. ThomasNewD. CasonNew

Forwards

D. Goodwin14 min · TRG. Erheriene5 min · TRK. Spencer2 min · TRD. EmetuNewK. IoaneNewT. CollinsNew

Centers

C. PareNew

UTEP

Guards

L. Moeller33 min · TRJ. Whiting32 min · TRR. Miller25 min · TRR. Jackson18 min · TRC. McDanielsNewD. CrissNew

Forwards

R. Cason15 min · TRA. Cassia10 min · TRJ. Ratowski7 min · TRM. KelvinNewI. WardNewI. PerasovicNew

Centers

D. TarpleyNew

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

UIW70.4 #275

UTEP66.4 #340

Points per possession

UIW1.07 #206

UTEP1.00 #326

Pace (possessions)

UIW65.4 #335

UTEP66.6 #291

Shooting

Effective FG%

UIW50.2 #228

UTEP48.3 #309

3-point %

UIW36.1 #54

UTEP33.9 #178

3-point attempt rate

UIW39.1 #190

UTEP40.3 #163

Free throw rate

UIW34.0 #210

UTEP33.4 #227

Possessions

Turnover rate

UIW17.1 #206

UTEP17.4 #229

Offensive rebound rate

UIW32.1 #120

UTEP26.2 #319

Assists per game

UIW10.8 #342

UTEP11.0 #338

Defense

Points allowed

UIW75.0 #189

UTEP72.7 #125

Points allowed per possession

UIW1.15 #331

UTEP1.09 #196

Opponent effective FG%

UIW54.5 #314

UTEP51.5 #187

Opponent 3-point %

UIW34.4 #214

UTEP34.0 #182

Turnovers forced

UIW15.8 #233

UTEP18.0 #98

Defensive rebound rate

UIW68.0 #260

UTEP67.2 #293

Steals per game

UIW5.1 #329

UTEP7.1 #113

Blocks per game

UIW2.4 #310

UTEP3.5 #149

UIW		UTEP
Scoring
70.4 #275	Points per game	66.4 #340
1.07 #206	Points per possession	1.00 #326
65.4 #335	Pace (possessions)	66.6 #291
Shooting
50.2 #228	Effective FG%	48.3 #309
36.1 #54	3-point %	33.9 #178
39.1 #190	3-point attempt rate	40.3 #163
34.0 #210	Free throw rate	33.4 #227
Possessions
17.1 #206	Turnover rate	17.4 #229
32.1 #120	Offensive rebound rate	26.2 #319
10.8 #342	Assists per game	11.0 #338
Defense
75.0 #189	Points allowed	72.7 #125
1.15 #331	Points allowed per possession	1.09 #196
54.5 #314	Opponent effective FG%	51.5 #187
34.4 #214	Opponent 3-point %	34.0 #182
15.8 #233	Turnovers forced	18.0 #98
68.0 #260	Defensive rebound rate	67.2 #293
5.1 #329	Steals per game	7.1 #113
2.4 #310	Blocks per game	3.5 #149

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.

Incarnate Word

9-19 in 2025-26 overall · 7-15 in conference · Southland Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs SF Austin68–76
Wvs Lamar72–60
L@ N'Western St49–54
W@ East Texas A&M82–73
Lvs LSU N Orleans64–78

A week or more of rest.

UTEP

8-20 in 2025-26 overall · 7-13 in conference · Mountain West Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Jax State61–64
Wvs Kennesaw St78–71
L@ Western KY65–97
L@ MTSU67–77
L@ New Mexico St63–67

A week or more of rest.

Incarnate Word Cardinals at UTEP Miners

What could decide it: UTEP has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Incarnate Word

UTEP

UTEP has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Incarnate Word

UTEP