CBB Matchups
Every D1 game with tempo-free ratings, four factors and market lines, one place.
College basketball is being built for the 2026-27 season (tip-off Nov 3). What's here fills in as games are played.
Non-conferenceUTSA Convocation Center, San Antonio, TX
Army
Efficiency #336
2025-26: 11-21 · 5-14 conf
@
UTSA
Efficiency #350
2025-26: 5-25 · 1-17 conf
Thu, Nov 26 · TBD
73.8
win 43%
Projected
76.0
win 57%
No line posted yet.
Model: UTSA −2.1 · total 149.8 · ratings as of Sat, Oct 3
Preseason ratings start from 2025-26's final adjusted ratings, regressed toward the D1 average. The stats below are 2025-26's too; both update once 2026-27 games are played.
How the projection is built
each step, from an average D-I game to this oneProjected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: UTSA 69.1, Army 68.2 → 69.0 possessions
+1.4
UTSA offense vs Army defense
−0.8
Army offense vs UTSA defense
+1.0
Projected total
149.8
Axis starts at 147 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
UTSA offense vs Army defense
−0.8
Army offense vs UTSA defense
−1.0
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.0
UTSA by 2.1
2.1
Army side ◂▸ UTSA side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to +2.2 against +2.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help UTSA.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 69.0, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, UTSA is the faster team (69.6, #111 of 365) and Army the slower (67.2, #234). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
69.0
per team, 40 min
Projected total
149.8
model
Projected team totals
73.8 / 76.0
Army / UTSA
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.2#195
Army
69.1#112
UTSA
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetClashArmy
Style match: 3-point volume
Army takes 53.3% of its shots from three; UTSA lets opponents take 43.3% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 53.0% — both habits push the same way.
AdvantageUTSA
Where UTSA struggles: shooting
UTSA shoots an effective 44.8% (#360); Army allows 55.1% (#334). Expect about 49.5%, 1.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.6 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageArmy
Where Army scores: the offensive glass
Army rebounds 29.6% of its own misses (#219); UTSA lets opponents grab 38.7% of their own misses (#363). Expect about 33.9%, 3.5 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.1 points per 100 possessions.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (UTSA) is close to a coin flip going forward — the study's model of next-game 3P% barely beats guessing the D1 average. Shot volume is what actually carries: expect Army at about 53.0% of its shots from three, UTSA about 42.3%.
Army has the ball
OffenseUTSA allowsvs D1 avg
49.3% #279
53.3% #277
-0.2 pt/100
17.2% #220
14.7% #311
+1.3 pt/100
29.6% #219
38.7% #363
+2.1 pt/100
26.8% #352
33.3% #135
-0.6 pt/100
71.7% #215
—
-0.1 pt/100
Army net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +2.6 pts/100
UTSA has the ball
OffenseArmy allowsvs D1 avg
44.8% #360
55.1% #334
-2.6 pt/100
17.5% #235
15.4% #257
+0.6 pt/100
30.2% #191
27.7% #54
-0.9 pt/100
29.5% #320
39.6% #298
+0.0 pt/100
69.8% #275
—
-0.2 pt/100
UTSA net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.1 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersArmyoffense vsUTSAdefense
Share of shots by zone
Army shoots
34.7
3.5
9.1
52.7
UTSA allows
40.0
4.2
13.3
42.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 58.2%#187 | 60.5%#249 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 39.0%#194 | 38.5%#145 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 27.5%#364 | 38.5%#184 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.0%#278 | 35.1%#251 | 33.7% |
UTSAoffense vsArmydefense
Share of shots by zone
UTSA shoots
37.2
6.4
15.5
40.8
Army allows
38.3
5.2
14.3
42.1
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 50.6%#356 | 64.9%#348 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 33.0%#316 | 37.3%#121 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 37.2%#217 | 37.6%#144 | 38.0% |
| Three | 29.2%#351 | 35.6%#285 | 33.7% |
RimShort 2 (≤9 ft)Mid 2 (10 ft+)Three
Zones from play-by-play shot descriptions; garbage time removed. Bars show the share of field-goal attempts in each zone; where a slice is too thin for its number, the shares are listed under the bar. FG% ranks: #1 = best for that side (most accurate shooting, stingiest defense).
Shot volume
Extra scoring chances from rebounds, turnovers and the foul line · 2025-26 numbersArmy
−3.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#319 of 365
Off reb %
29.6%
#219
Def reb %
72.3%
#54
Turnover %
17.2%
#220
Forced TO %
15.4%
#257
FT rate
26.8%
#352
FT allowed
39.6%
#298
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.3
Defensive rebounding+1.0
Ball security−0.3
Forcing turnovers−0.9
Foul shots drawn−2.1
Foul shots allowed−1.1
UTSA
−5.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#351 of 365
Off reb %
30.2%
#191
Def reb %
61.3%
#363
Turnover %
17.5%
#235
Forced TO %
14.7%
#311
FT rate
29.5%
#320
FT allowed
33.3%
#135
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.1
Defensive rebounding−2.6
Ball security−0.5
Forcing turnovers−1.4
Foul shots drawn−1.4
Foul shots allowed+0.5
Army has more extra scoring chances per game: −3.7 (#319 of 365) to UTSA’s −5.4 (#351).
Grade = extra shots and foul-line trips per game compared with a D-I average team, built from six season rates. Cell shading is the national rank for each rate (greener = better for that team).
Rotation
Army2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Army's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Ryan Curry | G | Jr | 6'0" | 31-31 | 33.8 | 13.3 | 4.1 | 4.5 | 2.2 | 50.4% | 33.5% | 7.3 | 81.3% | 25.6% | |
| 10 | Jacen Holloway | F | So | 6'4" | 31-23 | 28.2 | 10.8 | 3.6 | 2.1 | 1.6 | 54.5% | 30.9% | 1.8 | 64.8% | 23.3% | |
| 4 | Jaxson Bell | G | So | 6'3" | 30-8 | 25.3 | 12.2 | 5.0 | 1.5 | 2.0 | 51.5% | 35.9% | 4.8 | 80.9% | 29.8% | |
| 1 | Jackson Furman | G | Fr | 6'3" | 32-8 | 23.5 | 8.9 | 3.3 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 47.7% | 34.7% | 5.4 | 82.2% | 26.7% | |
| 22 | Kevin McCarthy | G | So | 6'4" | 30-29 | 24.3 | 7.9 | 2.7 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 50.9% | 34.6% | 5.3 | 68.8% | 20.9% | |
| 32 | Tate Laczkowski | F | Jr | 6'8" | 32-30 | 21.5 | 5.2 | 5.3 | 1.9 | 1.1 | 57.1% | 28.1% | 1.0 | 43.8% | 15.8% | |
| 54 | Jorn Everson | F | Sr | 6'8" | 32-26 | 18.9 | 7.6 | 2.3 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 50.0% | 30.1% | 3.5 | 60.0% | 25.5% | |
| 5 | Joshua Eli | F | So | 6'6" | 29-0 | 14.3 | 4.3 | 3.5 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 53.9% | 54.2% | 0.8 | 62.2% | 17.3% | |
| 24 | Alex Engro | G | So | 6'2" | 23-0 | 6.6 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 25.0% | 12.5% | 1.0 | 50.0% | 15.4% | |
| 13 | Dillon Watt | G | Fr | 5'11" | 21-0 | 5.1 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 17.6% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 84.2% | 18.0% | |
| 23 | Dylan Benner | F | Fr | 6'7" | 19-1 | 5.7 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 43.1% | 20.8% | 1.3 | 62.5% | 22.3% | |
| 21 | Jackson Mayo | G | Sr | 6'0" | 16-2 | 5.9 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 39.5% | 27.8% | 2.3 | 50.0% | 27.1% | |
| 0 | Dayon Polk | G | So | 6'0" | 10-1 | 8.0 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 20.6% | 8.3% | 1.2 | — | 18.9% | |
| 12 | Dylan Murans | F | So | 6'7" | 12-0 | 3.6 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 27.3% | 0.0% | 0.5 | 50.0% | 17.5% | |
| 25 | Jahaan Green | G | Fr | 6'5" | 10-0 | 3.1 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 50.0% | 100.0% | 0.1 | 100.0% | 21.9% | |
| 14 | Brendon O'Keefe | G | So | 5'10" | 8-0 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 50.0% | 50.0% | 0.8 | — | 23.3% | |
| 34 | Nnaemeka Ikechi | F | So | 6'7" | 3-0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 11.3% | |
| 15 | Chanse Perkins | F | Sr | 6'4" | 0-1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
UTSA2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted UTSA's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Jamir Simpson | G | Sr | 6'5" | 30-29 | 34.6 | 16.2 | 4.1 | 2.4 | 1.8 | 45.8% | 30.1% | 5.9 | 75.0% | 29.7% | |
| 0 | Dorian Hayes | G | Fr | 6'5" | 26-23 | 30.2 | 8.8 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.3 | 46.7% | 33.3% | 6.3 | 70.7% | 19.4% | |
| 4 | Brent Moss | G | Jr | 6'6" | 29-15 | 26.8 | 9.6 | 4.7 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 44.8% | 32.7% | 5.3 | 74.4% | 23.8% | |
| 24 | Baboucarr Njie | F | So | 6'6" | 29-10 | 25.5 | 9.4 | 5.2 | 1.5 | 2.4 | 46.6% | 6.5% | 1.1 | 63.5% | 26.6% | |
| 2 | Austin Nunez | G | Sr | 6'2" | 22-21 | 28.5 | 9.8 | 2.1 | 2.8 | 2.0 | 35.2% | 25.3% | 4.0 | 88.5% | 27.5% | |
| 23 | Matheo Coffi | F | Fr | 6'8" | 30-21 | 19.0 | 3.8 | 4.8 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 57.4% | 36.8% | 1.3 | 50.0% | 12.7% | |
| 1 | Kaidon Rayfield | F | Fr | 6'8" | 26-13 | 20.0 | 6.7 | 4.8 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 42.1% | 22.7% | 1.7 | 56.9% | 23.6% | |
| 12 | Daniel Akitoby | F | Sr | 6'9" | 24-8 | 13.9 | 5.7 | 4.1 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 59.8% | 40.0% | 0.4 | 64.5% | 21.7% | |
| 8 | LJ Brown | G | Sr | 6'2" | 17-2 | 12.5 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 42.2% | 27.8% | 2.1 | 75.0% | 15.0% | |
| 6 | Macaleab Rich | G | Jr | 6'7" | 11-2 | 15.1 | 8.1 | 2.4 | 0.6 | 1.5 | 57.1% | 18.2% | 1.0 | 70.8% | 30.1% | |
| 10 | Mo Njie | C | Sr | 6'11" | 20-6 | 7.8 | 1.6 | 1.9 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 59.5% | 100.0% | 0.1 | 44.4% | 14.3% | |
| 5 | Pierce Spencer | G | Sr | 6'3" | 4-0 | 12.5 | 3.5 | 1.0 | 1.8 | 0.5 | 35.7% | 0.0% | 0.5 | 66.7% | 21.0% | |
| 17 | Stanley Borden | C | Sr | 7'0" | 3-0 | 6.7 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 10.5% | |
| 25 | Jackson Fazande | F | So | 6'3" | 3-0 | 1.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 13.1% | |
| 3 | Vasean Allette | PG | Jr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Army2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Army's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Ryan Curry | G | Jr | 6'0" | 31-31 | 33.8 | 13.3 | 4.1 | 4.5 | 2.2 | 50.4% | 33.5% | 7.3 | 81.3% | 25.6% | |
| 10 | Jacen Holloway | F | So | 6'4" | 31-23 | 28.2 | 10.8 | 3.6 | 2.1 | 1.6 | 54.5% | 30.9% | 1.8 | 64.8% | 23.3% | |
| 4 | Jaxson Bell | G | So | 6'3" | 30-8 | 25.3 | 12.2 | 5.0 | 1.5 | 2.0 | 51.5% | 35.9% | 4.8 | 80.9% | 29.8% | |
| 1 | Jackson Furman | G | Fr | 6'3" | 32-8 | 23.5 | 8.9 | 3.3 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 47.7% | 34.7% | 5.4 | 82.2% | 26.7% | |
| 22 | Kevin McCarthy | G | So | 6'4" | 30-29 | 24.3 | 7.9 | 2.7 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 50.9% | 34.6% | 5.3 | 68.8% | 20.9% | |
| 32 | Tate Laczkowski | F | Jr | 6'8" | 32-30 | 21.5 | 5.2 | 5.3 | 1.9 | 1.1 | 57.1% | 28.1% | 1.0 | 43.8% | 15.8% | |
| 54 | Jorn Everson | F | Sr | 6'8" | 32-26 | 18.9 | 7.6 | 2.3 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 50.0% | 30.1% | 3.5 | 60.0% | 25.5% | |
| 5 | Joshua Eli | F | So | 6'6" | 29-0 | 14.3 | 4.3 | 3.5 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 53.9% | 54.2% | 0.8 | 62.2% | 17.3% | |
| 24 | Alex Engro | G | So | 6'2" | 23-0 | 6.6 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 25.0% | 12.5% | 1.0 | 50.0% | 15.4% | |
| 13 | Dillon Watt | G | Fr | 5'11" | 21-0 | 5.1 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 17.6% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 84.2% | 18.0% | |
| 23 | Dylan Benner | F | Fr | 6'7" | 19-1 | 5.7 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 43.1% | 20.8% | 1.3 | 62.5% | 22.3% | |
| 21 | Jackson Mayo | G | Sr | 6'0" | 16-2 | 5.9 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 39.5% | 27.8% | 2.3 | 50.0% | 27.1% | |
| 0 | Dayon Polk | G | So | 6'0" | 10-1 | 8.0 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 20.6% | 8.3% | 1.2 | — | 18.9% | |
| 12 | Dylan Murans | F | So | 6'7" | 12-0 | 3.6 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 27.3% | 0.0% | 0.5 | 50.0% | 17.5% | |
| 25 | Jahaan Green | G | Fr | 6'5" | 10-0 | 3.1 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 50.0% | 100.0% | 0.1 | 100.0% | 21.9% | |
| 14 | Brendon O'Keefe | G | So | 5'10" | 8-0 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 50.0% | 50.0% | 0.8 | — | 23.3% | |
| 34 | Nnaemeka Ikechi | F | So | 6'7" | 3-0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 11.3% | |
| 15 | Chanse Perkins | F | Sr | 6'4" | 0-1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Army
Against the spread
Season
12-18
Home
4-10
Road
8-7
Last 10
1-9
avg cover −3.7
Missed the spread 4 straightCovered 1 of 8 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
17-13
Home
7-7
Road
9-6
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total −3.0
Under in the last gameOver in 4 of 8 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 3 | Bucknell | A | L 55–65 | +2.0 | L−8.0 | 144.0 | U120 | 82.2 | 97.2 | 66.9 |
| Feb 28 | Lafayette | A | L 77–83 | +3.0 | L−3.0 | 144.5 | O160 | 106.2 | 114.5 | 72.5 |
| Feb 25 | Bucknell | H | L 73–75 | −3.5 | L−5.5 | 142.5 | O148 | 100.8 | 103.6 | 72.4 |
| Feb 21 | Navy | H | L 63–81 | +7.5 | L−10.5 | 137.5 | O144 | 98.4 | 126.5 | 64.0 |
| Feb 18 | Loyola MD | A | W 87–77 | +4.5 | W+14.5 | 150.0 | O164 | 126.1 | 111.6 | 69.0 |
| Feb 14 | American | A | L 63–75 | +9.5 | L−2.5 | 145.5 | U138 | 95.8 | 114.0 | 65.8 |
| Feb 11 | Boston U | H | L 68–85 | +3.0 | L−14.0 | 140.0 | O153 | 108.8 | 136.1 | 62.5 |
| Feb 7 | Lafayette | H | L 60–63 | +1.0 | L−2.0 | 143.0 | U123 | 89.1 | 93.6 | 67.3 |
| Feb 4 | Colgate | A | L 55–69 | +10.0 | L−4.0 | 149.5 | U124 | 85.6 | 107.3 | 64.3 |
| Jan 31 | Holy Cross | H | W 69–68 | −3.0 | L−2.0 | 144.0 | U137 | 101.8 | 100.3 | 67.8 |
UTSA
Against the spread
Season
10-18
Home
5-7
Road
4-10
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +1.6
Covered the last gameCovered 6 of 10 as an underdogCovered 5 of 9 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
16-12
Home
5-7
Road
11-3
Last 10
8-2
avg vs total +4.3
Over 4 straightOver in 8 of 10 as an underdogOver in 7 of 9 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8 | Rice | A | L 71–80 | +12.0 | W+3.0 | 150.0 | O151 | 103.2 | 116.3 | 68.8 |
| Mar 1 | Wichita St | H | L 67–84 | +15.5 | L−1.5 | 150.5 | O151 | 96.1 | 120.5 | 69.7 |
| Feb 25 | East Carolina | H | L 81–82 | +4.5 | W+3.5 | 153.5 | O163 | 119.9 | 121.4 | 67.5 |
| Feb 22 | Tulsa | A | L 74–100 | +22.0 | L−4.0 | 159.5 | O174 | 103.4 | 139.8 | 71.5 |
| Feb 18 | FAU | H | L 52–60 | +11.5 | W+3.5 | 157.5 | U112 | 76.9 | 88.7 | 67.6 |
| Feb 15 | Charlotte | A | W 88–79 | +14.0 | W+23.0 | 148.0 | O167 | 133.7 | 120.0 | 65.8 |
| Feb 11 | East Carolina | A | L 72–88 | +10.5 | L−5.5 | 149.5 | O160 | 101.3 | 123.9 | 71.0 |
| Feb 7 | North Texas | H | L 58–81 | +10.0 | L−13.0 | 138.5 | O139 | 83.2 | 116.1 | 69.7 |
| Feb 4 | South Florida | A | L 88–109 | +24.0 | W+3.0 | 163.5 | O197 | 124.4 | 154.1 | 70.7 |
| Jan 28 | UAB | H | L 73–83 | +13.5 | W+3.5 | 156.5 | U156 | 103.3 | 117.5 | 70.6 |
Records vs the closing line describe the past; ten games is a small sample.
Tale of the tape
national rank toned left for away, right for homeArmyUTSA
Efficiency
103.4
101.5
114.3
115.1
68.2
69.1
—
—
Shooting
49.3%
44.8%
50.7%
45.5%
32.0%
29.2%
71.7%
69.8%
26.8%
29.5%
Ball control & glass
17.2%
17.5%
15.4%
14.7%
29.6%
30.2%
27.7%
38.7%
10.4%
11.8%
11.2%
13.1%
Style
53.3%
41.3%
37.8%
42.6%
9.6%
15.6%
59.0%
42.8%
36.6%
31.5%
Roster
2.33
2.66
6'3.9"
6'5.8"
—
—
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputArmy
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Army's roster for this season yet — no movement to show.
Returns 100% of last season's minutes. Teams returning at least 65% of last season's minutes have historically gained about 2.2 points of AdjEM (n=156 team-seasons, 2022-2026). (ESPN hasn't posted this season's roster yet -- this may still be last season's list.)
UTSA
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted UTSA's roster for this season yet — no movement to show.
Returns 100% of last season's minutes. Teams returning at least 65% of last season's minutes have historically gained about 2.2 points of AdjEM (n=156 team-seasons, 2022-2026). (ESPN hasn't posted this season's roster yet -- this may still be last season's list.)
Head-to-head
this season and lastNo meetings the last two seasons.
The CBB Matchups tab lays out the day's Division I slate: matchup, tip time, records and rank, and — once posted — Pinnacle's spread and total (the median across books when Pinnacle has no line). Three views switch the table between projected scores, pace and totals, and each team's offensive and defensive tendencies. Each game opens into opponent-adjusted possessions, efficiency and four-factor tendencies for both teams, plus recent form, rotation and head-to-head history. Every game also carries our projected score, spread and total, built bottom-up from those same numbers: expected possessions times each side's opponent-adjusted points per possession, plus home court.
What these numbers mean: line shopping.