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-conferenceNeutral siteSuncoast Credit Union Arena, Fort Myers, FLFort Myers Tip-Off - Palms Division

Tulane

Efficiency #239

2025-26: 18-15 · 9-11 conf

Georgia St

Efficiency #310

2025-26: 10-22 · 7-12 conf

Mon, Nov 23 · 4:00 PM ET

73.9

win 60%

Projected

70.9

win 40%

No line posted yet.

Model: TULN −3.1 · total 144.8 · 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 one

Projected total

Average D-I game

148.2

PaceAdjusted tempo: Georgia St 68.7, Tulane 68.0 → 68.3 possessions

+0.1

Georgia St offense vs Tulane defense

−3.3

Tulane offense vs Georgia St defense

−0.2

Projected total

144.8

Axis starts at 142 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Georgia St offense vs Tulane defense

−3.3

Tulane offense vs Georgia St defense

+0.2

Tulane by 3.1

3.1

Tulane side ◂▸ Georgia St side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Georgia St.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.3, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Georgia St is the faster team (68.8, #161 of 365) and Tulane the slower (67.9, #203). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.3

per team, 40 min

Projected total

144.8

model

Projected team totals

73.9 / 70.9

Tulane / Georgia St

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.0#212

Tulane

68.7#146

Georgia St

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet

AdvantageGeorgia St

Where Georgia St struggles: shooting

Georgia St shoots an effective 44.2% (#362); Tulane allows 50.7% (#140). Expect about 46.9%, 4.4 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -6.3 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageTulane

Where Tulane struggles: the offensive glass

Tulane rebounds 22.8% of its own misses (#352); Georgia St lets opponents grab 33.6% of their own misses (#312). Expect about 26.6%, 3.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.3 points per 100 possessions.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Georgia St) 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 Tulane at about 43.5% of its shots from three, Georgia St about 42.5%.

DefenseTulane

Tulane's shot-blocking

Tulane ranks #29 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.4% of Georgia St's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.

Tulane has the ball

OffenseGeorgia St allowsvs D1 avg

49.4% #275

50.6% #135

-2.0 pt/100

15.4% #97

16.4% #197

+1.3 pt/100

22.8% #352

33.6% #312

-2.3 pt/100

43.5% #14

34.9% #175

+0.5 pt/100

76.7% #40

—

+0.4 pt/100

Tulane net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -2.2 pts/100

Georgia St has the ball

OffenseTulane allowsvs D1 avg

44.2% #362

50.7% #140

-6.3 pt/100

15.9% #133

17.1% #140

+0.3 pt/100

27.7% #278

35.8% #352

+0.5 pt/100

37.2% #124

38.1% #262

+0.4 pt/100

78.6% #11

—

+0.5 pt/100

Georgia St net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -4.6 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers

Tulaneoffense vsGeorgia Stdefense

Share of shots by zone

Tulane shoots

37.2

4.0

14.5

44.4

Georgia St allows

40.0

5.2

15.9

38.9

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.0%#162	57.4%#127	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	27.0%#362	37.9%#134	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	32.6%#335	38.1%#161	38.0%
Three	32.0%#279	33.1%#132	33.7%

Georgia Stoffense vsTulanedefense

Share of shots by zone

Georgia St shoots

29.5

5.8

23.8

40.9

Tulane allows

40.6

6.9

12.8

39.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	50.3%#358	54.5%#49	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	34.4%#296	42.4%#236	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	35.2%#284	36.8%#124	38.0%
Three	30.6%#329	34.5%#216	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 numbers

Tulane

−1.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#255 of 365

Off reb %

22.8%

#352

Def reb %

64.2%

#352

Turnover %

15.4%

#97

Forced TO %

17.1%

#140

FT rate

43.5%

#14

FT allowed

38.1%

#262

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−2.5

Defensive rebounding−1.7

Ball security+0.9

Forcing turnovers+0.3

Foul shots drawn+2.2

Foul shots allowed−0.7

Georgia St

−0.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#222 of 365

Off reb %

27.7%

#278

Def reb %

66.4%

#312

Turnover %

15.9%

#133

Forced TO %

16.4%

#197

FT rate

37.2%

#124

FT allowed

34.9%

#175

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.9

Defensive rebounding−1.0

Ball security+0.6

Forcing turnovers−0.2

Foul shots drawn+0.6

Foul shots allowed+0.1

Georgia St has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.9 (#222 of 365) to Tulane’s −1.5 (#255).

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

Tulane2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Tulane'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
7	Rowan Brumbaugh	G	Jr	6'4"	33-33	36.1	19.2	4.9	3.5	2.3	52.8%	36.0%	5.3	80.4%	29.9%
99	Curtis Williams Jr.	G	Jr	6'6"	33-32	32.1	12.4	4.8	1.2	1.5	49.4%	33.5%	6.2	82.5%	24.4%
22	Asher Woods	G	Sr	6'3"	33-31	30.9	12.8	3.2	2.0	1.8	45.7%	27.2%	3.5	85.0%	25.5%
5	Scotty Middleton	F	Jr	6'6"	33-19	25.7	6.9	4.0	1.2	0.8	52.7%	36.9%	4.3	73.9%	16.5%
0	Tyler Ringgold	F	So	6'8"	32-32	24.8	9.4	3.9	1.4	1.5	49.3%	29.9%	2.4	62.8%	24.4%
23	Percy Daniels	C	Sr	6'10"	32-4	16.5	2.3	2.2	0.7	0.5	62.8%	0.0%	0.0	72.4%	8.0%
9	KJ Greene	G	So	6'3"	32-1	15.1	4.4	1.3	1.6	0.9	40.1%	22.5%	1.3	78.9%	20.6%
1	Josiah Moore	G	So	6'4"	32-2	12.6	3.7	1.9	0.9	0.7	48.4%	15.8%	0.6	67.5%	19.3%
11	Luke Rasmussen	G	So	6'8"	17-11	15.1	2.6	1.8	0.6	0.6	46.6%	23.3%	1.8	27.3%	13.6%
55	Davion Bradford	C	Sr	7'0"	11-0	4.0	0.3	0.5	0.0	0.1	0.0%	0.0%	0.2	75.0%	11.7%
15	Robert Moore	G	Fr	6'6"	5-0	2.6	1.6	0.0	0.0	0.0	44.4%	25.0%	1.6	—	40.0%
34	Jake Shapiro	G	Jr	6'1"	5-0	1.2	1.8	0.2	0.0	0.0	112.5%	75.0%	0.8	—	38.9%
32	Luke Cronin	F	Jr	6'8"	2-0	1.5	0.0	0.5	0.0	0.5	—	—	0.0	—	19.9%
77	Vasilije Kuridza	F	Fr	6'9"	2-0	1.5	0.0	0.5	1.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
13	Joseph Teich	G	So	5'10"	2-0	1.0	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.

Georgia St2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Georgia St'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
22	Malachi Brown	G	Jr	6'1"	32-31	31.0	12.3	3.8	3.0	2.2	48.7%	36.5%	5.2	79.3%	25.9%
0	Micah Tucker	G	Fr	6'3"	31-28	31.5	13.5	2.1	3.0	1.9	48.6%	32.5%	3.8	81.3%	25.9%
10	Jelani Hamilton	G	So	6'5"	27-26	31.2	17.8	4.6	2.3	1.9	44.6%	34.0%	5.8	88.4%	34.5%
12	Anthony Enoh	F	Jr	6'7"	30-17	22.1	5.0	5.0	0.8	0.9	37.4%	23.3%	1.4	65.2%	17.2%
6	Joah Chappelle	F	So	6'8"	28-19	23.6	7.3	5.3	0.5	0.8	48.5%	37.8%	1.6	70.6%	18.8%
20	Ayouba Berthe	G	Sr	6'5"	32-2	16.9	4.4	1.9	0.8	0.7	38.3%	27.9%	3.8	81.8%	19.8%
4	Trey Scott III	F	Fr	6'11"	26-3	20.6	5.3	3.4	0.7	0.5	47.1%	28.1%	2.5	66.7%	17.0%
32	Christian Beam	C	So	7'1"	26-15	15.6	3.2	3.9	0.2	0.8	47.2%	—	0.0	57.9%	14.4%
1	Jakai Newton	G	So	6'4"	21-6	17.0	7.2	3.6	0.9	1.0	39.8%	26.2%	3.1	82.1%	28.9%
2	James Cooper	F	Sr	6'8"	24-10	7.3	1.0	1.5	0.2	0.1	37.5%	—	0.0	71.4%	10.0%
55	Chris Jones	G	Fr	6'6"	19-0	8.0	2.6	1.1	0.3	0.4	50.0%	33.3%	1.1	100.0%	20.1%
8	Isaiah Sherrard	F	Jr	6'7"	11-3	10.4	1.8	0.7	0.3	0.6	37.5%	25.0%	1.5	50.0%	16.4%
9	Kwame Tanic	F	So	6'7"	1-0	3.0	3.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	150.0%	100.0%	1.0	—	17.8%
21	Clash Peters	F	So	6'9"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
7	Emmanuel Koveos	G	Jr	6'0"	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.

Tulane2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Tulane'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
7	Rowan Brumbaugh	G	Jr	6'4"	33-33	36.1	19.2	4.9	3.5	2.3	52.8%	36.0%	5.3	80.4%	29.9%
99	Curtis Williams Jr.	G	Jr	6'6"	33-32	32.1	12.4	4.8	1.2	1.5	49.4%	33.5%	6.2	82.5%	24.4%
22	Asher Woods	G	Sr	6'3"	33-31	30.9	12.8	3.2	2.0	1.8	45.7%	27.2%	3.5	85.0%	25.5%
5	Scotty Middleton	F	Jr	6'6"	33-19	25.7	6.9	4.0	1.2	0.8	52.7%	36.9%	4.3	73.9%	16.5%
0	Tyler Ringgold	F	So	6'8"	32-32	24.8	9.4	3.9	1.4	1.5	49.3%	29.9%	2.4	62.8%	24.4%
23	Percy Daniels	C	Sr	6'10"	32-4	16.5	2.3	2.2	0.7	0.5	62.8%	0.0%	0.0	72.4%	8.0%
9	KJ Greene	G	So	6'3"	32-1	15.1	4.4	1.3	1.6	0.9	40.1%	22.5%	1.3	78.9%	20.6%
1	Josiah Moore	G	So	6'4"	32-2	12.6	3.7	1.9	0.9	0.7	48.4%	15.8%	0.6	67.5%	19.3%
11	Luke Rasmussen	G	So	6'8"	17-11	15.1	2.6	1.8	0.6	0.6	46.6%	23.3%	1.8	27.3%	13.6%
55	Davion Bradford	C	Sr	7'0"	11-0	4.0	0.3	0.5	0.0	0.1	0.0%	0.0%	0.2	75.0%	11.7%
15	Robert Moore	G	Fr	6'6"	5-0	2.6	1.6	0.0	0.0	0.0	44.4%	25.0%	1.6	—	40.0%
34	Jake Shapiro	G	Jr	6'1"	5-0	1.2	1.8	0.2	0.0	0.0	112.5%	75.0%	0.8	—	38.9%
32	Luke Cronin	F	Jr	6'8"	2-0	1.5	0.0	0.5	0.0	0.5	—	—	0.0	—	19.9%
77	Vasilije Kuridza	F	Fr	6'9"	2-0	1.5	0.0	0.5	1.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
13	Joseph Teich	G	So	5'10"	2-0	1.0	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Tulane

Against the spread

Season

15-17

Home

7-10

Road

6-4

Last 10

6-4

avg cover −3.0

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 8 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

14-18

Home

6-11

Road

5-5

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total −0.9

Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 8 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 12	CharlotteAdjEM #193	N	L 60–74	+1.0	L−13.0	144.5	U134	98.3	121.3	61.0
Mar 11	MemphisAdjEM #152	N	W 81–69	+4.5	W+16.5	150.5	U150	114.8	97.8	70.5
Mar 8	MemphisAdjEM #152	H	L 95–96 OT	+2.5	W+1.5	154.0	O191	122.9	124.2	77.3
Mar 5	TempleAdjEM #168	A	L 60–89	+5.0	L−24.0	145.0	O149	89.1	132.2	67.3
Mar 1	South FloridaAdjEM #36	A	L 62–90	+15.0	L−13.0	154.5	U152	85.1	123.5	72.8
Feb 25	TulsaAdjEM #46	H	L 56–90	+5.5	L−28.5	156.5	U146	84.4	135.6	66.4
Feb 22	RiceAdjEM #255	H	W 81–75	−5.0	W+1.0	147.5	O156	118.1	109.3	68.6
Feb 19	North TexasAdjEM #151	A	W 77–71	+6.5	W+12.5	137.5	O148	117.4	108.3	65.6
Feb 15	UABAdjEM #111	A	W 55–54	+7.0	W+8.0	152.5	U109	87.7	86.1	62.7
Feb 11	TempleAdjEM #168	H	W 77–66	−2.0	W+9.0	145.0	U143	113.4	97.2	67.9

Georgia St

Against the spread

Season

13-16-1

Home

5-7

Road

8-6-1

Last 10

3-7

avg cover −5.3

Missed the spread 4 straightCovered 3 of 8 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

14-16

Home

7-5

Road

6-9

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +1.0

Over 4 straightOver in 4 of 8 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 3	LouisianaAdjEM #318	N	L 75–84	−1.0	L−10.0	134.0	O159	108.3	121.3	69.3
Feb 27	Old DominionAdjEM #242	H	L 73–81	+1.0	L−7.0	149.5	O154	99.1	109.9	73.7
Feb 24	CoastalAdjEM #241	H	L 71–76	+1.0	L−4.0	141.0	O147	105.9	113.3	67.1
Feb 21	James MadisonAdjEM #206	H	L 65–80	+2.5	L−12.5	142.5	O145	97.0	119.4	67.0
Feb 19	GA SouthernAdjEM #231	H	W 66–64	+1.0	W+3.0	155.0	U130	96.2	93.3	68.6
Feb 14	Old DominionAdjEM #242	A	L 55–78	+4.0	L−19.0	147.0	U133	85.2	120.8	64.6
Feb 12	James MadisonAdjEM #206	A	L 79–81 OT	+6.0	W+4.0	144.0	O160	106.8	109.5	74.0
Feb 7	N IllinoisAdjEM #341	H	L 74–75	−4.5	L−5.5	142.0	O149	103.4	104.8	71.6
Feb 4	TroyAdjEM #136	H	L 63–74	+5.5	L−5.5	145.5	U137	98.6	115.9	63.9
Jan 31	South AlabamaAdjEM #188	A	L 67–69	+5.5	W+3.5	139.5	U136	111.5	114.9	60.1

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 home

TulaneGeorgia St

Efficiency

106.8

101.9

110.2

109.9

68.0

68.7

—

Shooting

49.4%

44.2%

50.5%

42.9%

32.0%

30.6%

76.7%

78.6%

43.5%

37.2%

Ball control & glass

15.4%

15.9%

17.1%

16.4%

22.8%

27.7%

35.8%

33.6%

8.7%

8.6%

10.9%

8.7%

Style

45.0%

42.4%

37.1%

32.1%

10.8%

10.3%

54.8%

50.6%

26.0%

33.0%

Roster

2.94

2.24

6'5.5"

6'5.7"

—

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input

Tulane

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Tulane'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.)

Georgia St

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Georgia St's roster for this season yet — no movement to show.

Head-to-head

this season and last

No 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.