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-conferenceReed Arena, College Station, TX

SE Louisiana

Efficiency #296

2025-26: 9-22 · 6-16 conf

Texas A&M

Efficiency #43

2025-26: 22-12 · 11-8 conf

Mon, Nov 16 · TBD

66.2

win 8%

Projected

82.1

win 92%

No line posted yet.

Model: TA&M −16.0 · total 148.3 · 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: Texas A&M 70.5, SE Louisiana 67.1 → 69.3 possessions

+2.0

Texas A&M offense vs SE Louisiana defense

+5.0

SE Louisiana offense vs Texas A&M defense

−7.0

Projected total

148.3

Axis starts at 145 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Texas A&M offense vs SE Louisiana defense

+5.0

SE Louisiana offense vs Texas A&M defense

+7.0

Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors

+4.0

Texas A&M by 16.0

16.0

SE Louisiana side ◂▸ Texas A&M side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 148.2 against a projected 148.3. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Texas A&M.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 69.3, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Texas A&M is the faster team (72.0, #24 of 365) and SE Louisiana the slower (65.6, #312). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

69.3

per team, 40 min

Projected total

148.3

model

Projected team totals

66.2 / 82.1

SE Louisiana / Texas A&M

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.1#282

SE Louisiana

70.5#27

Texas A&M

How this game plays

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

AdvantageSE Louisiana

Where SE Louisiana struggles: shooting

SE Louisiana shoots an effective 46.7% (#343); Texas A&M allows 50.7% (#141). Expect about 48.3%, 2.9 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.2 points per 100 possessions.

Pace

Tempo tug-of-war

Texas A&M averages 72.0 possessions per 40, SE Louisiana 65.6. Slower teams pull the pace toward themselves more than fast teams push it (0.80 vs 0.66 in five seasons of games), so expect about 69 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.

AdvantageTexas A&M

Where Texas A&M scores: shooting

Texas A&M shoots an effective 53.8% (#71); SE Louisiana allows 52.4% (#233). Expect about 53.3%, 2.0 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.9 points per 100 possessions.

TurnoversSE Louisiana

SE Louisiana turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 18.7% is worth roughly -2.4 points per 100 possessions against SE Louisiana's offense.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (SE Louisiana) 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 SE Louisiana at about 40.9% of its shots from three, Texas A&M about 43.9%.

ClashTexas A&M

Strength vs strength: turnover rate

Texas A&M (#52 in turnover rate) against SE Louisiana (#46 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 17.1%. Historically SE Louisiana's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.57 vs 0.64).

SE Louisiana has the ball

OffenseTexas A&M allowsvs D1 avg

46.7% #343

50.7% #141

-4.2 pt/100

18.4% #291

18.4% #82

-2.4 pt/100

28.6% #245

33.0% #300

+0.0 pt/100

40.3% #56

35.3% #190

+0.3 pt/100

68.4% #318

—

-0.4 pt/100

SE Louisiana net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -6.5 pts/100

Texas A&M has the ball

OffenseSE Louisiana allowsvs D1 avg

53.8% #71

52.4% #233

+2.9 pt/100

14.7% #52

19.1% #46

-0.4 pt/100

32.0% #122

31.4% #225

+1.0 pt/100

37.1% #128

41.2% #314

+0.6 pt/100

73.8% #144

—

+0.1 pt/100

Texas A&M net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +4.2 pts/100

Shot diet

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

SE Louisianaoffense vsTexas A&Mdefense

Share of shots by zone

SE Louisiana shoots

35.9

5.4

19.4

39.3

Texas A&M allows

35.1

5.9

16.4

42.6

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	58.7%#171	62.4%#308	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	33.8%#309	39.2%#161	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	34.1%#309	38.5%#175	38.0%
Three	28.4%#362	31.8%#53	33.7%

Texas A&Moffense vsSE Louisianadefense

Share of shots by zone

Texas A&M shoots

41.5

5.6

6.9

46.1

SE Louisiana allows

38.3

5.0

19.5

37.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	57.5%#213	59.1%#195	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	38.4%#212	46.7%#328	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.9%#228	36.9%#127	38.0%
Three	35.9%#63	36.0%#301	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

SE Louisiana

−0.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#200 of 365

Off reb %

28.6%

#245

Def reb %

68.6%

#225

Turnover %

18.4%

#291

Forced TO %

19.1%

#46

FT rate

40.3%

#56

FT allowed

41.2%

#314

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.6

Defensive rebounding−0.3

Ball security−1.1

Forcing turnovers+1.6

Foul shots drawn+1.4

Foul shots allowed−1.5

Texas A&M

+2.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#62 of 365

Off reb %

32.0%

#122

Def reb %

67.0%

#300

Turnover %

14.7%

#52

Forced TO %

18.4%

#82

FT rate

37.1%

#128

FT allowed

35.3%

#190

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.5

Defensive rebounding−0.8

Ball security+1.4

Forcing turnovers+1.1

Foul shots drawn+0.5

Foul shots allowed0.0

Texas A&M has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.8 (#62 of 365) to SE Louisiana’s −0.5 (#200).

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

SE Louisiana2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted SE Louisiana'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
0	Jeremy Elyzee	F	So	6'7"	31-31	29.5	11.1	4.5	1.8	1.9	48.9%	21.2%	1.7	70.3%	25.7%
23	Isaiah Gaines	F	Sr	6'8"	31-31	28.3	10.6	6.2	1.6	1.9	54.9%	9.1%	0.4	63.4%	23.9%
1	Makhi Myles	F	So	6'7"	31-18	21.0	7.7	3.6	0.6	0.9	50.5%	34.3%	3.3	82.8%	22.7%
10	Jaiden Lawrence	G	Jr	6'4"	31-18	20.3	5.1	2.4	0.6	0.5	45.9%	29.9%	3.5	66.7%	17.2%
4	CJ Booker	PG	So	5'10"	30-22	20.5	4.7	1.3	2.0	0.8	45.4%	39.7%	1.9	72.2%	17.3%
8	Peter Hemschemeier	G	Fr	6'5"	27-12	20.3	6.4	1.6	1.9	1.6	40.7%	27.5%	4.4	73.1%	27.2%
3	Ethan Pickett	G	Sr	6'5"	31-21	17.6	5.1	2.4	1.3	1.1	44.4%	16.0%	0.8	68.4%	21.4%
2	Jalen Forrest	G	Jr	6'4"	28-0	17.2	7.9	2.6	0.6	1.0	44.0%	26.5%	2.4	78.8%	29.6%
5	Kyle Edison	G	So	6'3"	25-2	9.8	3.2	1.5	0.9	0.8	43.8%	23.1%	1.6	64.9%	25.4%
6	Ubong-Abasi Etim	C	Sr	6'9"	31-0	7.4	1.2	1.5	0.2	0.2	51.5%	—	0.0	16.7%	12.1%
32	Garrett Shoemaker	F	Fr	6'9"	24-0	7.1	1.9	1.4	0.1	0.4	51.5%	29.4%	0.7	35.7%	20.5%
12	Ahmed Essahaty	G	Sr	6'2"	16-0	10.1	2.2	1.4	0.8	0.9	38.9%	21.1%	1.2	58.3%	21.1%
7	Seth Jones	G	Jr	6'1"	8-0	19.8	7.3	2.8	1.0	2.3	41.7%	27.9%	5.4	80.0%	30.3%
11	Amir Chaney	PG	Fr	5'10"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
9	Cody Al-Naziat	G	Fr	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.

Texas A&M2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
9	Ruben Dominguez	G	So	6'6"	34-27	23.4	10.2	2.3	1.4	0.4	57.7%	40.0%	6.3	87.1%	20.7%
0	Marcus Hill	G	Sr	6'3"	34-30	22.8	10.3	3.1	1.6	1.1	51.1%	23.8%	1.9	71.6%	25.4%
5	Jacari Lane	G	Sr	6'0"	33-28	19.3	6.1	1.7	3.0	1.0	47.8%	30.3%	2.7	86.8%	19.2%
7	Zach Clemence	F	Sr	6'11"	34-4	16.9	6.9	3.2	0.9	0.8	57.0%	40.0%	2.8	78.0%	22.0%
6	Ali Dibba	G	Sr	6'5"	34-1	15.8	5.7	2.8	0.8	0.4	48.8%	37.0%	1.4	56.5%	21.8%
1	Josh Holloway	G	Jr	6'1"	34-0	13.4	4.6	1.7	1.8	1.4	56.1%	40.0%	0.9	69.2%	21.4%
33	Federiko Federiko	F	Sr	6'11"	31-4	8.7	1.8	1.9	0.5	0.2	60.0%	—	0.0	46.9%	11.3%
4	Jamie Vinson	F	So	6'11"	30-0	6.6	3.5	2.3	0.4	0.4	55.6%	16.7%	0.6	57.7%	28.8%
21	Mackenzie Mgbako	F	Jr	6'9"	7-7	18.9	10.4	4.9	1.3	1.7	49.2%	34.3%	5.0	88.2%	31.0%
14	Chris McDermott	F	So	6'7"	11-1	3.7	1.1	1.1	0.3	0.1	75.0%	0.0%	0.2	0.0%	13.9%
10	Jeremiah Green	G	Fr	6'3"	7-0	4.6	1.0	0.1	0.6	0.3	30.0%	33.3%	0.4	100.0%	13.6%
8	Noah Shelby	G	Jr	6'3"	8-0	2.8	1.3	0.3	0.0	0.0	30.0%	20.0%	1.3	100.0%	27.6%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

SE Louisiana2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted SE Louisiana'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
0	Jeremy Elyzee	F	So	6'7"	31-31	29.5	11.1	4.5	1.8	1.9	48.9%	21.2%	1.7	70.3%	25.7%
23	Isaiah Gaines	F	Sr	6'8"	31-31	28.3	10.6	6.2	1.6	1.9	54.9%	9.1%	0.4	63.4%	23.9%
1	Makhi Myles	F	So	6'7"	31-18	21.0	7.7	3.6	0.6	0.9	50.5%	34.3%	3.3	82.8%	22.7%
10	Jaiden Lawrence	G	Jr	6'4"	31-18	20.3	5.1	2.4	0.6	0.5	45.9%	29.9%	3.5	66.7%	17.2%
4	CJ Booker	PG	So	5'10"	30-22	20.5	4.7	1.3	2.0	0.8	45.4%	39.7%	1.9	72.2%	17.3%
8	Peter Hemschemeier	G	Fr	6'5"	27-12	20.3	6.4	1.6	1.9	1.6	40.7%	27.5%	4.4	73.1%	27.2%
3	Ethan Pickett	G	Sr	6'5"	31-21	17.6	5.1	2.4	1.3	1.1	44.4%	16.0%	0.8	68.4%	21.4%
2	Jalen Forrest	G	Jr	6'4"	28-0	17.2	7.9	2.6	0.6	1.0	44.0%	26.5%	2.4	78.8%	29.6%
5	Kyle Edison	G	So	6'3"	25-2	9.8	3.2	1.5	0.9	0.8	43.8%	23.1%	1.6	64.9%	25.4%
6	Ubong-Abasi Etim	C	Sr	6'9"	31-0	7.4	1.2	1.5	0.2	0.2	51.5%	—	0.0	16.7%	12.1%
32	Garrett Shoemaker	F	Fr	6'9"	24-0	7.1	1.9	1.4	0.1	0.4	51.5%	29.4%	0.7	35.7%	20.5%
12	Ahmed Essahaty	G	Sr	6'2"	16-0	10.1	2.2	1.4	0.8	0.9	38.9%	21.1%	1.2	58.3%	21.1%
7	Seth Jones	G	Jr	6'1"	8-0	19.8	7.3	2.8	1.0	2.3	41.7%	27.9%	5.4	80.0%	30.3%
11	Amir Chaney	PG	Fr	5'10"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
9	Cody Al-Naziat	G	Fr	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

SE Louisiana

Against the spread

Season

14-16

Home

5-6

Road

7-10

Last 10

3-7

avg cover −4.6

Covered the last gameCovered 1 of 8 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

13-17

Home

6-5

Road

6-11

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +0.5

Over in the last gameOver in 5 of 8 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 2	LSU N OrleansAdjEM #221	A	W 82–78	+7.0	W+11.0	144.0	O160	110.2	104.8	74.4
Feb 28	NichollsAdjEM #250	A	L 60–68	+4.5	L−3.5	140.0	U128	91.8	104.0	65.4
Feb 23	Texas A&M-CCAdjEM #181	H	L 68–73	+2.0	L−3.0	130.5	O141	105.2	112.9	64.7
Feb 21	UT Rio GrandeAdjEM #109	H	L 75–96	+4.0	L−17.0	139.5	O171	117.5	150.4	63.8
Feb 16	East Texas A&MAdjEM #311	A	L 53–70	+1.5	L−15.5	136.5	U123	78.2	103.3	67.7
Feb 14	N'Western StAdjEM #299	A	L 66–69	+1.0	L−2.0	131.0	O135	105.6	110.4	62.5
Feb 9	Incarnate WordAdjEM #264	H	W 74–62	−1.0	W+11.0	137.5	U136	121.1	101.5	61.1
Feb 7	Hou ChristianAdjEM #297	H	W 55–47	−4.5	W+3.5	133.5	U102	97.4	83.2	56.5
Feb 2	LamarAdjEM #236	A	L 54–73	+6.0	L−13.0	133.5	U127	89.0	120.3	60.7
Jan 31	SF AustinAdjEM #73	A	L 58–85	+9.5	L−17.5	135.5	O143	95.6	140.1	60.7

Texas A&M

Against the spread

Season

19-15

Home

9-9

Road

8-3

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −4.0

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 5 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

20-14

Home

12-6

Road

6-5

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total −3.9

Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 5 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 5 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 21	#2HoustonAdjEM #6	N	L 57–88	+10.0	L−21.0	143.0	O145	87.1	134.5	65.5
Mar 19	#7Saint Mary'sAdjEM #23	N	W 63–50	+2.5	W+15.5	148.5	U113	106.4	84.5	59.2
Mar 12	OklahomaAdjEM #47	N	L 63–83	−2.0	L−22.0	162.0	U146	96.4	127.0	65.3
Mar 7	LSUAdjEM #72	A	W 94–91 3OT	−2.5	W+0.5	160.5	O185	101.9	98.7	92.2
Mar 3	KentuckyAdjEM #27	H	W 96–85	−1.5	W+9.5	162.0	O181	127.3	112.7	75.4
Feb 28	TexasAdjEM #38	H	L 70–76	−2.5	L−8.5	160.5	U146	101.8	110.5	68.8
Feb 25	#20ArkansasAdjEM #19	A	L 84–99	+7.5	L−7.5	170.0	O183	108.7	128.1	77.3
Feb 21	OklahomaAdjEM #47	A	W 75–71	+1.5	W+5.5	165.5	U146	120.1	113.7	62.5
Feb 18	Ole MissAdjEM #82	H	W 80–77	−9.5	L−6.5	155.0	O157	116.3	111.9	68.8
Feb 14	#19VanderbiltAdjEM #12	A	L 69–82	+7.5	L−5.5	165.0	U151	98.9	117.5	69.8

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

SE LouisianaTexas A&M

Efficiency

102.1

115.1

109.1

104.8

67.1

70.5

—

Shooting

46.7%

53.8%

49.4%

53.8%

28.4%

35.9%

68.4%

73.8%

40.3%

37.1%

Ball control & glass

18.4%

14.7%

19.1%

18.4%

28.6%

32.0%

31.4%

33.0%

10.1%

8.8%

9.7%

11.7%

Style

39.5%

46.2%

43.8%

40.4%

12.2%

12.5%

51.6%

61.2%

37.4%

41.1%

Roster

2.67

3.38

6'5.1"

6'5.2"

—

64.3%

Offseason

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

SE Louisiana

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted SE Louisiana'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.)

Texas A&M

Returning minutes: 64.3%Returning production: 58.9%

Lost

Rashaun Agee 26.9 mpg, 14.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Rylan Griffen 24.4 mpg, 10.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Pop Isaacs 21.7 mpg, 9.5 ppg · transferred to Oklahoma

Added

Nobody of note.

No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.

Returns 64% of last season's minutes; lost 3 of its top 5 (1 transferred).

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.