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.

Conference gameMatthew Knight Arena, Eugene, OR

USC

Efficiency #97

2025-26: 18-14 · 7-14 conf

Oregon

Efficiency #143

2025-26: 12-20 · 5-16 conf

Sat, Dec 5 · TBD

73.5

win 43%

Projected

75.7

win 57%

No line posted yet.

Model: ORE −2.2 · total 149.2 · 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: Oregon 67.4, USC 70.5 → 69.6 possessions

+2.8

Oregon offense vs USC defense

−1.8

USC offense vs Oregon defense

0.0

Projected total

149.2

Axis starts at 146 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Oregon offense vs USC defense

−1.8

USC offense vs Oregon defense

0.0

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

+4.0

Oregon by 2.2

2.2

USC side ◂▸ Oregon 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 Oregon.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 69.6, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, USC is the faster team (71.0, #53 of 365) and Oregon the slower (66.5, #270). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

69.6

per team, 40 min

Projected total

149.2

model

Projected team totals

73.5 / 75.7

USC / Oregon

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

70.5#25

USC

67.4#258

Oregon

How this game plays

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

DefenseUSC

USC's shot-blocking

USC ranks #9 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 13.2% of Oregon's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.

AdvantageOregon

Where Oregon struggles: shooting

Oregon shoots an effective 49.5% (#271); USC allows 49.7% (#89). Expect about 49.4%, 1.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.6 points per 100 possessions.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (USC's defense) 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 USC at about 36.9% of its shots from three, Oregon about 42.7%.

USC has the ball

OffenseOregon allowsvs D1 avg

50.4% #225

50.9% #148

-1.0 pt/100

17.4% #228

15.7% #234

+0.4 pt/100

32.4% #113

32.3% #271

+1.4 pt/100

44.2% #8

32.0% #105

+0.3 pt/100

72.6% #182

—

+0.0 pt/100

USC net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.1 pts/100

Oregon has the ball

OffenseUSC allowsvs D1 avg

49.5% #271

49.7% #89

-2.6 pt/100

17.6% #248

16.3% #198

-0.3 pt/100

32.3% #114

32.2% #269

+1.4 pt/100

35.0% #181

33.4% #139

-0.1 pt/100

73.0% #169

—

+0.1 pt/100

Oregon net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.6 pts/100

Shot diet

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

USCoffense vsOregondefense

Share of shots by zone

USC shoots

38.6

6.4

21.2

33.8

Oregon allows

30.9

6.5

20.6

42.0

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.7%#128	57.2%#122	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	39.6%#184	44.5%#282	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	38.3%#179	43.9%#339	38.0%
Three	31.7%#299	33.4%#144	33.7%

Oregonoffense vsUSCdefense

Share of shots by zone

Oregon shoots

33.8

7.2

16.8

42.3

USC allows

37.0

4.7

18.0

40.4

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	58.8%#166	56.0%#87	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	39.8%#178	44.6%#283	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.7%#243	44.3%#342	38.0%
Three	32.1%#277	30.9%#31	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

USC

+2.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#82 of 365

Off reb %

32.4%

#113

Def reb %

67.8%

#269

Turnover %

17.4%

#228

Forced TO %

16.3%

#198

FT rate

44.2%

FT allowed

33.4%

#139

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.6

Defensive rebounding−0.5

Ball security−0.4

Forcing turnovers−0.2

Foul shots drawn+2.4

Foul shots allowed+0.5

Oregon

−0.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#193 of 365

Off reb %

32.3%

#114

Def reb %

67.7%

#271

Turnover %

17.6%

#248

Forced TO %

15.7%

#234

FT rate

35.0%

#181

FT allowed

32.0%

#105

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.6

Defensive rebounding−0.5

Ball security−0.6

Forcing turnovers−0.7

Foul shots drawn0.0

Foul shots allowed+0.8

USC has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.3 (#82 of 365) to Oregon’s −0.4 (#193).

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

USC2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
6	Jacob Cofie	F	So	6'10"	32-32	30.4	9.9	6.8	1.9	1.7	55.3%	31.8%	2.1	60.5%	19.5%
13	Kam Woods	G	Sr	6'2"	20-17	31.4	8.8	4.3	4.1	2.0	44.1%	16.7%	2.1	61.1%	20.9%
7	Jordan Marsh	G	Jr	5'11"	28-0	18.3	7.3	2.0	1.9	1.1	49.7%	35.7%	3.0	77.8%	23.3%
8	Jerry Easter II	G	Fr	6'5"	28-7	17.9	4.6	3.1	1.1	0.9	45.5%	23.5%	0.6	74.4%	17.0%
5	Terrance Williams II	F	Sr	6'7"	30-13	13.7	2.3	2.0	0.6	0.1	36.7%	27.6%	1.0	64.1%	11.2%
0	Alijah Arenas	G	Fr	6'6"	14-13	27.6	14.1	2.9	2.1	2.3	37.6%	21.3%	4.4	79.2%	37.1%
33	Jaden Brownell	F	Sr	6'10"	30-0	11.6	5.1	1.9	0.4	0.6	48.2%	29.4%	2.8	83.3%	26.9%
9	Ryan Cornish	G	Sr	6'5"	25-11	11.0	2.4	0.7	0.8	0.4	48.0%	32.4%	1.4	93.3%	13.7%
1	Rodney Rice	G	Jr	6'5"	6-6	34.0	20.3	3.3	6.0	1.8	48.9%	38.5%	6.5	74.4%	32.8%
3	Amarion Dickerson	G	Sr	6'7"	8-1	21.6	4.6	3.4	1.1	1.0	59.1%	44.4%	1.1	61.1%	12.3%
12	EJ Neal Jr.	G	Sr	6'5"	8-0	2.3	0.8	0.3	0.0	0.3	37.5%	0.0%	0.6	—	28.3%
21	Jonah Goorin	G	So	6'4"	2-0	2.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.5	—	26.4%
18	Patrick O'Brien	G	Fr	6'5"	2-0	2.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
22	Brit Burden	F	So	6'7"	2-0	1.5	1.0	0.5	0.0	0.0	100.0%	—	0.0	—	17.4%

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

Oregon2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
5	Takai Simpkins	G	Sr	6'4"	31-31	32.0	12.5	2.9	2.4	2.1	51.0%	35.7%	4.5	84.8%	24.7%
10	Kwame Evans Jr.	F	Jr	6'10"	30-30	31.0	13.3	7.4	2.0	1.9	51.1%	30.4%	3.4	79.9%	25.9%
13	Sean Stewart	F	Jr	6'9"	32-23	23.0	6.5	5.2	1.2	1.2	51.2%	100.0%	0.0	53.3%	19.4%
4	Dezdrick Lindsay	F	Sr	6'6"	32-8	20.5	5.3	2.8	1.5	0.8	46.4%	32.8%	1.8	58.3%	18.7%
23	Wei Lin	G	So	6'4"	30-9	17.5	6.6	0.9	1.7	1.2	43.1%	29.5%	3.5	82.4%	27.4%
12	Drew Carter	G	Sr	6'3"	25-11	14.8	2.7	1.2	0.8	0.8	53.4%	34.8%	1.8	85.7%	13.5%
24	Jamari Phillips	G	So	6'4"	26-0	11.3	2.7	0.9	0.5	0.5	43.8%	29.5%	2.3	83.3%	18.7%
22	Devon Pryor	F	Jr	6'7"	16-11	18.1	2.9	2.5	1.2	0.6	47.5%	22.2%	1.1	47.4%	11.9%
6	Oleksandr Kobzystyi	F	Sr	6'8"	19-0	9.6	2.7	1.3	0.3	0.1	53.6%	39.1%	1.2	66.7%	16.0%
16	Ege Demir	C	Jr	6'11"	19-0	9.0	2.2	3.5	0.3	0.7	44.4%	—	0.0	28.6%	21.5%
7	Luke Johnson	F	So	6'8"	11-0	6.0	1.2	0.7	0.1	0.2	41.7%	25.0%	0.7	50.0%	15.8%
0	Efe Vatan	F	Fr	6'10"	5-0	3.0	1.2	0.4	0.0	0.2	66.7%	—	0.0	66.7%	23.3%
35	Miles Stewart	F	Sr	6'8"	1-0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
15	Rian Gonzales	G	Fr	6'3"	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.

USC2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
6	Jacob Cofie	F	So	6'10"	32-32	30.4	9.9	6.8	1.9	1.7	55.3%	31.8%	2.1	60.5%	19.5%
13	Kam Woods	G	Sr	6'2"	20-17	31.4	8.8	4.3	4.1	2.0	44.1%	16.7%	2.1	61.1%	20.9%
7	Jordan Marsh	G	Jr	5'11"	28-0	18.3	7.3	2.0	1.9	1.1	49.7%	35.7%	3.0	77.8%	23.3%
8	Jerry Easter II	G	Fr	6'5"	28-7	17.9	4.6	3.1	1.1	0.9	45.5%	23.5%	0.6	74.4%	17.0%
5	Terrance Williams II	F	Sr	6'7"	30-13	13.7	2.3	2.0	0.6	0.1	36.7%	27.6%	1.0	64.1%	11.2%
0	Alijah Arenas	G	Fr	6'6"	14-13	27.6	14.1	2.9	2.1	2.3	37.6%	21.3%	4.4	79.2%	37.1%
33	Jaden Brownell	F	Sr	6'10"	30-0	11.6	5.1	1.9	0.4	0.6	48.2%	29.4%	2.8	83.3%	26.9%
9	Ryan Cornish	G	Sr	6'5"	25-11	11.0	2.4	0.7	0.8	0.4	48.0%	32.4%	1.4	93.3%	13.7%
1	Rodney Rice	G	Jr	6'5"	6-6	34.0	20.3	3.3	6.0	1.8	48.9%	38.5%	6.5	74.4%	32.8%
3	Amarion Dickerson	G	Sr	6'7"	8-1	21.6	4.6	3.4	1.1	1.0	59.1%	44.4%	1.1	61.1%	12.3%
12	EJ Neal Jr.	G	Sr	6'5"	8-0	2.3	0.8	0.3	0.0	0.3	37.5%	0.0%	0.6	—	28.3%
21	Jonah Goorin	G	So	6'4"	2-0	2.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.5	—	26.4%
18	Patrick O'Brien	G	Fr	6'5"	2-0	2.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
22	Brit Burden	F	So	6'7"	2-0	1.5	1.0	0.5	0.0	0.0	100.0%	—	0.0	—	17.4%

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

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

USC

Against the spread

Season

13-18

Home

6-9

Road

5-6

Last 10

2-8

avg cover −7.8

Missed the spread 7 straightCovered 2 of 8 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

17-13-1

Home

10-5

Road

5-6

Last 10

7-3

avg vs total +4.2

Over 4 straightOver in 7 of 8 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 11	WashingtonAdjEM #59	N	L 79–83 OT	+3.5	L−0.5	153.0	O162	97.8	102.7	80.8
Mar 7	UCLAAdjEM #37	H	L 68–89	+5.0	L−16.0	151.0	O157	108.7	142.2	62.6
Mar 4	WashingtonAdjEM #59	A	L 72–91	+5.5	L−13.5	151.0	O163	94.7	119.7	76.0
Feb 28	#12NebraskaAdjEM #17	H	L 67–82	+5.0	L−10.0	148.5	O149	97.3	119.1	68.8
Feb 24	UCLAAdjEM #37	A	L 62–81	+7.0	L−12.0	150.5	U143	94.5	123.4	65.6
Feb 21	OregonAdjEM #143	H	L 70–71	−5.0	L−6.0	149.5	U141	99.8	101.3	70.1
Feb 18	#10IllinoisAdjEM #4	H	L 65–101	+9.0	L−27.0	152.5	O166	91.0	141.4	71.4
Feb 11	Ohio StateAdjEM #31	A	L 82–89	+8.0	W+1.0	152.5	O171	111.9	121.5	73.3
Feb 8	Penn StateAdjEM #194	A	W 77–75	−3.0	L−1.0	157.0	U152	106.4	103.7	72.3
Feb 3	IndianaAdjEM #45	H	W 81–75	+1.5	W+7.5	152.5	O156	111.5	103.2	72.7

Oregon

Against the spread

Season

12-20

Home

7-10

Road

4-6

Last 10

6-4

avg cover +0.5

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 5 of 7 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

14-18

Home

9-8

Road

2-8

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total −3.9

Under in the last gameOver in 3 of 7 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 10	MarylandAdjEM #198	N	L 60–70	−4.0	L−14.0	139.0	U130	95.6	111.5	62.8
Mar 7	WashingtonAdjEM #59	H	W 85–79	+1.5	W+7.5	146.0	O164	129.7	120.5	65.5
Mar 3	#11IllinoisAdjEM #4	A	L 54–80	+17.5	L−8.5	147.0	U134	78.9	116.9	68.5
Feb 28	NorthwesternAdjEM #78	A	L 62–63	+3.5	W+2.5	142.5	U125	97.3	98.9	63.7
Feb 25	WisconsinAdjEM #28	H	W 85–71	+5.5	W+19.5	153.0	O156	122.8	102.5	69.2
Feb 21	USCAdjEM #97	A	W 71–70	+5.0	W+6.0	149.5	U141	101.3	99.8	70.1
Feb 17	MinnesotaAdjEM #94	H	L 44–61	−3.5	L−20.5	134.5	U105	73.5	101.9	59.9
Feb 14	Penn StateAdjEM #194	H	W 83–72	−6.5	W+4.5	147.0	O155	126.5	109.7	65.6
Feb 9	IndianaAdjEM #45	A	L 74–92	+11.0	L−7.0	143.5	O166	111.5	138.7	66.3
Feb 7	#12PurdueAdjEM #9	A	L 64–68	+18.5	W+14.5	145.0	U132	96.6	102.7	66.2

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

USCOregon

Efficiency

109.7

108.8

105.5

107.2

70.5

67.4

—

Shooting

50.4%

49.5%

51.8%

50.5%

31.7%

32.1%

72.6%

73.0%

44.2%

35.0%

Ball control & glass

17.4%

17.6%

16.3%

15.7%

32.4%

32.3%

32.2%

32.3%

10.2%

10.3%

8.3%

9.5%

Style

34.1%

42.8%

42.7%

39.5%

12.8%

10.1%

56.5%

59.0%

30.8%

29.6%

Roster

2.79

3.25

6'5.7"

6'6.6"

68.1%

81.4%

Offseason

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

USC

Returning minutes: 68.1%Returning production: 58.4%

Lost

Ezra Ausar 29.8 mpg, 14.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Chad Baker-Mazara 24.1 mpg, 15.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Gabe Dynes 11.2 mpg, 2.8 ppg · transferred to Louisville

Added

Nobody of note.

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

Returns 68% of last season's minutes; lost 2 of its top 5. 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).

Oregon

Returning minutes: 81.4%Returning production: 72.8%

Lost

Nate Bittle 24.3 mpg, 13.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Jackson Shelstad 13.1 mpg, 5.8 ppg · transferred to Louisville

Added

Rian Gonzales no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 81% of last season's minutes; lost 1 of its top 5. 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).

Head-to-head

this season and last

Date	Season	Result
Sat, Feb 21	2025-26	Oregon 71 – 70 USC
Tue, Dec 2	2025-26	USC 82 – 77 Oregon

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.