Texas A&M-Corpus Christi Islanders vs Florida State Seminoles basketball final score
Fri, Nov 13 · 5:00 PM ET · Donald L. Tucker Center, Tallahassee, FL
Non-conferenceACCNXDonald L. Tucker Center, Tallahassee, FL
Texas A&M-CC
2-1 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #178
@
Florida St
2-1 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #54
Final
6084
Final score
Projected 64.3 – 87.4
AMCC win 2%FSU win 98%
MarketClose
Spread
FSU −24.0
open FSU −22.0
Total
149.0
open 148.0
Our line
FSU −23.1
Our total
151.7
as of Fri, Nov 13 · 4:51 PM ET
Our play
How our line is built
each step, from an even game to our lineSpread
Even game
0.0
Florida Strated 14.4 above average
+14.4
Texas A&M-CCrated 5.4 below average
+5.4
Home court
+3.4
Our line
FSU −23.1
◂ Texas A&M-CC sideFlorida St side ▸
Total
Average D-I game
151.3
Florida Sthigher-scoring games
+6.9
Texas A&M-CClower-scoring games
−6.4
Our line
151.7
Axis starts at 145 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the line by 0.1. The spread is seen from the home side: a plus moves it toward Florida St.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 71.9, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw season pace, Florida St is the faster team (74.1, #80 of 365) and Texas A&M-CC the slower (64.3, #341). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
71.9
per team, 40 min
Market total
149.0
Market close · open 148.0
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.5#294
Texas A&M-CC
73.8#35
Florida St
How this game plays
points this game from the four factors, vs an average D-I matchupOur line
FSU −23.1
Four factors 8.6Not in these stats 14.5
From the four factors
Florida St has the ball+3.5
Texas A&M-CC has the ball−5.1
Florida St has the ball
✓Takes care of the ballTO% 13.9% #52 · AMCC forces 17.9% #175 · ~11 turnovers+2.3
✓Gets to the lineFTR 47.6% #61 · AMCC allows 50.5% #318 · FT 81.3% #24+1.9
✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 52.6% #138 · AMCC allows 45.9% #81−1.0
✓Wins second chancesOR% 38.5% #55 · AMCC allows 23.0% #26+0.3
Texas A&M-CC has the ball
✗Coughs it upTO% 24.9% #346 · FSU forces 18.9% #138 · ~16 turnovers−3.8
✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 47.9% #235 · FSU allows 48.8% #146−2.3
✓Gets to the lineFTR 48.9% #55 · FSU allows 45.8% #287 · FT 69.6% #185+0.9
✓Wins second chancesOR% 37.0% #77 · FSU allows 23.8% #35+0.1
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shootTexas A&M-CCoffense vsFlorida Stdefense
Share of shots by zone
Texas A&M-CC shoots
50.0
2.3
17.0
30.7
Florida St allows
20.6
8.8
18.4
52.2
D-I average
38.2
8.1
12.3
41.4
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 52.3%#268 | 64.3%#270 | 58.1% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 50.0%#78 | 33.3%#131 | 37.9% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 46.7%#80 | 28.0%#91 | 36.0% |
| Three | 26.7%#294 | 34.6%#233 | 32.4% |
Florida Stoffense vsTexas A&M-CCdefense
Share of shots by zone
Florida St shoots
36.2
4.0
21.5
38.3
Texas A&M-CC allows
40.7
14.3
14.3
30.8
D-I average
38.2
8.1
12.3
41.4
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 63.0%#106 | 43.2%#25 | 58.1% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 50.0%#78 | 46.2%#244 | 37.9% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 46.9%#79 | 38.5%#198 | 36.0% |
| Three | 26.0%#309 | 33.3%#203 | 32.4% |
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 lineTexas A&M-CC
−0.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#180 of 365
Off reb %
37.0%
#77
Def reb %
77.0%
#26
Turnover %
24.9%
#346
Forced TO %
17.9%
#175
FT rate
48.9%
#55
FT allowed
50.5%
#318
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.9
Defensive rebounding+2.9
Ball security−4.8
Forcing turnovers−0.1
Foul shots drawn+3.0
Foul shots allowed−3.4
Florida St
+9.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#55 of 365
Off reb %
38.5%
#55
Def reb %
76.2%
#35
Turnover %
13.9%
#52
Forced TO %
18.9%
#138
FT rate
47.6%
#61
FT allowed
45.8%
#287
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+2.3
Defensive rebounding+2.7
Ball security+3.0
Forcing turnovers+0.6
Foul shots drawn+2.7
Foul shots allowed−2.2
Florida St has more extra scoring chances per game: +9.1 (#55 of 365) to Texas A&M-CC’s −0.4 (#180).
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
Who has been playing, and who has notTexas A&M-CC2026-27 numbers · last game: Louisiana, Nov 6
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | Min/40, last 8 | Last 3 vs before | Status | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | F | Sr | 6'8" | 3-3 | 23.3 | 34 | — | Started last | 6.7 | 4.3 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 63.6% | 100.0% | 0.7 | 60.0% | 16.2% | |
| 10 | G | Sr | 6'5" | 3-3 | 22.0 | 26 | — | Started last | 10.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 57.9% | 46.2% | 4.3 | 88.9% | 23.9% | |
| 12 | G | Jr | 6'7" | 3-0 | 20.0 | 18 | — | Bench | 10.3 | 2.3 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 64.3% | 25.0% | 1.3 | 80.0% | 26.4% | |
| 22 | F | Jr | 6'7" | 3-1 | 18.0 | 27 | — | Bench | 6.7 | 6.0 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 53.8% | — | 0.0 | 75.0% | 23.3% | |
| 4 | G | So | 6'5" | 3-1 | 17.7 | 19 | — | Bench | 3.7 | 3.7 | 1.7 | 1.0 | 25.0% | 0.0% | 1.7 | 37.5% | 25.5% | |
| 42 | F | Jr | 6'7" | 3-2 | 16.3 | 14 | — | Started last | 8.0 | 3.3 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 90.9% | — | 0.0 | 44.4% | 26.2% | |
| 1 | G | Sr | 6'3" | 3-1 | 15.7 | 18 | — | Bench | 3.3 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 20.0% | 0.0% | 0.7 | 100.0% | 18.6% | |
| 2 | G | Jr | 6'2" | 3-0 | 14.3 | 14 | — | Bench | 2.3 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 16.7% | 12.5% | 2.7 | 50.0% | 28.9% | |
| 9 | G | Sr | 6'3" | 3-2 | 13.7 | 18 | — | Started last | 3.0 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 2.0 | 26.9% | 20.0% | 1.7 | 100.0% | 29.1% | |
| 5 | G | Fr | 6'2" | 3-0 | 10.7 | 4 | — | Bench | 3.3 | 1.3 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 43.8% | 20.0% | 1.7 | 100.0% | 17.2% | |
| 7 | F | Sr | 6'5" | 2-0 | 14.5 | 0 | — | Missed last game | 13.0 | 5.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 80.0% | — | 0.0 | 33.3% | 40.0% | |
| 0 | G | Jr | 6'1" | 3-2 | 8.7 | — | — | Active | 3.0 | 3.0 | 1.3 | 0.3 | 50.0% | — | 0.0 | 100.0% | 21.1% | |
| 23 | C | Fr | 6'11" | 1-0 | 20.0 | — | — | Active | 10.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 83.3% | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 21.2% | |
| 11 | G | Fr | 5'10" | 1-0 | 11.0 | — | — | Active | 7.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 70.0% | 33.3% | 3.0 | — | 24.3% |
Competitive minutes leave out garbage time (provisional rule: a second-half lead of 25+ inside 15:00, 20+ inside 10:00, 15+ inside 5:00 or 10+ inside 2:00, held to the end) and are shown per 40 minutes. Status says only whether a player appeared; the reason is not published.
Trends
Results against the closing spread and total, last ten games, entering this gameTexas A&M-CC
Against the spread
Season
1-1
Home
0-0
Road
1-1
Last 10
1-1
avg cover +4.5
Covered the last game
Over / under
Season
0-2
Home
0-0
Road
0-2
Last 10
0-2
avg vs total −11.2
Under 2 straight
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 10 | Dallas Christian Crusaders | H | W 102–58 | — | — | — | — | 137.9 | 78.4 | 74.0 |
| Nov 6 | Louisiana | A | W 67–60 | +3.5 | W+10.5 | 129.0 | U127 | 101.9 | 91.3 | 65.8 |
| Nov 2 | Texas St | A | L 55–67 | +10.5 | L−1.5 | 142.5 | U122 | 87.6 | 106.7 | 62.8 |
| Mar 10 | SF Austin | N | L 58–60 | +6.0 | W+4.0 | 134.5 | U118 | 94.7 | 98.0 | 61.3 |
| Mar 9 | LSU N Orleans | N | W 74–61 | −2.0 | W+11.0 | 147.5 | U135 | 127.1 | 104.8 | 58.2 |
| Mar 2 | East Texas A&M | H | W 84–71 | −8.0 | W+5.0 | 137.5 | O155 | 124.9 | 105.6 | 67.2 |
| Feb 28 | N'Western St | H | W 71–59 | −6.0 | W+6.0 | 134.0 | U130 | 117.4 | 97.5 | 60.5 |
| Feb 23 | SE Louisiana | A | W 73–68 | −2.0 | W+3.0 | 130.5 | O141 | 112.9 | 105.2 | 64.7 |
| Feb 21 | McNeese | A | L 54–70 | +14.0 | L−2.0 | 140.5 | U124 | 82.3 | 106.7 | 65.6 |
| Feb 16 | SF Austin | H | L 68–78 | +5.0 | L−5.0 | 136.5 | O146 | 101.5 | 116.4 | 67.0 |
Florida St
Against the spread
Season
2-1
Home
1-1
Road
0-0
Last 10
2-1
avg cover +5.0
Missed the spread in the last game
Over / under
Season
2-1
Home
1-1
Road
0-0
Last 10
2-1
avg vs total +4.3
Under in the last game
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 10 | #1Florida | H | L 72–81 | +8.5 | L−0.5 | 164.0 | U153 | 98.6 | 110.9 | 73.0 |
| Nov 6 | Troy | H | W 91–68 | −22.5 | W+0.5 | 158.5 | O159 | 128.6 | 96.1 | 70.8 |
| Nov 2 | Florida A&M | N | W 112–69 | −28.0 | W+15.0 | 157.5 | O181 | 142.4 | 87.7 | 78.6 |
| Mar 12 | #1Duke | N | L 79–80 | +17.0 | W+16.0 | 150.5 | O159 | 117.5 | 119.0 | 67.2 |
| Mar 11 | California | N | W 95–89 | −3.0 | W+3.0 | 155.0 | O184 | 136.3 | 127.7 | 69.7 |
| Mar 7 | SMU | H | W 91–78 | −1.0 | W+12.0 | 158.5 | O169 | 123.4 | 105.8 | 73.7 |
| Mar 4 | Pitt | A | W 75–74 | −1.5 | L−0.5 | 145.0 | O149 | 114.3 | 112.8 | 65.6 |
| Feb 28 | Georgia Tech | A | W 80–71 | −6.0 | W+3.0 | 159.5 | U151 | 123.7 | 109.8 | 64.7 |
| Feb 24 | Miami | H | L 73–83 | +2.0 | L−8.0 | 153.5 | O156 | 103.1 | 117.2 | 70.8 |
| Feb 21 | Clemson | A | W 70–65 | +8.5 | W+13.5 | 144.5 | U135 | 116.9 | 108.6 | 59.9 |
Records vs the closing line describe the past; ten games is a small sample.
Team comparison
national rank toned left for away, right for homeTexas A&M-CCFlorida St
Efficiency
101.3
114.6
102.5
102.8
68.5
73.8
-5.3
0.9
Shooting
47.9%
52.6%
51.6%
61.0%
26.7%
26.0%
69.6%
81.3%
48.9%
47.6%
Ball control & glass
24.9%
13.9%
17.9%
18.9%
37.0%
38.5%
23.0%
23.8%
10.9%
6.7%
10.9%
5.9%
Style
31.9%
38.2%
45.9%
43.6%
7.4%
14.5%
29.3%
45.1%
57.4%
31.7%
Roster
3.12
2.57
6'5.1"
6'7.5"
12.1%
9.7%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputTexas A&M-CC
Returning minutes: 15.1%Returning production: 14.1%
Lost
- Sheldon Williams 25.4 mpg, 11.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Nick Shogbonyo 22.8 mpg, 10.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Mason Gibson 19.5 mpg, 8.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Leo Torbor 19.2 mpg, 5.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Franck Yetna 18.8 mpg, 6.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- D'Avian Houston 16.8 mpg, 6.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Jordan Mizell from Tarleton St · 27.6 mpg, 5.3 ppg last season
- Sebastian Robinson from NJIT · 24.9 mpg, 13.4 ppg last season
- Isaiah Lewis from Long Beach St · 22.1 mpg, 6.0 ppg last season
- Bin Basil from Wagner · 22.0 mpg, 8.6 ppg last season
- Lamin Foon no D1 minutes last season
- Jacori Jones no D1 minutes last season
Returns 15% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5. Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Florida St
Returning minutes: 15.9%Returning production: 17.0%
Lost
- Lajae Jones 29.5 mpg, 12.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Robert McCray V 28.9 mpg, 16.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Chauncey Wiggins 27.1 mpg, 12.9 ppg · transferred to Gonzaga
- Martin Somerville 26.0 mpg, 8.0 ppg · transferred to West Virginia
- Kobe MaGee 19.8 mpg, 7.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Thomas Bassong 19.3 mpg, 5.9 ppg · transferred to Mississippi St
Added
- Kam Taylor from UNC Asheville · 34.7 mpg, 18.9 ppg last season
- Anthony Robinson II from Missouri · 27.0 mpg, 8.9 ppg last season
- Sebastian Rancik from Colorado · 24.6 mpg, 10.8 ppg last season
- Cooper Schwieger from Wake Forest · 19.7 mpg, 4.9 ppg last season
- Shon Abaev from Cincinnati · 11.6 mpg, 5.1 ppg last season
- Jasen Lopez no D1 minutes last season
Returns 16% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5 (2 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Line history
Market line, home spread or game totalLines by book
| Book | Spread (home) open → now | Total open → now | ML home | ML away |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DraftKings | -21.5→-23.5-112 | 147.5→148.5o-112 u-108 | — | +2200 |
| FanDuel | -22.5→-23.5-105 | 148.5o-115 u-105 | — | +3000 |
| BetMGM | — | 148.5→149.5o-105 u-115 | — | +2200 |
| BetRivers | -22.5→-24.5-106 | 149.5→148.5o-113 u-110 | — | — |
| Caesars | -22.5→-23.5-110 | 148.5→149o-110 u-110 | — | — |
| Fanatics | -22→-24.5-105 | 148→149o-110 u-110 | — | +3000 |
| BetOnline | -22→-23-118 | 148→149.5o-110 u-110 | — | — |
| Bovada | -22.5→-24-105 | 149.5→149o-110 u-110 | — | — |
| theScore Bet | -21.5→-23.5+100 | 147.5o-120 u+100 | — | +3000 |
| Hard Rock | -22.5→-24.5-105 | 149.5→148.5o-110 u-110 | — | — |
| Kalshi | -22.5-127 | 147.5→149.5o+100 u-104 | -4900 | +3233 |
| Polymarket | -22.5→-23.5-104 | 149.5o+100 u-104 | -4248 | +3348 |
| Novig | -22.5→— | 149.5o-102 u-102 | -4445 | +3348 |
DraftKings
FanDuel
BetMGM
BetRivers
Caesars
Fanatics
BetOnline
Bovada
theScore Bet
Hard Rock
Kalshi
Polymarket
Novigopen = first-sighted line for this event · now = latest capture
Head-to-head
this season and lastNo meetings the last two seasons.
More games on Fri, Nov 13
- West Florida vs Cleveland St · 3:00 PM ET
- North Alabama at Miami · 5:00 PM ET
- Georgetown at Clemson · 6:00 PM ET
- Bryant at Rutgers · 6:00 PM ET
- Pitt at Butler · 6:30 PM ET
- Merrimack at Florida · 7:00 PM ET
- Georgia at North Carolina · 7:00 PM ET
- Tennessee St at Tennessee · 7:00 PM ET
- Long Island at Fordham · 7:00 PM ET
- Harvard at G Washington · 7:00 PM ET
- Sam Houston at Illinois · 7:00 PM ET
- Troy at NC State · 7:00 PM ET
- Mount St Marys at Virginia Tech · 7:00 PM ET
- Yale at Northeastern · 7:00 PM ET
- Chattanooga at Elon · 7:00 PM ET
- Iona at Hofstra · 7:00 PM ET
- N Arizona at Kentucky · 7:00 PM ET
- Prairie View at Vanderbilt · 7:00 PM ET
- FIU at FGCU · 7:00 PM ET
- Columbia at Bucknell · 7:00 PM ET
- Marist at Lehigh · 7:00 PM ET
- Northern Iowa at Michigan St · 7:00 PM ET
- App State at Charlotte · 7:00 PM ET
- Ohio at Purdue · 7:00 PM ET
- Ohio State at UConn · 7:30 PM ET
- SE Missouri at MTSU · 7:30 PM ET
- NC Central at Liberty · 7:30 PM ET
- South Dakota at Drake · 7:30 PM ET
- FDU at Oklahoma · 8:00 PM ET
- SIUE at Duke · 8:00 PM ET
- Virginia at Maryland · 8:00 PM ET
- C Arkansas at Arkansas · 8:00 PM ET
- Milwaukee at TCU · 8:00 PM ET
- GA Southern at UCF · 8:00 PM ET
- Alcorn St at Tarleton St · 8:00 PM ET
- Wright St at Samford · 8:00 PM ET
- Illinois St at N Dakota St · 8:00 PM ET
- Texas Southern at Murray St · 8:00 PM ET
- Southern Miss at Texas St · 8:00 PM ET
- Lindenwood at Omaha · 8:45 PM ET
- Seton Hall at Alabama · 9:00 PM ET
- Xavier vs Mississippi St · 9:00 PM ET
- DePaul at Northwestern · 9:00 PM ET
- Arizona at Auburn · 9:00 PM ET
- Ball State at SMU · 9:00 PM ET
- UL Monroe at Arizona St · 9:00 PM ET
- Cal Poly at Idaho · 9:00 PM ET
- Stanford at UNLV · 9:00 PM ET
- Chicago St at San Diego · 9:30 PM ET
- Miss Valley St at Oregon St · 9:30 PM ET
- UIC at Saint Mary's · 10:00 PM ET
- East Texas A&M at Portland · 10:00 PM ET
- UC San Diego at Utah State · 10:00 PM ET
- AR-Pine Bluff at CA Baptist · 10:30 PM ET
The CBB Matchups tab lays out the day's Division I slate: matchup, tip time, records and rank, and — once posted — the market spread and total (the median across books when no market line is up). 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, from our line: the same view our bets are made from.
What these numbers mean: line shopping.