West Florida Argonauts vs Alabama A&M Bulldogs basketball final score
Thu, Nov 12 · 8:00 PM ET · Event Center, Huntsville, AL
Non-conferenceEvent Center, Huntsville, AL
West Florida
2-1 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #343
@
Alabama A&M
2-1 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #335
Final (OT)
8385
Final score
Projected 73.8 – 75.6
UWF win 44%AAMU win 56%
MarketClose
Spread
AAMU −4.5
open AAMU −8.5
Total
146.0
open 147.5
Our line
AAMU −1.8
Our total
149.4
as of Thu, Nov 12 · 7:54 PM ET
Our play
How our line is built
each step, from an even game to our lineSpread
Even game
0.0
Alabama A&Mrated 8.7 below average
−8.7
West Floridarated 6.9 below average
+6.9
Home court
+3.6
Our line
AAMU −1.8
◂ West Florida sideAlabama A&M side ▸
Total
Average D-I game
151.4
Alabama A&Mlower-scoring games
−5.5
West Floridahigher-scoring games
+3.5
Our line
149.4
Axis starts at 142 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
The spread is seen from the home side: a plus moves it toward Alabama A&M.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 70.3, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw season pace, West Florida is the faster team (76.1, #47 of 365) and Alabama A&M the slower (69.4, #227). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
70.3
per team, 40 min
Market total
146.0
Market close · open 147.5
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
71.2#134
West Florida
69.6#243
Alabama A&M
How this game plays
points this game from the four factors, vs an average D-I matchupOur line
AAMU −1.8
Four factors −17.2 · not in these stats +19.0
From the four factors
Alabama A&M has the ball−16.1
West Florida has the ball+1.1
Alabama A&M has the ball
✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 31.1% #361 · UWF allows 48.4% #134−12.1
✗Few second chancesOR% 24.4% #303 · UWF allows 29.7% #153−2.4
✗Coughs it upTO% 24.5% #343 · UWF forces 15.8% #247 · ~14 turnovers−1.8
✓Gets to the lineFTR 39.6% #143 · UWF allows 43.5% #263 · FT 66.7% #239+0.2
West Florida has the ball
✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 35.6% #356 · AAMU allows 55.3% #279−6.0
✓Wins second chancesOR% 38.9% #49 · AAMU allows 41.9% #337+4.4
✓Takes care of the ballTO% 14.5% #67 · AAMU forces 18.7% #144 · ~12 turnovers+1.5
✓Gets to the lineFTR 38.4% #156 · AAMU allows 43.9% #269 · FT 82.1% #21+1.1
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shootWest Floridaoffense vsAlabama A&Mdefense
Share of shots by zone
West Florida shoots
42.0
7.2
20.3
30.4
Alabama A&M allows
31.1
8.9
6.7
53.3
D-I average
38.1
8.1
12.5
41.4
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 41.4%#343 | 50.0%#71 | 58.0% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 20.0%#296 | 75.0%#349 | 38.0% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 21.4%#294 | 0.0%#1 | 35.6% |
| Three | 26.1%#304 | 41.9%#336 | 32.5% |
Alabama A&Moffense vsWest Floridadefense
Share of shots by zone
Alabama A&M shoots
18.4
7.9
23.7
50.0
West Florida allows
33.9
3.2
8.1
54.8
D-I average
38.1
8.1
12.5
41.4
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 42.9%#333 | 66.7%#292 | 58.0% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 33.3%#184 | 0.0%#1 | 38.0% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 11.1%#335 | 20.0%#48 | 35.6% |
| Three | 20.8%#352 | 29.4%#114 | 32.5% |
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 lineWest Florida
+2.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#129 of 365
Off reb %
38.9%
#49
Def reb %
70.3%
#153
Turnover %
14.5%
#67
Forced TO %
15.8%
#247
FT rate
38.4%
#156
FT allowed
43.5%
#263
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+2.5
Defensive rebounding+0.7
Ball security+2.6
Forcing turnovers−1.6
Foul shots drawn+0.3
Foul shots allowed−1.6
Alabama A&M
−10.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#324 of 365
Off reb %
24.4%
#303
Def reb %
58.1%
#337
Turnover %
24.5%
#343
Forced TO %
18.7%
#144
FT rate
39.6%
#143
FT allowed
43.9%
#269
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−2.3
Defensive rebounding−3.4
Ball security−4.5
Forcing turnovers+0.5
Foul shots drawn+0.6
Foul shots allowed−1.7
West Florida has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.9 (#129 of 365) to Alabama A&M’s −10.8 (#324).
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
West Florida2026-27 numbers through Thu, Nov 12
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | G | Sr | 6'5" | 4-4 | 22.8 | 11.8 | 4.3 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 56.3% | 42.9% | 5.3 | 33.3% | 27.8% | |
| 4 | G | Jr | 6'1" | 4-4 | 21.5 | 7.0 | 3.3 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 70.6% | 33.3% | 1.5 | 100.0% | 15.5% | |
| 2 | G | Jr | 6'2" | 4-4 | 20.8 | 18.8 | 3.8 | 2.3 | 1.8 | 54.0% | 41.7% | 6.0 | 91.3% | 44.2% | |
| 32 | G | Sr | 6'2" | 4-0 | 18.0 | 6.8 | 2.3 | 3.0 | 1.8 | 58.3% | 37.5% | 2.0 | 75.0% | 21.6% | |
| 10 | F | Sr | 6'7" | 4-4 | 17.8 | 3.8 | 3.5 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 30.8% | 0.0% | 1.0 | 77.8% | 16.0% | |
| 8 | F | Sr | 6'6" | 3-0 | 21.3 | 7.3 | 4.3 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 38.0% | 20.0% | 1.7 | 75.0% | 27.2% | |
| 7 | G | Jr | 6'2" | 4-0 | 16.0 | 6.0 | 1.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 44.0% | 42.9% | 3.5 | 100.0% | 24.3% | |
| 23 | F | Sr | 6'9" | 4-4 | 16.0 | 8.3 | 3.0 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 73.5% | 50.0% | 0.5 | 72.7% | 22.4% | |
| 0 | F | Sr | 6'7" | 4-0 | 15.5 | 9.5 | 3.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 76.5% | — | 0.0 | 92.3% | 21.9% | |
| 21 | G | Sr | 6'4" | 3-0 | 13.7 | 9.0 | 3.0 | 1.7 | 0.0 | 70.6% | 50.0% | 2.7 | 75.0% | 22.9% | |
| 6 | F | Fr | 6'6" | 3-0 | 13.7 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 34.6% | 25.0% | 1.3 | 0.0% | 21.6% | |
| 5 | F | So | 6'7" | 2-0 | 20.0 | 7.0 | 9.0 | 2.5 | 1.0 | 38.5% | — | 0.0 | 66.7% | 21.7% | |
| 1 | G | Sr | 6'2" | 3-0 | 11.0 | 9.3 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 65.6% | 50.0% | 3.3 | 77.8% | 33.4% | |
| 11 | G | Fr | 6'1" | 2-0 | 8.0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 66.7% | 40.0% | 2.5 | — | 18.9% |
Trends
Results against the closing spread and total, last ten games, entering this gameWest Florida
Against the spread
Season
1-0
Home
0-0
Road
1-0
Last 10
1-0
avg cover +6.5
Covered the last game
Over / under
Season
0-1
Home
0-0
Road
0-1
Last 10
0-1
avg vs total −4.0
Under in the last game
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 9 | Baptist (Fl) Eagles | H | W 110–59 | — | — | — | — | 130.1 | 69.8 | 84.5 |
| Nov 6 | FIU | A | L 75–85 | +16.5 | W+6.5 | 164.0 | U160 | 98.6 | 111.8 | 76.1 |
| Nov 2 | Southeastern Baptist Chargers | H | W 127–42 | — | — | — | — | 164.2 | 54.3 | 77.4 |
Alabama A&M
Against the spread
Season
0-1
Home
0-0
Road
0-1
Last 10
0-1
avg cover −13.5
Missed the spread in the last game
Over / under
Season
0-1
Home
0-0
Road
0-1
Last 10
0-1
avg vs total −9.0
Under in the last game
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 9 | DePaul | A | L 47–84 | +23.5 | L−13.5 | 140.0 | U131 | 67.7 | 121.0 | 69.4 |
| Nov 6 | Mississippi U for Women Owls | H | W 103–47 | — | — | — | — | 132.7 | 60.6 | 77.6 |
| Nov 2 | Oakwood Ambassadors | H | W 90–57 | — | — | — | — | 110.6 | 70.1 | 81.3 |
| Mar 13 | Prairie View | N | L 55–74 | −2.0 | L−21.0 | 140.5 | U129 | 87.1 | 117.2 | 63.1 |
| Mar 12 | Texas Southern | N | W 85–74 OT | −1.5 | W+9.5 | 142.5 | O159 | 111.5 | 97.1 | 76.2 |
| Mar 5 | Southern | H | L 85–88 | +1.0 | L−2.0 | 145.0 | O173 | 117.0 | 121.1 | 72.7 |
| Mar 3 | Grambling | H | W 77–63 | −2.0 | W+12.0 | 140.0 | P140 | 120.8 | 98.8 | 63.8 |
| Feb 28 | Alabama St | H | L 88–89 | −1.0 | L−2.0 | 143.0 | O177 | 131.0 | 132.5 | 67.2 |
| Feb 21 | Bethune | A | L 76–85 | +7.0 | L−2.0 | 143.0 | O161 | 112.3 | 125.6 | 67.7 |
| Feb 19 | Florida A&M | A | W 63–61 | +2.0 | W+4.0 | 139.5 | U124 | 100.0 | 96.8 | 63.0 |
Records vs the closing line describe the past; ten games is a small sample.
Team comparison
national rank toned left for away, right for homeWest FloridaAlabama A&M
Efficiency
98.8
98.7
112.6
111.6
71.2
69.6
-2.0
7.3
Shooting
35.6%
31.1%
34.0%
31.0%
26.1%
20.8%
82.1%
66.7%
38.4%
39.6%
Ball control & glass
14.5%
24.5%
15.8%
18.7%
38.9%
24.4%
29.7%
41.9%
10.5%
15.8%
18.0%
17.2%
Style
31.5%
45.3%
40.0%
29.8%
12.0%
14.9%
52.2%
57.1%
56.1%
44.3%
Roster
3.30
2.97
6'4.3"
6'4.7"
—
31.1%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputWest Florida
Returning minutes: —Returning production: —
Lost
Nobody of note.
Added
Nobody of note.
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
New to Division I this season -- no returning-minutes baseline.
Alabama A&M
Returning minutes: 38.9%Returning production: 37.5%
Lost
- Kintavious Dozier 32.3 mpg, 14.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Koron Davis 29.4 mpg, 14.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- PJ Eason 25.2 mpg, 7.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Lou Hutchinson III 16.5 mpg, 4.0 ppg · transferred to West Georgia
- James Flippin 7.7 mpg, 2.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Angok Anyang 5.8 mpg, 1.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Javantae Edwards from Canisius · 20.0 mpg, 5.7 ppg last season
- Nate Johnson from Detroit Mercy · 8.3 mpg, 2.3 ppg last season
- Stephaun Walker no D1 minutes last season
- David Meriwether no D1 minutes last season
- Kevin Paul no D1 minutes last season
- Devontes Cobbs no D1 minutes last season
Returns 39% of last season's minutes; lost 3 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).
Line history
Market line, home spread or game totalLines by book
| Book | Spread (home) open → now | Total open → now | ML home | ML away |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DraftKings | -8.5→-4.5-108 | 147.5→146.5o-112 u-108 | -198 | +164 |
| FanDuel | — | 147.5→146.5o-110 u-110 | — | — |
| BetMGM | — | 147.5→146.5o-110 u-110 | -190 | +155 |
| BetRivers | -7.5→-4.5-120 | 148.5o-106 u-118 | -235 | +180 |
| Caesars | -7.5→-4.5-110 | 147.5→146.5o-110 u-110 | -180 | +152 |
| Fanatics | -7.5→-4.5-110 | 148.5→146.5o-110 u-110 | -205 | +170 |
| BetOnline | -7→-4-110 | 148.5→146o-110 u-110 | — | — |
| Bovada | -7.5→-4.5-105 | 148.5→146.5o-115 u-105 | -200 | +170 |
| theScore Bet | -8.5→-4.5+100 | 147.5→145.5o-120 u+100 | -190 | +160 |
| Hard Rock | -7.5→-4.5-120 | 148.5o-105 u-115 | -230 | +180 |
| Kalshi | -8.5→-5.5+127 | 147.5o+108 u-117 | -178 | +170 |
| Polymarket | -8.5→-5.5+117 | 146.5o-104 u+100 | -178 | +170 |
| Novig | -4.5+108 | 147.5→146.5o-104 u-102 | -174 | +170 |
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 Thu, Nov 12
- Kansas City vs George Mason · 3:00 PM ET
- Morgan St at UMBC · 6:00 PM ET
- Bradley vs Coppin St · 6:00 PM ET
- Tennessee Tech at Indiana · 6:30 PM ET
- Mercyhurst at Penn State · 6:30 PM ET
- Niagara at Bowling Green · 7:00 PM ET
- Canisius at Brown · 7:00 PM ET
- MD Eastern at Rhode Island · 7:00 PM ET
- Bakersfield at W Illinois · 7:00 PM ET
- Southern Utah at High Point · 7:00 PM ET
- Loyola MD at Towson · 7:00 PM ET
- Mercer at West Virginia · 7:00 PM ET
- Stetson at Howard · 7:00 PM ET
- Monmouth at Quinnipiac · 7:00 PM ET
- C Connecticut at Sacred Heart · 7:00 PM ET
- W Michigan at Purdue FW · 7:00 PM ET
- Richmond at S Illinois · 8:00 PM ET
- Southern at Minnesota · 8:00 PM ET
- LMU vs South Alabama · 8:00 PM ET
- Oklahoma St at Texas A&M · 8:00 PM ET
- New Mexico St at UTEP · 9:00 PM ET
- Montana St at BYU · 9:00 PM ET
- UC Riverside at San José St · 10:00 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.