PythiaBasketballBETA
NCAA
Texas Tech hosts New Orleans in the NCAA on 18 November 2026, and the Pythia model names Texas Tech the clear favourite, rating them 98% to win because the Red Zippers are undefeated at 3-0, averaging 78.7 points and allowing only 59.3, while New Orleans sits at 1-1, scoring 73.5 and conceding 82.5. Texas Tech's home record is 3-0, with four wins and one loss in their last five games, and they beat Illinois 84-78, Bethune-Cookman 76-58 and Jackson State 76-42 at home. New Orleans' road record is 0-1, having lost 57-100 to LSU on 3 November 2026, and they have two wins and three losses in their last five games, including a 90-65 home win over Loyola NO. The teams have met once before, with Texas Tech winning 82-50 on 26 November 2025. Pythia projects a 98% chance for Texas Tech to win, 2% for New Orleans, and a score of 88-64, totaling 152.0 points; the model also gives a 1% chance of overtime. The Red Zippers will likely dominate the game, as their recent home victories and defensive record suggest a decisive win.
| Split | Scored | Allowed | Total | Margin | Win % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Season (3) | 78.7 | 59.3 | 138.0 | +19.3 | 100% |
| Season at home (3) | 78.7 | 59.3 | 138.0 | +19.3 | 100% |
| Season away | no games | ||||
| Last 10 (10) | 74.8 | 71.0 | 145.8 | +3.8 | 60% |
| Last 5 (5) | 78.4 | 67.8 | 146.2 | +10.6 | 80% |
| Last 30 games by opponent strength | |||||
| vs Stronger (8) | 78.1 | 76.0 | 154.1 | +2.1 | 75% |
| vs Similar (12) | 78.6 | 74.7 | 153.2 | +3.9 | 58% |
| vs Weaker ◀ (10) | 82.2 | 65.9 | 148.1 | +16.3 | 80% |
| Split | Scored | Allowed | Total | Margin | Win % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Season (2) | 73.5 | 82.5 | 156.0 | -9.0 | 50% |
| Season at home (1) | 90.0 | 65.0 | 155.0 | +25.0 | 100% |
| Season away (1) | 57.0 | 100.0 | 157.0 | -43.0 | 0% |
| Last 10 (10) | 71.4 | 71.6 | 143.0 | -0.2 | 50% |
| Last 5 (5) | 71.8 | 76.2 | 148.0 | -4.4 | 40% |
| Last 30 games by opponent strength | |||||
| vs Stronger ◀ (12) | 68.4 | 82.1 | 150.5 | -13.7 | 25% |
| vs Similar (17) | 77.6 | 74.9 | 152.5 | +2.7 | 59% |
| vs Weaker | no games | ||||
| 1st half | Scored | Allowed | Total | Margin | Won the half | Over main line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Last 30 (30) | 41.8 | 34.4 | 76.2 | +7.5 | 73% | - |
| Last 30 at home (18) | 43.2 | 32.9 | 76.1 | +10.3 | 89% | - |
| Last 30 away (12) | 39.8 | 36.6 | 76.3 | +3.2 | 50% | - |
| Last 10 (10) | 39.4 | 32.8 | 72.2 | +6.6 | 80% | - |
| Last 5 (5) | 37.8 | 31.0 | 68.8 | +6.8 | 80% | - |
| Last 30 games by opponent strength | ||||||
| vs Stronger (8) | 40.1 | 35.9 | 76.0 | +4.2 | 50% | - |
| vs Similar (12) | 42.4 | 36.2 | 78.7 | +6.2 | 83% | - |
| vs Weaker ◀ (10) | 42.5 | 30.9 | 73.4 | +11.6 | 80% | - |
| 1st half | Scored | Allowed | Total | Margin | Won the half | Over main line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Last 30 (30) | 34.6 | 35.4 | 70.0 | -0.8 | 53% | - |
| Last 30 at home (13) | 36.5 | 36.3 | 72.8 | +0.2 | 54% | - |
| Last 30 away (17) | 33.1 | 34.7 | 67.8 | -1.6 | 53% | - |
| Last 10 (10) | 31.2 | 34.2 | 65.4 | -3.0 | 50% | - |
| Last 5 (5) | 31.0 | 38.8 | 69.8 | -7.8 | 40% | - |
| Last 30 games by opponent strength | ||||||
| vs Stronger ◀ (12) | 30.8 | 38.1 | 68.9 | -7.3 | 25% | - |
| vs Similar (17) | 36.8 | 33.8 | 70.5 | +3.0 | 71% | - |
| vs Weaker | no games | |||||
Yesterday's results in full, today's games and market moves worth watching. One post a day, no signup.
| Date | Game | Score |
|---|---|---|
| 26/11/25 | Texas Tech v New Orleans | 82-50 |
| Date | H/A | Opponent | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/11/26 | H | Illinois | 84-78 |
| 06/11/26 | H | Bethune-Cookman | 76-58 |
| 03/11/26 | H | Jackson State | 76-42 |
| 23/03/26 | A | Alabama | 65-90 |
| 20/03/26 | H | Akron | 91-71 |
| 12/03/26 | H | Iowa State | 53-75 |
| 08/03/26 | A | Brigham Young | 76-82 |
| 04/03/26 | H | TCU | 65-73 |
| 28/02/26 | A | Iowa State | 82-73 |
| 25/02/26 | H | Cincinnati | 80-68 |
| Date | H/A | Opponent | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/11/26 | H | Loyola NO | 90-65 |
| 04/11/26 | A | LSU | 57-100 |
| 09/03/26 | A | Texas A&M-CC | 61-74 |
| 08/03/26 | H | Houston Christian | 73-60 |
| 03/03/26 | H | SE Louisiana | 78-82 |
| 28/02/26 | H | McNeese State | 63-66 |
| 24/02/26 | A | Stephen F. Austin | 77-73 |
| 22/02/26 | A | Lamar | 77-71 |
| 17/02/26 | A | Incarnate Word | 78-64 |
| 14/02/26 | A | Houston Christian | 60-61 |
| Form | Last 5 | Win % |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | WWW | 100% |
| Home | WWW | 100% |
| Away | - | - |
| Stats | Overall | Home | Away |
|---|---|---|---|
| Games | 3 | 3 | - |
| Win % | 100% | 100% | - |
| Points / game | 78.7 | 78.7 | - |
| Allowed / game | 59.3 | 59.3 | - |
| Point differential | +19.3 | +19.3 | - |
| Avg total | 138.0 | 138.0 | - |
| Over main line | - | - | - |
| Win by 10+ | 67% | 67% | - |
| Close games (≤5 pts) won | - | - | - |
| Overtime % | 0% | 0% | - |
| Form | Last 5 | Win % |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | LW | 50% |
| Home | W | 100% |
| Away | L | 0% |
| Stats | Overall | Home | Away |
|---|---|---|---|
| Games | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Win % | 50% | 100% | 0% |
| Points / game | 73.5 | 90.0 | 57.0 |
| Allowed / game | 82.5 | 65.0 | 100.0 |
| Point differential | -9.0 | +25.0 | -43.0 |
| Avg total | 156.0 | 155.0 | 157.0 |
| Over main line | - | - | - |
| Win by 10+ | 50% | 100% | 0% |
| Close games (≤5 pts) won | - | - | - |
| Overtime % | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| # | Team | GP | W | L | Win % | PF/g | PA/g | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  Baylor | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 95.3 | 59.7 | +35.7 |
| 2 |  TCU | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 101.3 | 68.3 | +33.0 |
| 3 |  West Virginia | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 85.7 | 53.3 | +32.3 |
| 4 |  Kansas | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 91.0 | 59.7 | +31.3 |
| 5 |  Brigham Young | 4 | 4 | 0 | 100% | 96.5 | 75.8 | +20.8 |
| 6 |  Arizona State | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 83.3 | 63.7 | +19.7 |
| 7 | Texas Tech | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 78.7 | 59.3 | +19.3 |
| 8 |  Utah Utes | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 72.7 | 61.3 | +11.3 |
| 9 |  UCF Knights | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 86.3 | 79.7 | +6.7 |
| 10 |  Houston | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 84.7 | 62.3 | +22.3 |
| 11 |  Oklahoma State | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 92.7 | 72.0 | +20.7 |
| 12 |  Iowa State | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 81.0 | 61.3 | +19.7 |
| 13 |  Arizona | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 89.7 | 75.7 | +14.0 |
| 14 |  Cincinnati | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 73.7 | 60.0 | +13.7 |
| 15 |  Colorado | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 81.0 | 70.3 | +10.7 |
| 16 |  Kansas State | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 83.3 | 76.0 | +7.3 |
| # | Team | GP | W | L | Win % | PF/g | PA/g | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  Stephen F. Austin | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 95.0 | 54.7 | +40.3 |
| 2 |  Houston Christian | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100% | 89.7 | 62.7 | +27.0 |
| 3 |  Lamar | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 109.0 | 67.3 | +41.7 |
| 4 |  McNeese State | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 100.3 | 80.7 | +19.7 |
| 5 |  UTRGV | 3 | 2 | 1 | 67% | 71.3 | 62.0 | +9.3 |
| 6 |  Texas A&M-CC | 4 | 2 | 2 | 50% | 71.0 | 67.2 | +3.8 |
| 7 | New Orleans | 2 | 1 | 1 | 50% | 73.5 | 82.5 | -9.0 |
| 8 |  Nicholls State | 3 | 1 | 2 | 33% | 78.7 | 67.7 | +11.0 |
| 9 |  SE Louisiana | 3 | 1 | 2 | 33% | 64.3 | 87.3 | -23.0 |
| 10 |  Northwestern St. | 4 | 1 | 3 | 25% | 64.2 | 77.8 | -13.5 |
| 11 |  Incarnate Word | 4 | 0 | 4 | 0% | 60.8 | 79.2 | -18.5 |
We use cookies to keep the site working, to remember your settings, to understand which predictions people read, and to improve what we show you. For more information, see our Cookie Policy.
Cookies required to use the site and the features you have asked for. They provide the pages, predictions and account functions you requested. These are essential for the operation of our website.
Cookies that remember the preferences and settings from your last visit, so the site behaves the way you left it. They do not tell us who you are and they are not used to build a profile of you.
Cookies used to collect information about your usage of the site. These are used to produce aggregated statistics about visits to our pages. We use these statistics internally to test and improve the site and to give you a better experience. Without them our ability to provide a smoother experience may be degraded.
Cookies used to deliver adverts relevant to you based on your interests. This can include limiting the number of times you see an advert as well as helping us measure the effectiveness of an advert. Without these cookies you will still see adverts, but they will not be adjusted to your interests.
