← Matchups

Kentucky

SEC · 1-1 (0-1 SEC) · power +14.3 · #58
Our side · spreadTA&M -15.5 our number TA&M -17.5 · 2.0 pts from the market our number starts from the opening line and is corrected -1.5 for this matchup by our data on both teams

Texas A&M

SEC · 2-0 · power +31.6 · #5
Our side
SpreadTA&M -15.5 ours TA&M -17.5
TotalOver 49.5 ours 53.7
MoneylineTA&M to win ours 85% · book 86%
Distance from the market 2.0 pts / +4.2 total a caution, not a signal
Projected score 18–36 UK – TA&M
2026-09-19 · 3:30 PM Kyle Field · College Station, TX SEC game Early season

The books 5 account books · tap any price — the ticket builds at that book

Book UK spreadTA&M spread OverUnder UK winTA&M win UK TT overUK TT under TA&M TT overTA&M TT under
DraftKings
FanDuel
BetMGM
ESPN Bet
Caesars

The gold price is the best available on that side; a gold marks the side our number implies — a read, not a pick. TT is a team total — that team’s own points, not the game’s; columns are empty where no book hangs one. Send to book opens whichever book you tapped, not the one we would have picked. Prices are the books’ own.

Ours vs the market

SpreadTexas A&M -17.5
the marketTexas A&M -15.5
Total53.7
the market49.5
Texas A&M win85% vs 86%

Both percentages are Texas A&M’s chance to win — ours, then the book’s with the vig removed, medianed across the books we track.

What the gap has been worth 10,740 games · 2016–2025

0–3 pts52.0%
3–750.2%
7–1449.3%
14+46.8%

How often the side we favoured covered, by how far our number sat from the market’s. Break-even at −110 is 52.4% — no bucket reaches it, and the rate falls as we disagree more. The further we sit from the market, the worse we have done.

Public vs booksbets vs money · Action Network captured 5 hr ago spread TA&M 57% bets · 66% money total Over 66% bets · 71% money ML TA&M 98% bets · 99% money
Series Texas A&M lead 2–1 · 3 meetings since 1952
2025 unit ranks — last completed season, from games actually played
Run game even 13 ranks apart
Kentucky Wildcats #190 rush offense Texas A&M Aggies #177 run defense
Pass game edge Texas A&M Aggies 154 ranks
Kentucky Wildcats #168 pass offense Texas A&M Aggies #14 pass defense
Run game edge Texas A&M Aggies 47 ranks
Texas A&M Aggies #67 rush offense Kentucky Wildcats #114 run defense
Pass game edge Texas A&M Aggies 131 ranks
Texas A&M Aggies #55 pass offense Kentucky Wildcats #186 pass defense
Kentucky Wildcats Balanced · 56% run Ball-control Texas A&M Aggies Balanced · 55% run Avg pace Dual-threat QB · 39 rush ypg
Mark Stoops · 75-63 Mike Elko · 35-16

Ranked by team-unit strength (rush & pass offense vs. run & pass defense) across all 265 D1 teams, not by individual players. Identity, tempo and unit strength are measured from the 2025 season.

The evidence 2025 production and power ratings · supporting the number above

Who carried each team in 2025
Kentucky Wildcats
DL Mi'Quise Humphrey-Grace 6 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 1.5 TFL #5 DL
DB Jordan Castell 16 tkl · 1 INT #22 DB
DL Tavion Gadson 5 tkl · 1.5 sacks · 2.0 TFL #33 DL
TE Willie Rodriguez 12 rec · 97 yds · 1 TD #16 TE
Texas A&M Aggies
DL Marco Jones 5 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 1.0 TFL #10 DL
DB Julio Humphrey 2 tkl · 1 PD · 1 INT #84 DB
WR Isaiah Horton 7 rec · 109 yds · 3 TD #82 WR
DL T.J. Searcy 8 tkl · 1.5 TFL #166 DL

Top-rated players from last season, ranked within their position across D1. A grade measures what a player produced, and no 2026 game has been played yet — so this is who produced for these programs in 2025, not a claim about who is on the field this year.

Power breakdown
TeamPowerOffDefRank
Kentucky WildcatsSEC +14.3 +4.7 +9.5 #58
Texas A&M AggiesSEC +31.6 +16.2 +15.4 #5

Def is higher = better. The projection assumes a 2.4-pt home edge (0 at neutral sites).

Where the number comes from
Kentucky offense vs Texas A&M defense-10.7 pts
Texas A&M offense vs Kentucky defense+6.7 pts
Travel · context onlyAway team travels 846 mi

An efficiency adjustment from season-to-date EPA and success rate applies once teams have played enough games; before then it is 0 and the number is the power rating alone.

Situational spots are shown for context, not baked in: travel, altitude and rest were tested against 6,000+ games and the power and efficiency ratings already account for them. Adding them again would double-count.