|
|
TEXAS A&M TENNESSEE |
|
| 121 | 67 Final 61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
533 | TEXAS A&M | 119.5 | 120.5 | 534 | TENNESSEE | -4 | -4.5 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 12-5 | +5.6 | 8-7 | 5-7 | 67.8 | 30.1 | 45.1% | 36.1 | 61.9 | 29.0 | 39.4% | 32.9 | Road Games | 3-4 | -0.4 | 3-4 | 2-5 | 59.1 | 26.3 | 41.7% | 33.6 | 61.9 | 31.6 | 42.5% | 31.7 | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | +2.8 | 3-2 | 2-3 | 62.2 | 27.0 | 38.6% | 39.4 | 63.8 | 30.2 | 37.4% | 37.8 | Conference Games | 3-2 | +2.8 | 3-2 | 2-3 | 62.2 | 27.0 | 38.6% | 39.4 | 63.8 | 30.2 | 37.4% | 37.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 67.8 | 30.1 | 24-54 | 45.1% | 5-15 | 33.9% | 14-21 | 64.7% | 36 | 9 | 14 | 18 | 6 | 12 | 3 | vs opponents surrendering | 64.5 | 30.2 | 23-55 | 41.6% | 6-18 | 32.8% | 13-20 | 67.2% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 19 | 6 | 14 | 3 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 59.1 | 26.3 | 21-51 | 41.7% | 4-14 | 30.0% | 12-17 | 68.9% | 34 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 5 | 14 | 2 | Stats Against (All Games) | 61.9 | 29.0 | 21-53 | 39.4% | 7-22 | 30.6% | 13-19 | 70.4% | 33 | 9 | 12 | 19 | 6 | 14 | 4 | vs opponents averaging | 68.9 | 32.2 | 24-54 | 44.0% | 6-18 | 34.0% | 15-22 | 68.9% | 35 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 61.9 | 31.6 | 22-51 | 42.5% | 5-18 | 25.8% | 13-19 | 69.6% | 32 | 8 | 12 | 17 | 7 | 14 | 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 12-5 | +5.7 | 5-11 | 5-12 | 64.4 | 28.3 | 44.2% | 33.5 | 62.1 | 30.0 | 40.6% | 32.1 | Home Games | 8-1 | +4.9 | 2-7 | 1-8 | 64.1 | 27.9 | 45.2% | 32.9 | 57.9 | 27.2 | 39.6% | 30.6 | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | +4.1 | 4-1 | 2-3 | 59.6 | 28.0 | 42.6% | 34.2 | 57.0 | 26.6 | 38.1% | 32.2 | Conference Games | 4-1 | +4.1 | 4-1 | 2-3 | 59.6 | 28.0 | 42.6% | 34.2 | 57.0 | 26.6 | 38.1% | 32.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 64.4 | 28.3 | 23-52 | 44.2% | 6-16 | 35.7% | 13-19 | 66.8% | 33 | 10 | 11 | 20 | 8 | 12 | 4 | vs opponents surrendering | 65.6 | 30.5 | 23-54 | 42.1% | 7-20 | 33.6% | 13-20 | 67.7% | 33 | 9 | 12 | 19 | 6 | 13 | 4 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 64.1 | 27.9 | 23-51 | 45.2% | 6-16 | 35.9% | 12-19 | 66.7% | 33 | 10 | 12 | 16 | 9 | 11 | 5 | Stats Against (All Games) | 62.1 | 30.0 | 20-49 | 40.6% | 8-21 | 36.8% | 14-21 | 67.7% | 32 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 6 | 14 | 2 | vs opponents averaging | 68.9 | 32.5 | 24-54 | 43.8% | 6-18 | 34.9% | 15-22 | 68.7% | 35 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 57.9 | 27.2 | 20-50 | 39.6% | 9-24 | 37.3% | 10-15 | 67.2% | 31 | 9 | 14 | 17 | 5 | 15 | 2 |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: TEXAS A&M 76.1, TENNESSEE 76.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
12/6/2014 | ARIZONA ST | 72-71 | W | -6 | L | | - | 27-53 | 50.9% | 22 | 8 | 25-47 | 53.2% | 30 | 17 | 12/9/2014 | @ BAYLOR | 63-77 | L | 5 | L | 122 | O | 22-38 | 57.9% | 17 | 17 | 29-59 | 49.2% | 36 | 13 | 12/13/2014 | YOUNGSTOWN ST | 81-63 | W | -13 | W | | - | 31-51 | 60.8% | 35 | 12 | 25-61 | 41.0% | 28 | 10 | 12/20/2014 | *KANSAS ST | 64-71 | L | 4 | L | 128.5 | O | 25-51 | 49.0% | 25 | 6 | 24-39 | 61.5% | 24 | 12 | 12/30/2014 | MERCER | 65-50 | W | -12 | W | 121 | U | 23-50 | 46.0% | 36 | 8 | 19-46 | 41.3% | 25 | 11 | 1/3/2015 | HARTFORD | 58-49 | W | | - | | - | 19-50 | 38.0% | 41 | 13 | 16-57 | 28.1% | 35 | 14 | 1/6/2015 | @ ALABAMA | 44-65 | L | 5.5 | L | 126 | U | 16-52 | 30.8% | 33 | 14 | 21-47 | 44.7% | 36 | 8 | 1/10/2015 | KENTUCKY | 64-70 | L | 14.5 | W | 119 | O | 23-69 | 33.3% | 52 | 12 | 18-64 | 28.1% | 53 | 12 | 1/13/2015 | MISSISSIPPI ST | 74-70 | W | -10 | L | 117 | O | 21-44 | 47.7% | 34 | 13 | 21-59 | 35.6% | 36 | 14 | 1/17/2015 | @ LSU | 67-64 | W | 5 | W | 135.5 | U | 27-65 | 41.5% | 41 | 13 | 25-64 | 39.1% | 40 | 16 | 1/21/2015 | MISSOURI | 62-50 | W | -9 | W | 125.5 | U | 20-47 | 42.6% | 37 | 12 | 20-47 | 42.6% | 24 | 14 | 1/24/2015 | @ TENNESSEE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/27/2015 | @ AUBURN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/31/2015 | VANDERBILT | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/4/2015 | @ OLE MISS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/7/2015 | @ MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/11/2015 | GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/14/2015 | FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/6/2014 | KANSAS ST | 65-64 | W | -2 | L | 131 | U | 22-53 | 41.5% | 28 | 10 | 20-49 | 40.8% | 39 | 22 | 12/14/2014 | BUTLER | 67-55 | W | 1 | W | 123.5 | U | 25-50 | 50.0% | 32 | 7 | 18-54 | 33.3% | 38 | 14 | 12/17/2014 | @ NC STATE | 72-83 | L | 4.5 | L | 130.5 | O | 25-60 | 41.7% | 27 | 5 | 23-45 | 51.1% | 36 | 10 | 12/19/2014 | TENNESSEE TECH | 61-58 | W | -13 | L | 135 | U | 22-50 | 44.0% | 29 | 11 | 23-50 | 46.0% | 28 | 16 | 12/22/2014 | MERCER | 64-54 | W | -11.5 | L | 122.5 | U | 23-43 | 53.5% | 29 | 16 | 15-46 | 32.6% | 30 | 15 | 12/27/2014 | TENNESSEE ST | 67-46 | W | -22 | L | 124.5 | U | 23-54 | 42.6% | 38 | 10 | 17-47 | 36.2% | 27 | 16 | 12/31/2014 | E TENN ST | 71-61 | W | -10.5 | L | 137 | U | 26-52 | 50.0% | 38 | 13 | 20-48 | 41.7% | 20 | 13 | 1/7/2015 | @ MISSISSIPPI ST | 61-47 | W | -2 | W | 119.5 | U | 17-48 | 35.4% | 44 | 18 | 11-36 | 30.6% | 28 | 13 | 1/10/2015 | ALABAMA | 38-56 | L | -3 | L | 123 | U | 14-45 | 31.1% | 29 | 13 | 20-48 | 41.7% | 34 | 12 | 1/13/2015 | ARKANSAS | 74-69 | W | 3.5 | W | 136.5 | O | 27-53 | 50.9% | 33 | 14 | 26-57 | 45.6% | 32 | 18 | 1/17/2015 | @ MISSOURI | 59-51 | W | -1 | W | 125 | U | 19-49 | 38.8% | 37 | 11 | 20-55 | 36.4% | 33 | 14 | 1/20/2015 | @ S CAROLINA | 66-62 | W | 7 | W | 121 | O | 23-40 | 57.5% | 28 | 18 | 22-64 | 34.4% | 34 | 10 | 1/24/2015 | TEXAS A&M | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/27/2015 | @ ARKANSAS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/31/2015 | AUBURN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/3/2015 | MISSISSIPPI ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/7/2015 | @ GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/11/2015 | @ VANDERBILT | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/14/2015 | LSU | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| TEXAS A&M: The Aggies have struggled since joining the SEC, and it may be tough for them to get things going this season. There are some quality players left on the team though, most notably PG Alex Caruso (9.0 PPG, 5.0 APG, 3.6 RPG) who is the returning assist leader in the conference. At 6-foot-5, he forces to defenses to have to collapse on him when he is driving, because he can finish very well at the basket. SG Jordan Green (6.9 PPG, 2.3 RPG, 1.6 APG) and PF Kourtney Roberson (9.8 PPG, 6.8 RPG, 59% FG) are two experienced players who are willing to do the dirty work for the team. Transfer F/G Jalen Jones (14 PPG and 7.7 RPG at SMU) is a player who is capable of leading this team in scoring. | | TENNESSEE: The Volunteers were so close to making it to the Elite Eight last year, losing by only two points to Michigan in the Sweet 16. But after losing four players that combined for 51.0 PPG, Tennessee is now in rebuilding mode with Donnie Tyndall as the new head coach. Tyndall does have a potential star in the making in swingman Josh Richardson (10.3 PPG, 2.9 RPG, 79% FT). Richardson averaged 19.3 PPG on 62% FG in three NCAA Tournament games, showing he is ready to become the No. 1 scoring threat on the team. This is a team with a lot of question marks, as freshmen like PF Tariq Owens and SF Willie Carmichael will be asked to provide the team with some scoring pop. The same goes for sophomore SG Robert Hubbs III (5.0 PPG) who shot a miserable 28% threes as a freshman before suffering a season-ending shoulder injury. Now fully healthy, the team will count on Hubbs to provide some much needed long-range shooting. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 5/4/2024 11:13:48 AM EST. |
|
|