Back to matchup board
Round of 64 • Midwest Region

Alabama vs Hofstra prediction and matchup analysis

Alabama vs Hofstra is a Round of 64 game in the Midwest Region of the 2026 NCAA Tournament. The current projected score is Alabama 87, Hofstra 73. Compare seed, NET rank, KenPom efficiency, injuries, player leaders, and notable wins to evaluate both teams.

Round of 64Midwest Region

Predictions

Review the projected final score, expected total, risk factors, and historical context for this NCAA Tournament matchup.

Alabama 87–Hofstra 73
Final scoreAlabama 87, Hofstra 73

Explanation

  • Alabama has the clear top-end profile edge: the season profile snapshot lists the Crimson Tide at No. 18 NET and No. 18 KenPom, while Hofstra sits at No. 88 NET and No. 87 KenPom.
  • The scoring ceiling gap is substantial. season numbers have Alabama at 91.7 points per game with a No. 3 KenPom offense, while Hofstra is at 75.6 points per game with a No. 89 adjusted offense.
  • Alabama's schedule-tested resume is much stronger. resume metrics show Alabama at No. 9 strength of schedule, plus solid KPI/WAB marks, while Hofstra's schedule strength is far softer and it enters without a Division I Quad 1 win.
  • Hofstra's guards are good enough to keep the game competitive for stretches, but Alabama has more reliable shot creation across the roster, led by Labaron Philon Jr. And a deeper frontcourt scoring/rebounding base.
  • Hofstra has a real upset path if it controls tempo, yet Alabama has already shown it can beat tournament-level teams in multiple settings this season, which matters more than raw record here.

Risk factors

  • Alabama guard Aden Holloway is the biggest swing variable after his March 16, 2026 arrest; if his availability changes, Alabama loses 16.8 points per game and one of its best high-volume shooters.
  • Hofstra's backcourt can punish a loose defensive game. Cruz Davis and Preston Edmead combine for roughly 36 points per game and both shoot close to 40% from three.
  • Alabama's defense is good, not dominant, ranking No. 67 in KenPom. If the Tide foul too much or lose the turnover battle, the margin can tighten quickly.

Historical context

  • No. 13 seeds have beaten No. 4 seeds 32 times since the bracket expanded in 1985, a 21.4% upset rate, so the seed line has real trap-game history.
  • Hofstra is making its first NCAA tournament appearance since 2001, which adds some variance because the program has not been on this stage in 25 years.
  • Alabama still fits the stronger historical favorite profile for this slot: top-20 NET, top-20 KenPom, and an elite offense backed by a top-10 schedule.
Total points160 projected

Explanation

  • Alabama's offensive baseline starts this game high. The Crimson Tide average 91.7 points per game, and their No. 3 adjusted-offense profile means they do not need extreme shooting luck to reach the mid-to-high 80s.
  • Hofstra contributes enough offense to keep the total elevated. The Pride average 75.6 points per game and have two veteran guards in Davis and Edmead who can score efficiently from the perimeter.
  • Alabama's defensive profile leaves room for Hofstra to land in the low 70s. The Tide are far better offensively than defensively, which is why this projects above a normal 4-vs-13 total.
  • The number stays below Alabama's raw regular-season tempo because neutral-floor elimination games usually shave away a few transition chances and push favorites into more half-court possessions.
  • The cleanest blended script is Alabama in the high 80s and Hofstra in the low 70s, which lands this matchup around 160 total points.

Risk factors

  • Holloway's status can swing Alabama's spacing and shot volume enough to move this projection several points in either direction.
  • If Hofstra succeeds in shortening possessions and keeping Alabama off the offensive glass, the game can settle into the low 150s.
  • If Alabama turns the game into a three-point volume contest or Hofstra has to chase from behind for 25-plus minutes, the total can climb into the mid-160s.

Historical context

  • First-round 4-vs-13 games usually score lower than Alabama's regular-season profile because underdogs try to reduce possession count and avoid a transition game.
  • Alabama is not a typical 4-seed in that respect. Its offense is explosive enough to drag this matchup above the usual 4-vs-13 scoring range even with a mild tournament pace tax.
  • Hofstra's first NCAA game in 25 years also raises the odds of a slower opening stretch before the pace normalizes.

Team Comparison

Compare seeds, NET rankings, KenPom profiles, records, and team production side by side.

Record Statistics

Statistic
Alabama
Hofstra
Record23-924-10
ConferenceSECCAA
Road5-57-5
Neutral3-12-1
Home15-315-4
Quad 17-70-1
Quad 29-22-2

Team Statistics

Statistic
Alabama
Hofstra
Team PPG91.775.6
Team RPG40.639.3
Team APG16.112.8
Team SPG6.45.0
Team BPG5.13.7
FG%45.8%44.2%
3P%35.8%36.8%
FT%76.5%74.6%

Rankings

Statistic
Alabama
Hofstra
Seed#4#13
NET Rank#18#88
KenPom Rank#18#87
KenPom Adj Off Rank#3#89
KenPom Adj Def Rank#67#95

Notable matchups

Use quadrant results and marquee games to compare how each team performed against NCAA Tournament caliber competition.

Alabama

23-9
Notable matchups

Quad 1

7-7
  • W
    Away • NET #16
    103-9611/08/2025
  • L
    Home • NET #9
    80-8711/13/2025
  • W
    Neutral • NET #8
    90-8611/19/2025
  • L
    Neutral • NET #7
    85-9511/24/2025
  • L
    Neutral • NET #3
    75-9612/13/2025
  • W
    Home • NET #28
    89-7401/03/2026
  • L
    Away • NET #13
    90-9601/07/2026
  • W
    OklahomaAway • NET #48
    83-8101/17/2026
  • L
    Home • NET #20
    73-7901/24/2026
  • L
    Away • NET #4
    77-10002/01/2026
  • W
    AuburnAway • NET #38
    96-9202/07/2026
  • W
    Home • NET #15
    117-115*02/18/2026
  • W
    Away • NET #20
    71-6902/28/2026
  • L
    Away • NET #33
    88-9803/03/2026
Notable matchups

Quad 2

9-2
  • W
    Home • NET #34
    90-8412/03/2025
  • W
    Home • NET #45
    104-9312/17/2025
  • W
    YaleHome • NET #68
    102-7812/29/2025
  • L
    Home • NET #42
    88-9201/10/2026
  • W
    Mississippi St.Away • NET #112
    97-8201/13/2026
  • W
    Home • NET #58
    90-6401/27/2026
  • W
    Home • NET #44
    100-9702/04/2026
  • W
    Ole MissAway • NET #82
    93-7402/11/2026
  • W
    LSUAway • NET #77
    90-8302/21/2026
  • W
    AuburnHome • NET #38
    96-8403/07/2026
  • L
    Ole MissNeutral • NET #82
    79-8003/13/2026

Hofstra

24-10
Notable matchups

Quad 1

0-1
  • L
    Away • NET #51
    78-8211/03/2025
Notable matchups

Quad 2

2-2
  • W
    PittsburghAway • NET #104
    80-7312/07/2025
  • W
    SyracuseAway • NET #86
    70-6912/13/2025
  • L
    William & MaryAway • NET #129
    82-8901/24/2026
  • L
    UNCWAway • NET #96
    66-7002/14/2026

Player Leaders

Review the scorers, rebounders, playmakers, and efficiency leaders most likely to shape this matchup.

Alabama

Points leadersPPG
  • 1
    Labaron Philon Jr.G • GP 30 • MIN 30.3FG 50.9% • 3P 40.2% • FT 78.7%
    21.7PPG
  • 2
    Aden HollowayG • GP 28 • MIN 28.4FG 48.1% • 3P 43.8% • FT 86.4%
    16.8PPG
  • 3
    Latrell WrightsellG • GP 24 • MIN 26.9FG 39.8% • 3P 35.7% • FT 81.3%
    12.8PPG
  • 4
    Amari AllenF • GP 29 • MIN 28.4FG 45.5% • 3P 36.5% • FT 73.7%
    11.7PPG
  • 5
    Aiden SherrellF • GP 31 • MIN 23.6FG 55.1% • 3P 32.4% • FT 70.5%
    11.1PPG
Rebounds leadersRPG
  • 1
    Amari AllenF • GP 29 • MIN 28.4FG 45.5% • 3P 36.5% • FT 73.7%
    7.1RPG
  • 2
    Aiden SherrellF • GP 31 • MIN 23.6FG 55.1% • 3P 32.4% • FT 70.5%
    6.1RPG
  • 3
    Charles BediakoC • GP 5 • MIN 21.6FG 77.3% • 3P 0.0% • FT 69.6%
    4.6RPG
  • 4
    Houston MalletteG • GP 32 • MIN 23.3FG 37.2% • 3P 34.9% • FT 88.6%
    4.5RPG
  • 5
    Taylor Bol BowenF • GP 27 • MIN 18.7FG 39.7% • 3P 28.6% • FT 81.3%
    4.3RPG
Assists leadersAPG
  • 1
    Labaron Philon Jr.G • GP 30 • MIN 30.3FG 50.9% • 3P 40.2% • FT 78.7%
    4.7APG
  • 2
    Aden HollowayG • GP 28 • MIN 28.4FG 48.1% • 3P 43.8% • FT 86.4%
    3.8APG
  • 3
    Amari AllenF • GP 29 • MIN 28.4FG 45.5% • 3P 36.5% • FT 73.7%
    3.1APG
  • 4
    Latrell WrightsellG • GP 24 • MIN 26.9FG 39.8% • 3P 35.7% • FT 81.3%
    2.0APG
  • 5
    Aiden SherrellF • GP 31 • MIN 23.6FG 55.1% • 3P 32.4% • FT 70.5%
    1.1APG
Steals leadersSPG
  • 1
    Labaron Philon Jr.G • GP 30 • MIN 30.3FG 50.9% • 3P 40.2% • FT 78.7%
    1.1SPG
  • 2
    Amari AllenF • GP 29 • MIN 28.4FG 45.5% • 3P 36.5% • FT 73.7%
    1.1SPG
  • 3
    Latrell WrightsellG • GP 24 • MIN 26.9FG 39.8% • 3P 35.7% • FT 81.3%
    1.0SPG
  • 4
    Charles BediakoC • GP 5 • MIN 21.6FG 77.3% • 3P 0.0% • FT 69.6%
    0.8SPG
  • 5
    Davion HannahG • GP 10 • MIN 12.7FG 46.2% • 3P 36.4% • FT 62.5%
    0.7SPG
Blocks leadersBPG
  • 1
    Aiden SherrellF • GP 31 • MIN 23.6FG 55.1% • 3P 32.4% • FT 70.5%
    2.3BPG
  • 2
    Charles BediakoC • GP 5 • MIN 21.6FG 77.3% • 3P 0.0% • FT 69.6%
    1.4BPG
  • 3
    Taylor Bol BowenF • GP 27 • MIN 18.7FG 39.7% • 3P 28.6% • FT 81.3%
    0.9BPG
  • 4
    Amari AllenF • GP 29 • MIN 28.4FG 45.5% • 3P 36.5% • FT 73.7%
    0.7BPG
  • 5
    Keitenn BristowF • GP 10 • MIN 12.5FG 36.4% • 3P 11.1% • FT 73.3%
    0.6BPG

Hofstra

Points leadersPPG
  • 1
    Cruz DavisG • GP 34 • MIN 37.8FG 44.3% • 3P 39.9% • FT 82.9%
    20.2PPG
  • 2
    Preston EdmeadG • GP 34 • MIN 33.8FG 40.4% • 3P 38.3% • FT 83.3%
    15.9PPG
  • 3
    Biggie PattersonG • GP 30 • MIN 20.9FG 40.7% • 3P 31.8% • FT 76.1%
    9.5PPG
  • 4
    German PlotnikovG • GP 32 • MIN 32.3FG 42.2% • 3P 37.7% • FT 85.1%
    9.3PPG
  • 5
    Joshua DeCadyF • GP 32 • MIN 24.2FG 41.5% • 3P 28.1% • FT 57.7%
    6.3PPG
Rebounds leadersRPG
  • 1
    Silas SundayF • GP 34 • MIN 19.7FG 67.0% • 3P 0.0% • FT 64.9%
    6.9RPG
  • 2
    Victory OnuetuF • GP 34 • MIN 17.9FG 56.8% • 3P 0.0% • FT 49.0%
    6.9RPG
  • 3
    Biggie PattersonG • GP 30 • MIN 20.9FG 40.7% • 3P 31.8% • FT 76.1%
    5.6RPG
  • 4
    Cruz DavisG • GP 34 • MIN 37.8FG 44.3% • 3P 39.9% • FT 82.9%
    3.7RPG
  • 5
    Preston EdmeadG • GP 34 • MIN 33.8FG 40.4% • 3P 38.3% • FT 83.3%
    3.5RPG
Assists leadersAPG
  • 1
    Cruz DavisG • GP 34 • MIN 37.8FG 44.3% • 3P 39.9% • FT 82.9%
    4.6APG
  • 2
    Preston EdmeadG • GP 34 • MIN 33.8FG 40.4% • 3P 38.3% • FT 83.3%
    4.4APG
  • 3
    German PlotnikovG • GP 32 • MIN 32.3FG 42.2% • 3P 37.7% • FT 85.1%
    0.8APG
  • 4
    Jaeden RobertsG • GP 23 • MIN 8.3FG 43.0% • 3P 41.2% • FT 50.0%
    0.8APG
  • 5
    Silas SundayF • GP 34 • MIN 19.7FG 67.0% • 3P 0.0% • FT 64.9%
    0.7APG
Steals leadersSPG
  • 1
    Cruz DavisG • GP 34 • MIN 37.8FG 44.3% • 3P 39.9% • FT 82.9%
    1.1SPG
  • 2
    Amir WilliamsG • GP 3 • MIN 5.7FG 50.0% • 3P 0.0% • FT 0.0%
    1.0SPG
  • 3
    German PlotnikovG • GP 32 • MIN 32.3FG 42.2% • 3P 37.7% • FT 85.1%
    0.9SPG
  • 4
    Joshua DeCadyF • GP 32 • MIN 24.2FG 41.5% • 3P 28.1% • FT 57.7%
    0.8SPG
  • 5
    Biggie PattersonG • GP 30 • MIN 20.9FG 40.7% • 3P 31.8% • FT 76.1%
    0.6SPG
Blocks leadersBPG
  • 1
    Silas SundayF • GP 34 • MIN 19.7FG 67.0% • 3P 0.0% • FT 64.9%
    1.1BPG
  • 2
    Victory OnuetuF • GP 34 • MIN 17.9FG 56.8% • 3P 0.0% • FT 49.0%
    1.0BPG
  • 3
    German PlotnikovG • GP 32 • MIN 32.3FG 42.2% • 3P 37.7% • FT 85.1%
    0.7BPG
  • 4
    Cruz DavisG • GP 34 • MIN 37.8FG 44.3% • 3P 39.9% • FT 82.9%
    0.4BPG
  • 5
    Joshua DeCadyF • GP 32 • MIN 24.2FG 41.5% • 3P 28.1% • FT 57.7%
    0.3BPG

Injury Report

Check player availability and injury-related production impact before evaluating the final matchup edge.

Alabama

3 listed
  • Collins OnyejiakaC
    Out
    InjuryUndisclosed
    Player statsGP 2 • MIN 5.5
    PPG1.0#14
    RPG3.0#10
    APG0.0#16
    SPG0.0#14
    BPG0.0#15
  • Davion HannahG
    Game Time Decision
    InjuryUndisclosed
    Player statsGP 10 • MIN 12.7
    PPG3.3#12
    RPG1.9#12
    APG0.8#7
    SPG0.7#5
    BPG0.2#10
  • Keitenn BristowF
    Game Time Decision
    InjuryAnkle
    Player statsGP 10 • MIN 12.5
    PPG3.6#11
    RPG4.0#6
    APG0.5#9
    SPG0.6#9
    BPG0.6#5

Hofstra

0 listed

No injuries listed for this team.