
UCLA vs UCF prediction and matchup analysis
UCLA vs UCF is a Round of 64 game in the East Region of the 2026 NCAA Tournament. The current projected score is UCLA 77, UCF 72. Compare seed, NET rank, KenPom efficiency, injuries, player leaders, and notable wins to evaluate both teams.
Predictions
Review the projected final score, expected total, risk factors, and historical context for this NCAA Tournament matchup.
Explanation
- UCLA owns the cleaner full-profile edge in the season profile snapshot: better seed (7 vs. 10), better NET (30 vs. 51), better KenPom overall (27 vs. 54), better offense rank (22 vs. 40), and a much better defense rank (53 vs. 101).
- The Bruins are the more efficient shooting team possession to possession. the season profile player/team profile gives UCLA edges in field-goal percentage (47.1% vs. 46.6%), three-point percentage (38.2% vs. 36.2%), free-throw percentage (76.7% vs. 74.0%), and assists (16.3 vs. 15.8).
- UCLA's lead-guard structure is a real differentiator in a tournament game. Donovan Dent drives 7.6 assists per game in the season profile, and Tyler Bilodeau gives UCLA the best proven half-court scorer on either side at 17.6 points per game.
- UCLA's recent neutral-floor form is stronger. The Bruins beat Michigan State 88-84 in the Big Ten tournament before playing Purdue within 66-73, while UCF entered the bracket off a 66-65 neutral win over Cincinnati followed by a 59-81 loss to Arizona in Kansas City.
- I do not project a runaway because UCF has more rebounding volume and a real upset ceiling. The Knights average 37.2 rebounds per game in the season profile, and their resume includes wins over Texas A&M, Kansas, Texas Tech, and BYU.
Risk factors
- UCLA's injury uncertainty is the biggest reason this stays medium-low confidence. the injury report still lists both Dent and Bilodeau as game-time decisions, and Bilodeau is the Bruins' leading scorer.
- UCF can absolutely flip the game if Jamichael Stillwell, John Bol, and Jordan Burks turn this into a second-chance-possession game. The Knights have the better raw rebounding profile.
- UCF already proved it can beat tournament-level teams away from home, including road wins at Texas A&M and BYU. If Riley Kugel and Themus Fulks get hot from deep, the seed gap matters less.
Historical context
- NCAA bracket history makes this a dangerous seed line. The NCAA's 10-vs-7 history page shows No. 10 seeds have won often enough against No. 7 seeds to make this one of the most upset-prone Round of 64 pairings.
- UCLA was also a No. 7 seed in 2024 and opened that tournament with a controlled 72-47 win over Utah State before losing 66-58 to Tennessee. That recent path is a reminder that Mick Cronin teams often drag these games toward execution and defense.
- UCF's most recent NCAA Tournament appearance in 2019 opened with a 73-58 win over VCU. The program does have recent evidence that its physicality and guard play can travel into March.
Explanation
- The raw season scoring averages suggest an upper-150s environment, but UCLA's stronger overall defense and better half-court control pull the projection down from there.
- UCF's offense is good enough to avoid a true rock fight. The Knights average 81.0 points per game in the season profile and have multiple double-digit scorers, plus a strong offensive-rebounding base that can create put-backs.
- UCLA should still be the more stable offense in this matchup because UCF's defensive profile is shakier. KenPom puts the Knights at 101st defensively, which is the softest unit in the game.
- Recent neutral-site results for both teams point more toward a high-140s outcome than a track meet. UCLA's last two Big Ten tournament games totaled 172 and 139, while UCF's last two Big 12 tournament games totaled 131 and 140.
- My midpoint lands at 149 because it balances UCLA's shot quality edge with UCF's rebounding-driven possession volume and the late-game free throws that usually appear in a competitive NCAA opener.
Risk factors
- If UCF wins the glass decisively and turns misses into extra possessions, this total can climb into the mid-150s even without elite shooting.
- If Bilodeau or Dent are limited, UCLA's offense gets less efficient and the game can sink toward the low 140s.
- If both teams shoot close to their season three-point numbers, the total may finish a little above this estimate; if tournament nerves flatten the perimeter shooting, it likely finishes below it.
Historical context
- Recent NCAA openers for both programs finished well below their current regular-season scoring averages: UCLA's 2024 first-round win over Utah State totaled 119 points, and UCF's 2019 first-round win over VCU totaled 131.
- Round of 64 games on the 7-vs-10 seed line are often competitive into the final minute, which creates some late free throws but also tends to slow the game into longer half-court possessions.
- UCLA's recent March games under Cronin have generally leaned more controlled than its regular-season pace, which supports a total just under 150 rather than a free-flowing 160-plus game.
Team Comparison
Compare seeds, NET rankings, KenPom profiles, records, and team production side by side.
Record Statistics
| Statistic | UCLA | UCF |
|---|---|---|
| Record | 23-11 | 21-11 |
| Conference | Big Ten | Big 12 |
| Road | 6-5 | 5-5 |
| Neutral | 3-2 | 2-2 |
| Home | 14-4 | 14-4 |
| Quad 1 | 5-8 | 5-8 |
| Quad 2 | 5-3 | 6-3 |
Team Statistics
| Statistic | UCLA | UCF |
|---|---|---|
| Team PPG | 77.7 | 81.0 |
| Team RPG | 32.3 | 37.2 |
| Team APG | 16.3 | 15.8 |
| Team SPG | 6.6 | 5.7 |
| Team BPG | 2.9 | 3.0 |
| FG% | 47.1% | 46.6% |
| 3P% | 38.2% | 36.2% |
| FT% | 76.7% | 74.0% |
Rankings
| Statistic | UCLA | UCF |
|---|---|---|
| Seed | #7 | #10 |
| NET Rank | #30 | #51 |
| KenPom Rank | #27 | #54 |
| KenPom Adj Off Rank | #22 | #40 |
| KenPom Adj Def Rank | #53 | #101 |
Notable matchups
Use quadrant results and marquee games to compare how each team performed against NCAA Tournament caliber competition.

UCLA
Quad 1
- L65-6911/14/2025
- W
Washington82-8012/03/2025 - L72-8212/13/2025
- L61-7401/03/2026
- L72-8001/06/2026
- L74-8601/17/2026
- W69-6701/20/2026
- L56-8602/14/2026
- L59-8202/17/2026
- W95-94*02/21/2026
- W72-5203/03/2026
- W88-8403/13/2026
- L66-7303/14/2026
Quad 2
- L
California72-8011/25/2025 - W
Arizona St.90-7712/17/2025 - W
Northwestern71-6401/24/2026 - W
Oregon73-5701/28/2026 - L
Indiana97-98*01/31/2026 - W
Washington77-7302/07/2026 - L
Minnesota73-7802/28/2026 - W
Southern California89-6803/07/2026

UCF
Quad 1
- L93-10511/08/2025
- W86-7411/14/2025
- W81-7501/03/2026
- L
Oklahoma St.76-8701/06/2026 - L77-8401/17/2026
- L57-8701/20/2026
- W88-8001/31/2026
- L55-7902/04/2026
- L
Cincinnati72-9202/08/2026 - W97-8402/24/2026
- L
West Virginia62-7703/06/2026 - W
Cincinnati66-65*03/11/2026 - L59-8103/12/2026
Quad 2
- W
Cincinnati73-7201/11/2026 - W
Kansas St.82-7301/14/2026 - W
Colorado95-8601/24/2026 - W
Arizona St.79-7601/27/2026 - L
West Virginia67-7402/14/2026 - W82-7102/17/2026
- W
Utah73-7102/21/2026 - L
Baylor86-8702/28/2026 - L
Oklahoma St.104-111*03/03/2026
Player Leaders
Review the scorers, rebounders, playmakers, and efficiency leaders most likely to shape this matchup.

UCLA
- 1Tyler BilodeauF • GP 31 • MIN 30.2FG 51.8% • 3P 46.4% • FT 87.3%17.6PPG
- 2Donovan DentG • GP 33 • MIN 34.2FG 42.0% • 3P 26.2% • FT 63.6%13.5PPG
- 3Trent PerryG • GP 33 • MIN 29.6FG 44.6% • 3P 41.2% • FT 87.4%12.7PPG
- 4Skyy ClarkG • GP 24 • MIN 28.7FG 46.0% • 3P 43.2% • FT 86.1%11.7PPG
- 5Eric Dailey Jr.G • GP 33 • MIN 27.5FG 49.0% • 3P 31.1% • FT 70.5%11.3PPG
- 1Eric Dailey Jr.G • GP 33 • MIN 27.5FG 49.0% • 3P 31.1% • FT 70.5%5.8RPG
- 2Tyler BilodeauF • GP 31 • MIN 30.2FG 51.8% • 3P 46.4% • FT 87.3%5.6RPG
- 3Xavier BookerF • GP 34 • MIN 19.6FG 55.0% • 3P 41.7% • FT 69.7%3.3RPG
- 4Trent PerryG • GP 33 • MIN 29.6FG 44.6% • 3P 41.2% • FT 87.4%2.9RPG
- 5Donovan DentG • GP 33 • MIN 34.2FG 42.0% • 3P 26.2% • FT 63.6%2.9RPG
- 1Donovan DentG • GP 33 • MIN 34.2FG 42.0% • 3P 26.2% • FT 63.6%7.6APG
- 2Trent PerryG • GP 33 • MIN 29.6FG 44.6% • 3P 41.2% • FT 87.4%2.9APG
- 3Skyy ClarkG • GP 24 • MIN 28.7FG 46.0% • 3P 43.2% • FT 86.1%2.1APG
- 4Eric Dailey Jr.G • GP 33 • MIN 27.5FG 49.0% • 3P 31.1% • FT 70.5%1.3APG
- 5Tyler BilodeauF • GP 31 • MIN 30.2FG 51.8% • 3P 46.4% • FT 87.3%1.1APG
- 1Donovan DentG • GP 33 • MIN 34.2FG 42.0% • 3P 26.2% • FT 63.6%1.6SPG
- 2Skyy ClarkG • GP 24 • MIN 28.7FG 46.0% • 3P 43.2% • FT 86.1%1.2SPG
- 3Trent PerryG • GP 33 • MIN 29.6FG 44.6% • 3P 41.2% • FT 87.4%0.9SPG
- 4Eric Dailey Jr.G • GP 33 • MIN 27.5FG 49.0% • 3P 31.1% • FT 70.5%0.9SPG
- 5Steven Jamerson IIF • GP 33 • MIN 9.6FG 73.3% • 3P 0.0% • FT 63.0%0.6SPG
- 1Xavier BookerF • GP 34 • MIN 19.6FG 55.0% • 3P 41.7% • FT 69.7%1.1BPG
- 2Steven Jamerson IIF • GP 33 • MIN 9.6FG 73.3% • 3P 0.0% • FT 63.0%0.4BPG
- 3Tyler BilodeauF • GP 31 • MIN 30.2FG 51.8% • 3P 46.4% • FT 87.3%0.4BPG
- 4Donovan DentG • GP 33 • MIN 34.2FG 42.0% • 3P 26.2% • FT 63.6%0.3BPG
- 5Brandon WilliamsG • GP 32 • MIN 12.3FG 42.7% • 3P 24.0% • FT 63.0%0.2BPG

UCF
- 1Riley KugelG • GP 30 • MIN 28.9FG 41.8% • 3P 39.2% • FT 77.1%14.4PPG
- 2Themus FulksG • GP 32 • MIN 32.8FG 46.5% • 3P 40.8% • FT 79.5%14.1PPG
- 3Jordan BurksF • GP 32 • MIN 28.0FG 45.1% • 3P 36.0% • FT 78.2%13.0PPG
- 4Jamichael StillwellF • GP 30 • MIN 28.4FG 50.8% • 3P 31.6% • FT 72.4%11.7PPG
- 5Chris JohnsonG • GP 31 • MIN 15.7FG 44.0% • 3P 36.9% • FT 70.0%6.4PPG
- 1Jamichael StillwellF • GP 30 • MIN 28.4FG 50.8% • 3P 31.6% • FT 72.4%8.0RPG
- 2John BolC • GP 32 • MIN 18.7FG 72.7% • 3P 0.0% • FT 68.1%5.5RPG
- 3Jordan BurksF • GP 32 • MIN 28.0FG 45.1% • 3P 36.0% • FT 78.2%4.8RPG
- 4Devan CambridgeF • GP 32 • MIN 17.4FG 45.2% • 3P 25.9% • FT 70.5%3.5RPG
- 5Riley KugelG • GP 30 • MIN 28.9FG 41.8% • 3P 39.2% • FT 77.1%3.1RPG
- 1Themus FulksG • GP 32 • MIN 32.8FG 46.5% • 3P 40.8% • FT 79.5%6.7APG
- 2Riley KugelG • GP 30 • MIN 28.9FG 41.8% • 3P 39.2% • FT 77.1%2.5APG
- 3Jamichael StillwellF • GP 30 • MIN 28.4FG 50.8% • 3P 31.6% • FT 72.4%2.2APG
- 4Chris JohnsonG • GP 31 • MIN 15.7FG 44.0% • 3P 36.9% • FT 70.0%1.9APG
- 5Devan CambridgeF • GP 32 • MIN 17.4FG 45.2% • 3P 25.9% • FT 70.5%0.8APG
- 1Jamichael StillwellF • GP 30 • MIN 28.4FG 50.8% • 3P 31.6% • FT 72.4%1.1SPG
- 2Jordan BurksF • GP 32 • MIN 28.0FG 45.1% • 3P 36.0% • FT 78.2%1.1SPG
- 3Riley KugelG • GP 30 • MIN 28.9FG 41.8% • 3P 39.2% • FT 77.1%1.0SPG
- 4Themus FulksG • GP 32 • MIN 32.8FG 46.5% • 3P 40.8% • FT 79.5%0.8SPG
- 5Devan CambridgeF • GP 32 • MIN 17.4FG 45.2% • 3P 25.9% • FT 70.5%0.5SPG
- 1John BolC • GP 32 • MIN 18.7FG 72.7% • 3P 0.0% • FT 68.1%1.1BPG
- 2Devan CambridgeF • GP 32 • MIN 17.4FG 45.2% • 3P 25.9% • FT 70.5%0.6BPG
- 3Jordan BurksF • GP 32 • MIN 28.0FG 45.1% • 3P 36.0% • FT 78.2%0.5BPG
- 4Riley KugelG • GP 30 • MIN 28.9FG 41.8% • 3P 39.2% • FT 77.1%0.2BPG
- 5Jeremy FoumenaC • GP 26 • MIN 9.5FG 54.8% • 3P 0.0% • FT 50.0%0.2BPG
Injury Report
Check player availability and injury-related production impact before evaluating the final matchup edge.

UCLA
- Evan ManjikianFOut
- Donovan DentGGame Time DecisionPlayer statsGP 33 • MIN 34.2PPG13.5#2RPG2.9#5APG7.6#1SPG1.6#1BPG0.3#4
- Tyler BilodeauFGame Time DecisionPlayer statsGP 31 • MIN 30.2PPG17.6#1RPG5.6#2APG1.1#5SPG0.5#7BPG0.4#3

UCF
- Tanner JonesGOut