Bowling Green
MAC · 3–0
How this rating is built
Power = w × (average margin counted + average opponent rating) + (1 − w) × preseason prior, where w = games ÷ (games + 8). After 3 games, w is 27%, so the preseason prior is 73% of this rating — mostly preseason, for now. Every game played shrinks that share.
| Part | Value | Weight | Adds |
|---|---|---|---|
| Margin counted | +12.5 avg | × 27% | +3.4 |
| Opponents faced | -12.7 avg | × 27% | -3.5 |
| Preseason prior | -2.0 | × 73% | -1.5 |
| Power | -1.6 | ||
This explains how the model reached the number. The opponent ratings come out of the same fitted model, so it is not independent proof that the rating is right.
Results
Expected is the margin the model's ratings imply for that matchup and site. Perf is how far the actual margin beat it — the result against expectation. Adds is a different question: how many points of Power the game contributes, counting its margin and the strength of the opponent together. A game can beat expectation and still add little, or the reverse. Adds, plus the preseason prior, sum to Power (figures are rounded so the column adds up). Hover an Adds figure for its arithmetic.
| Wk | Opponent | Result | Expected | Perf | Adds | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | at | Georgia State | W 76–73 | +2.1 | +0.9 | +0.6 |
| 3 | vs | Cleveland State | W 95–79 | +15.1 | +0.9 | +0.1 |
| 3 | vs | Niagara | W 88–76 | +19.3 | -7.3 | -0.8 |
| Preseason prior (73% of the rating) | -1.5 | |||||
| Power | -1.6 | |||||
Remaining schedule
| Wk | Opponent | Projected | Win prob | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | at | William & Mary | -2.7 | 40% |
| 4 | vs | Northern Illinois | +11.0 | 84% |
| 5 | vs | Gardner-Webb | +20.0 | 97% |
| 5 | at | Indiana | -22.1 | 2% |
| 6 | at | Kent State | -3.5 | 38% |
| 6 | vs | Western Michigan | +1.5 | 55% |
| 8 | vs | Miami (OH) | -6.0 | 29% |
| 8 | at | Akron | -15.9 | 7% |
Season by season
Best finish: #80 in 2018–19. 22 seasons rated. The two columns' numbers are not comparable; the rank within each is. Season links open that year's game log.
Finishing rank, best at the top, on an axis running to 300 — this team's own range, not the size of the field. Two lines where both ratings cover a season - MRI 2.0 in red, Classic in grey. Hover a point for the season.
| Season | Rec | MRI 2.0 | MRI Classic |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025–26 | 18–14 | #152 of 365 · 0.41 | – |
| 2024–25 | 14–18 | #283 of 364 · -8.32 | – |
| 2023–24 | 20–14 | #233 of 362 · -4.37 | – |
| 2022–23 | 11–20 | #292 of 363 · -7.92 | – |
| 2021–22 | 13–18 | #240 of 358 · -4.84 | – |
| 2020–21 | 14–12 | #124 of 347 · 3.33 | – |
| 2019–20 | 19–10 | – | #137 of 353 · 46.42 |
| 2018–19 | 20–12 | – | #80 of 353 · 72.09 |
| 2017–18 | 16–16 | – | #207 of 351 · 22.56 |
| 2016–17 | 13–19 | – | #250 of 351 · 1.57 |
| 2015–16 | 16–18 | – | #227 of 351 · 8.69 |
| 2014–15 | 21–12 | – | #109 of 351 · 64.78 |
| 2013–14 | 12–20 | – | #230 of 351 · 12.97 |
| 2012–13 | 11–19 | – | #217 of 347 · 9.11 |
| 2011–12 | 16–15 | – | #136 of 345 · 49.97 |
| 2010–11 | 14–19 | – | #236 of 346 · 4.35 |
| 2009–10 | 14–16 | – | #208 of 335 · 14.71 |
| 2008–09 | 19–14 | – | #145 of 330 · 42.70 |
| 2007–08 | 13–17 | – | #244 of 328 · -6.10 |
| 2006–07 | 13–18 | – | #257 of 326 · -11.45 |
| 2005–06 | 9–21 | – | #297 of 326 · -35.38 |
| 2004–05 | 18–11 | – | #164 of 326 · 31.72 |