The MRI
2026–27 · Week 3

California

ACC · 2–2

Power+6.0#102 of 365
Résumé+0.17#156 · wins above average
Movement-7down from #95 last week
Best winRadford (84–70)
Worst lossUSC (65–77)
Schedule faced+5.4 avg opponent
Schedule ahead-4.8 avg opponent
Returning production20% of last season's win shares · #193 of 364 · counted against its preseason rating
Incoming production8.0 win shares from other schools' players
Recruiting class#64 in the country

How this rating is built

Power = w × (average margin counted + average opponent rating) + (1 − w) × preseason prior, where w = games ÷ (games + 8). After 4 games, w is 33%, so the preseason prior is 67% of this rating — mostly preseason, for now. Every game played shrinks that share.

PartValueWeightAdds
Margin counted-2.8 avg× 33%-1.0
Opponents faced+5.4 avg× 33%+1.8
Preseason prior+7.8× 67%+5.2
Power+6.0

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.

WkOpponentResult ExpectedPerfAdds
2 vs Adams State non-D1 W 115–86 +42.2 -13.2 +0.4
2 vs Radford W 84–70 +14.6 -0.6 +0.5
3 N Houston L 68–86 -24.5 +6.5 +0.4
3 vs USC L 65–77 -11.1 -0.9 -0.5
Preseason prior (67% of the rating)+5.2
Power+6.0

Remaining schedule

WkOpponent ProjectedWin prob
3 vs Utah Tech +15.1 92%
4 vs East Texas A&M +19.5 96%
5 vs Alabama State +25.2 99%
5 N Minnesota -7.6 24%

Season by season

Best finish: #12 in 2009–10. 22 seasons rated. The two columns' numbers are not comparable; the rank within each is. Season links open that year's game log.

25 1 400 2004–05 (MRI Classic): #167 of 326 (13-16)2005–06 (MRI Classic): #71 of 326 (20-11)2006–07 (MRI Classic): #113 of 326 (16-17)2007–08 (MRI Classic): #121 of 328 (17-16)2008–09 (MRI Classic): #52 of 330 (22-11)2009–10 (MRI Classic): #12 of 335 (24-11)2010–11 (MRI Classic): #116 of 346 (18-15)2011–12 (MRI Classic): #26 of 345 (24-10)2012–13 (MRI Classic): #74 of 347 (20-11)2013–14 (MRI Classic): #71 of 351 (21-14)2014–15 (MRI Classic): #145 of 351 (18-15)2015–16 (MRI Classic): #28 of 351 (23-11)2016–17 (MRI Classic): #49 of 351 (21-12)2017–18 (MRI Classic): #289 of 351 (8-23)2018–19 (MRI Classic): #305 of 353 (8-23)2019–20 (MRI Classic): #213 of 353 (14-18)2020–21 (MRI 2.0): #157 of 347 (9-20)2021–22 (MRI 2.0): #158 of 358 (12-20)2022–23 (MRI 2.0): #291 of 363 (3-29)2023–24 (MRI 2.0): #162 of 362 (13-19)2024–25 (MRI 2.0): #121 of 364 (14-19)2025–26 (MRI 2.0): #82 of 365 (22-12) MRI 2.0Classic 2004–05 2025–26

Finishing rank, best at the top, on an axis running to 400 — 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.

SeasonRec MRI 2.0MRI Classic
2025–26 22–12 #82 of 365 · 8.66 –
2024–25 14–19 #121 of 364 · 3.01 –
2023–24 13–19 #162 of 362 · 0.62 –
2022–23 3–29 #291 of 363 · -7.90 –
2021–22 12–20 #158 of 358 · 1.01 –
2020–21 9–20 #157 of 347 · 0.44 –
2019–20 14–18 – #213 of 353 · 13.89
2018–19 8–23 – #305 of 353 · -33.74
2017–18 8–23 – #289 of 351 · -18.12
2016–17 21–12 – #49 of 351 · 103.72
2015–16 23–11 – #28 of 351 · 130.37
2014–15 18–15 – #145 of 351 · 48.13
2013–14 21–14 – #71 of 351 · 85.44
2012–13 20–11 – #74 of 347 · 77.01
2011–12 24–10 – #26 of 345 · 133.28
2010–11 18–15 – #116 of 346 · 61.03
2009–10 24–11 – #12 of 335 · 155.40
2008–09 22–11 – #52 of 330 · 102.58
2007–08 17–16 – #121 of 328 · 57.04
2006–07 16–17 – #113 of 326 · 58.82
2005–06 20–11 – #71 of 326 · 86.49
2004–05 13–16 – #167 of 326 · 30.41