Central Michigan
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 | +21.2 avg | × 27% | +5.8 |
| Opponents faced | -16.1 avg | × 27% | -4.4 |
| Preseason prior | -9.9 | × 73% | -7.2 |
| Power | -5.8 | ||
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 | UL Monroe | W 83–78 | +8.9 | -3.9 | -0.2 |
| 2 | vs | Alma non-D1 | W 93–50 | +30.4 | +12.6 | +1.0 |
| 3 | vs | Youngstown State | W 91–78 | +1.7 | +11.3 | +0.6 |
| Preseason prior (73% of the rating) | -7.2 | |||||
| Power | -5.8 | |||||
Remaining schedule
| Wk | Opponent | Projected | Win prob | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | at | Northern Kentucky | -4.2 | 35% |
| 4 | at | Dayton | -12.8 | 12% |
| 4 | at | Pittsburgh | -18.5 | 5% |
| 5 | at | Notre Dame | -21.2 | 3% |
| 6 | at | Miami (OH) | -16.2 | 7% |
| 6 | vs | Ohio | -2.5 | 41% |
| 7 | vs | Kent State | -1.8 | 44% |
| 7 | at | Eastern Michigan | -5.5 | 31% |
Season by season
Best finish: #79 in 2014–15. 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 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.
| Season | Rec | MRI 2.0 | MRI Classic |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025–26 | 10–21 | #275 of 365 · -8.29 | – |
| 2024–25 | 14–17 | #206 of 364 · -3.07 | – |
| 2023–24 | 18–14 | #297 of 362 · -8.40 | – |
| 2022–23 | 10–21 | #331 of 363 · -12.24 | – |
| 2021–22 | 7–23 | #324 of 358 · -11.76 | – |
| 2020–21 | 7–16 | #290 of 347 · -8.78 | – |
| 2019–20 | 11–18 | – | #254 of 353 · -3.22 |
| 2018–19 | 20–12 | – | #127 of 353 · 51.07 |
| 2017–18 | 21–15 | – | #125 of 351 · 59.78 |
| 2016–17 | 16–16 | – | #252 of 351 · 0.90 |
| 2015–16 | 17–16 | – | #160 of 351 · 46.96 |
| 2014–15 | 23–9 | – | #79 of 351 · 83.93 |
| 2013–14 | 10–21 | – | #278 of 351 · -11.39 |
| 2012–13 | 10–20 | – | #269 of 347 · -20.05 |
| 2011–12 | 11–21 | – | #279 of 345 · -15.51 |
| 2010–11 | 10–21 | – | #279 of 346 · -15.09 |
| 2009–10 | 15–15 | – | #183 of 335 · 29.62 |
| 2008–09 | 12–19 | – | #255 of 330 · -4.69 |
| 2007–08 | 14–17 | – | #221 of 328 · 6.01 |
| 2006–07 | 13–18 | – | #244 of 326 · -5.64 |
| 2005–06 | 4–24 | – | #314 of 326 · -64.60 |
| 2004–05 | 10–18 | – | #289 of 326 · -26.79 |