Hampton
CAA · 1–2
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 | -7.9 avg | × 27% | -2.2 |
| Opponents faced | -5.1 avg | × 27% | -1.4 |
| Preseason prior | -6.9 | × 73% | -5.0 |
| Power | -8.6 | ||
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 Tech | L 55–75 | -15.3 | -4.7 | -1.4 |
| 2 | at | George Washington | L 61–75 | -20.8 | +6.8 | -0.3 |
| 3 | vs | Apprentice School non-D1 | W 67–56 | +27.6 | -16.6 | -1.9 |
| Preseason prior (73% of the rating) | -5.0 | |||||
| Power | -8.6 | |||||
Remaining schedule
| Wk | Opponent | Projected | Win prob | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | at | Navy | -7.0 | 26% |
| 5 | at | Old Dominion | -9.2 | 20% |
| 5 | N | UMass Lowell | -2.0 | 43% |
| 5 | N | Radford | -3.0 | 39% |
| 5 | at | American University | -10.7 | 17% |
| 7 | at | Wake Forest | -20.9 | 3% |
| 10 | vs | Drexel | +2.0 | 57% |
| 11 | at | Monmouth | -9.9 | 18% |
Season by season
Best finish: #131 in 2010–11. 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 | 13–19 | #267 of 365 · -7.14 | – |
| 2024–25 | 17–16 | #246 of 364 · -5.92 | – |
| 2023–24 | 9–24 | #340 of 362 · -14.42 | – |
| 2022–23 | 8–24 | #351 of 363 · -14.88 | – |
| 2021–22 | 9–19 | #332 of 358 · -12.69 | – |
| 2020–21 | 11–14 | #317 of 347 · -11.84 | – |
| 2019–20 | 12–19 | – | #290 of 353 · -24.00 |
| 2018–19 | 15–17 | – | #171 of 353 · 30.90 |
| 2017–18 | 19–16 | – | #184 of 351 · 33.16 |
| 2016–17 | 14–17 | – | #251 of 351 · 1.04 |
| 2015–16 | 21–11 | – | #157 of 351 · 48.77 |
| 2014–15 | 17–18 | – | #226 of 351 · 14.02 |
| 2013–14 | 18–13 | – | #159 of 351 · 41.44 |
| 2012–13 | 14–17 | – | #221 of 347 · 7.47 |
| 2011–12 | 11–20 | – | #256 of 345 · -5.94 |
| 2010–11 | 24–9 | – | #131 of 346 · 52.45 |
| 2009–10 | 14–18 | – | #207 of 335 · 16.43 |
| 2008–09 | 16–16 | – | #231 of 330 · 3.10 |
| 2007–08 | 18–12 | – | #139 of 328 · 46.52 |
| 2006–07 | 15–16 | – | #195 of 326 · 20.37 |
| 2005–06 | 16–16 | – | #197 of 326 · 22.44 |
| 2004–05 | 17–13 | – | #174 of 326 · 27.25 |