Northeastern
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 | -10.2 avg | × 27% | -2.8 |
| Opponents faced | +5.7 avg | × 27% | +1.6 |
| Preseason prior | -9.6 | × 73% | -7.0 |
| Power | -8.2 | ||
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 | Boston University | L 85–93 | -4.5 | -3.5 | -1.0 |
| 2 | at | Virginia | L 72–97 | -33.1 | +8.1 | -0.2 |
| 3 | vs | Harvard | W 74–70 | -7.1 | +11.1 | +0.0 |
| Preseason prior (73% of the rating) | -7.0 | |||||
| Power | -8.2 | |||||
Remaining schedule
| Wk | Opponent | Projected | Win prob | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | vs | Yale | -8.6 | 22% |
| 4 | at | Butler | -19.8 | 4% |
| 4 | at | Stonehill | +4.3 | 65% |
| 5 | at | Wisconsin | -27.6 | 1% |
| 5 | at | Northwestern | -23.1 | 2% |
| 7 | at | Boston College | -18.2 | 5% |
| 10 | at | Charleston | -15.4 | 8% |
| 10 | at | UNC Wilmington | -15.0 | 9% |
Season by season
Best finish: #68 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 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 | 7–24 | #290 of 365 · -9.13 | – |
| 2024–25 | 17–15 | #209 of 364 · -3.15 | – |
| 2023–24 | 12–20 | #262 of 362 · -5.96 | – |
| 2022–23 | 10–20 | #309 of 363 · -9.47 | – |
| 2021–22 | 9–22 | #263 of 358 · -6.35 | – |
| 2020–21 | 10–9 | #170 of 347 · -0.37 | – |
| 2019–20 | 17–16 | – | #120 of 353 · 54.18 |
| 2018–19 | 23–11 | – | #68 of 353 · 82.46 |
| 2017–18 | 23–10 | – | #75 of 351 · 87.55 |
| 2016–17 | 15–16 | – | #196 of 351 · 30.05 |
| 2015–16 | 18–15 | – | #176 of 351 · 35.86 |
| 2014–15 | 23–12 | – | #110 of 351 · 64.41 |
| 2013–14 | 11–21 | – | #244 of 351 · 8.04 |
| 2012–13 | 20–12 | – | #165 of 347 · 33.64 |
| 2011–12 | 14–17 | – | #248 of 345 · -0.89 |
| 2010–11 | 11–20 | – | #243 of 346 · 0.94 |
| 2009–10 | 20–13 | – | #100 of 335 · 67.58 |
| 2008–09 | 19–13 | – | #107 of 330 · 62.25 |
| 2007–08 | 14–17 | – | #168 of 328 · 31.15 |
| 2006–07 | 13–19 | – | #243 of 326 · -5.35 |
| 2005–06 | 19–11 | – | #127 of 326 · 49.22 |
| 2004–05 | 21–10 | – | #111 of 326 · 53.78 |