San Diego
WCC · 2–1
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 | +4.4 avg | × 27% | +1.2 |
| Opponents faced | -6.7 avg | × 27% | -1.8 |
| Preseason prior | -6.6 | × 73% | -4.8 |
| Power | -5.4 | ||
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 | vs | Biola non-D1 | W 79–62 | +30.7 | -13.7 | -0.7 |
| 2 | vs | Tarleton State | W 96–90 | +2.1 | +3.9 | -0.3 |
| 3 | at | Colorado | L 75–83 | -16.7 | +8.7 | +0.4 |
| Preseason prior (73% of the rating) | -4.8 | |||||
| Power | -5.4 | |||||
Remaining schedule
| Wk | Opponent | Projected | Win prob | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | vs | Chicago State | +12.2 | 87% |
| 4 | vs | UC Riverside | +3.9 | 64% |
| 4 | N | UC Irvine | -8.2 | 23% |
| 4 | N | Fordham | -7.3 | 25% |
| 5 | vs | Northern Colorado | -1.3 | 45% |
Season by season
Best finish: #100 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 | 12–21 | #279 of 365 · -8.48 | – |
| 2024–25 | 6–27 | #335 of 364 · -13.33 | – |
| 2023–24 | 18–15 | #293 of 362 · -7.88 | – |
| 2022–23 | 11–20 | #239 of 363 · -4.63 | – |
| 2021–22 | 15–16 | #232 of 358 · -4.16 | – |
| 2020–21 | 3–11 | #265 of 347 · -6.99 | – |
| 2019–20 | 8–23 | – | #286 of 353 · -19.29 |
| 2018–19 | 20–15 | – | #100 of 353 · 64.83 |
| 2017–18 | 20–14 | – | #152 of 351 · 46.77 |
| 2016–17 | 13–18 | – | #237 of 351 · 9.52 |
| 2015–16 | 9–21 | – | #300 of 351 · -26.77 |
| 2014–15 | 15–16 | – | #138 of 351 · 50.49 |
| 2013–14 | 18–17 | – | #165 of 351 · 39.81 |
| 2012–13 | 14–18 | – | #211 of 347 · 12.62 |
| 2011–12 | 13–18 | – | #244 of 345 · 0.70 |
| 2010–11 | 6–24 | – | #327 of 346 · -59.01 |
| 2009–10 | 11–21 | – | #258 of 335 · -5.74 |
| 2008–09 | 16–16 | – | #190 of 330 · 24.59 |
| 2007–08 | 22–13 | – | #116 of 328 · 60.06 |
| 2006–07 | 18–14 | – | #160 of 326 · 32.92 |
| 2005–06 | 18–12 | – | #115 of 326 · 55.32 |
| 2004–05 | 16–13 | – | #127 of 326 · 48.72 |