Tennessee Tech
SoCon · 2–2
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.
| Part | Value | Weight | Adds |
|---|---|---|---|
| Margin counted | -1.6 avg | × 33% | -0.5 |
| Opponents faced | +1.0 avg | × 33% | +0.3 |
| Preseason prior | -10.0 | × 67% | -6.7 |
| Power | -6.9 | ||
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 | Mississippi State | L 88–106 | -24.2 | +6.2 | -0.3 |
| 2 | vs | Blue Mountain non-D1 | W 117–70 | +29.3 | +17.7 | +0.7 |
| 2 | vs | Western Kentucky | W 97–94 | -6.0 | +9.0 | -0.1 |
| 3 | at | Indiana | L 66–90 | -27.4 | +3.4 | -0.5 |
| Preseason prior (67% of the rating) | -6.7 | |||||
| Power | -6.9 | |||||
Remaining schedule
| Wk | Opponent | Projected | Win prob | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | vs | Wright State - Lake non-D1 | +29.3 | 100% |
| 4 | at | UNC Asheville | -0.6 | 48% |
| 4 | vs | Presbyterian | +2.4 | 59% |
| 5 | vs | West Georgia | +10.6 | 83% |
| 5 | at | Eastern Kentucky | -2.0 | 43% |
| 6 | vs | Samford | -2.7 | 40% |
| 7 | at | Arizona | -34.8 | 0% |
| 8 | at | The Citadel | +6.0 | 71% |
Season by season
Best finish: #97 in 2004–05. 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 | 13–18 | #310 of 365 · -11.09 | – |
| 2024–25 | 15–17 | #319 of 364 · -11.14 | – |
| 2023–24 | 10–21 | #331 of 362 · -13.08 | – |
| 2022–23 | 16–17 | #278 of 363 · -7.35 | – |
| 2021–22 | 11–21 | #255 of 358 · -6.08 | – |
| 2020–21 | 5–22 | #319 of 347 · -12.11 | – |
| 2019–20 | 7–22 | – | #326 of 353 · -52.66 |
| 2018–19 | 6–23 | – | #327 of 353 · -50.86 |
| 2017–18 | 19–14 | – | #215 of 351 · 20.61 |
| 2016–17 | 12–20 | – | #255 of 351 · -0.67 |
| 2015–16 | 19–12 | – | #193 of 351 · 25.01 |
| 2014–15 | 12–18 | – | #235 of 351 · 10.46 |
| 2013–14 | 17–16 | – | #224 of 351 · 15.35 |
| 2012–13 | 10–17 | – | #256 of 347 · -12.86 |
| 2011–12 | 19–13 | – | #155 of 345 · 43.37 |
| 2010–11 | 20–13 | – | #148 of 346 · 44.61 |
| 2009–10 | 15–17 | – | #242 of 335 · 2.21 |
| 2008–09 | 12–18 | – | #229 of 330 · 3.80 |
| 2007–08 | 13–19 | – | #193 of 328 · 20.43 |
| 2006–07 | 19–13 | – | #127 of 326 · 50.93 |
| 2005–06 | 19–12 | – | #145 of 326 · 40.09 |
| 2004–05 | 18–10 | – | #97 of 326 · 65.12 |