The MRI
2026–27 · Week 3

West Virginia

Big 12 · 3–0

Power+16.6#42 of 365
Résumé+0.58#70 · wins above average
Movement-2down from #40 last week
Best winMercer (75–61)
Schedule faced-10.1 avg opponent
Schedule ahead+14.6 avg opponent
Returning production22% of last season's win shares · #181 of 364 · counted against its preseason rating
Incoming production12.0 win shares from other schools' players
Recruiting class#15 in the country

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.

PartValueWeightAdds
Margin counted+28.0 avg× 27%+7.6
Opponents faced-10.1 avg× 27%-2.8
Preseason prior+16.2× 73%+11.8
Power+16.6

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.

WkOpponentResult ExpectedPerfAdds
2 vs Niagara W 91–46 +37.4 +7.6 +1.7
2 vs Stetson W 91–53 +30.7 +7.3 +2.1
3 vs Mercer W 75–61 +21.0 -7.0 +1.0
Preseason prior (73% of the rating)+11.8
Power+16.6

Remaining schedule

WkOpponent ProjectedWin prob
4 N Auburn -3.6 37%
5 N North Carolina -2.2 42%
7 N Pittsburgh +6.9 73%
8 N Wake Forest +7.3 75%

Season by season

Best finish: #5 in 2016–17. 22 seasons rated. The two columns' numbers are not comparable; the rank within each is. Season links open that year's game log.

25 1 200 2004–05 (MRI Classic): #66 of 326 (24-11)2005–06 (MRI Classic): #60 of 326 (22-11)2006–07 (MRI Classic): #32 of 326 (27-9)2007–08 (MRI Classic): #14 of 328 (26-11)2008–09 (MRI Classic): #10 of 330 (23-12)2009–10 (MRI Classic): #6 of 335 (31-7)2010–11 (MRI Classic): #40 of 346 (21-12)2011–12 (MRI Classic): #44 of 345 (19-14)2012–13 (MRI Classic): #156 of 347 (13-19)2013–14 (MRI Classic): #82 of 351 (17-16)2014–15 (MRI Classic): #17 of 351 (25-10)2015–16 (MRI Classic): #6 of 351 (26-9)2016–17 (MRI Classic): #5 of 351 (28-9)2017–18 (MRI Classic): #9 of 351 (26-10)2018–19 (MRI Classic): #159 of 353 (15-21)2019–20 (MRI Classic): #7 of 353 (21-10)2020–21 (MRI 2.0): #20 of 347 (19-10)2021–22 (MRI 2.0): #67 of 358 (16-17)2022–23 (MRI 2.0): #27 of 363 (19-15)2023–24 (MRI 2.0): #138 of 362 (9-23)2024–25 (MRI 2.0): #58 of 364 (19-13)2025–26 (MRI 2.0): #51 of 365 (21-14) MRI 2.0Classic 2004–05 2025–26

Finishing rank, best at the top, on an axis running to 200 — 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.

SeasonRec MRI 2.0MRI Classic
2025–26 21–14 #51 of 365 · 13.51 –
2024–25 19–13 #58 of 364 · 11.18 –
2023–24 9–23 #138 of 362 · 2.43 –
2022–23 19–15 #27 of 363 · 14.42 –
2021–22 16–17 #67 of 358 · 9.49 –
2020–21 19–10 #20 of 347 · 14.86 –
2019–20 21–10 – #7 of 353 · 147.24
2018–19 15–21 – #159 of 353 · 35.80
2017–18 26–10 – #9 of 351 · 169.56
2016–17 28–9 – #5 of 351 · 202.30
2015–16 26–9 – #6 of 351 · 183.59
2014–15 25–10 – #17 of 351 · 147.21
2013–14 17–16 – #82 of 351 · 79.56
2012–13 13–19 – #156 of 347 · 36.51
2011–12 19–14 – #44 of 345 · 107.60
2010–11 21–12 – #40 of 346 · 114.05
2009–10 31–7 – #6 of 335 · 178.99
2008–09 23–12 – #10 of 330 · 174.59
2007–08 26–11 – #14 of 328 · 147.05
2006–07 27–9 – #32 of 326 · 124.76
2005–06 22–11 – #60 of 326 · 91.35
2004–05 24–11 – #66 of 326 · 82.47