Dolphin Ratings - College Basketball

Explanation: Each team is listed with its record, overall score differential, and six ratings. Brief explanations of the ratings follow.

Schedule The number in this column is the effective opponent strength of a team. In other words, they would be expected to have the same record had they played all games against an opponent of this predictive rating at a neutral site. Because this calculation depends on the strength of the team in question, it is not possible to rank schedules using these values.
Standard Ranks teams in an order such that a team is "probably better" than all teams ranked lower than it. This calculation uses margin of victory only for computing a team's opponents strengths; the team's rating itself is computed using only wins, losses, and ties relative to its schedule
Median Likelihood Determines the likely ratings for each team, based on its wins, losses, and ties relative to its schedule. This generally produces the same or similar ratings as the standard ranking.
Predictive Both schedule strength and rating vs. schedule strength are determined considering both the wins and losses and the score differentials. This rating contains none of the biases in the standard rating, but does weight recent games slightly more than past games since those are a better indication of the team's current strength. This rating is the best of the first three for seeing how good teams are, and thus is the best for predicting future results.
Improved RPI Rating The improved RPI formula is similar to the standard RPI, except that the schedule strength is carried out to infinite depth instead of ending with opponents' opponents, thus allows for a better comparison of isolated groups of teams than is given by the standard RPI calculation. It is similar to the simple rating, except that all games are given equal weight.
RPI Rating. Included only because of common real-life usage. The RPI rating has many statistical problems. The football RPI rating is based on the BCS formula, and approximates the schedule, loss, and quality win components.
Pseudo-Poll. A blended ranking based on win-loss and predictive ratings, calibrated to match real-life polls as closely as possible. This gives a rough but unbiased estimate of how typical voters value record vs. impressive wins.
Predictive-Scoring. This value indicates how many points a team would be expected to score if it played an identical team.
Predictive-Offense. This combines the predictive and scoring ratings to measure how many points a team scores. The number is the predictive rating of an opponent against whom the team would be expected to score the league average number of points. This does not necessarily rate a team's offensive abilities, as a fast pace in basketball or big-play defense in football can make a team score more points.
Predictive-Defense. This combines the predictive and scoring ratings to measure how many points a team allows. The number is the predictive rating of an opponent against whom the team would be expected to allow the league average number of points. The same caveat in the predictive-offense rating applies here.

Because these ratings contain no prejudices regarding team or conference strengths, they tend to be quite inaccurate early in the seasons. College football appears to take at least 5 games per team before even remotely reasonable ratings are produced; acceptable ratings are produced with 8 games per team; excellent ratings unfortunately require 14 games per team.

Rankings by division: Overall NCAA-I NCAA-II NCAA-III NAIA-I NAIA-II NCCAA-I NCCAA-II USCAA-I USCAA-II CIS CCAA NBCAA Indep

Full Ranking

                                                    STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI     RPI         POLL       OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM                     W  L  T   PF   PA  SCHED  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
Cincinnati-Clermont     26 10  0 3018 2613 -1.653    1 -1.104    1 -1.110    1 -1.225    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    1 13.617    1 -0.822    1 -1.628
Penn St-DuBois          22  6  0 2227 1932 -2.267    2 -1.390    2 -1.406    2 -1.730    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    2 12.362    2 -1.500    2 -1.960
Taylor-Fort Wayne       14 14  0 2221 2288 -2.170    3 -2.032    3 -2.149    3 -2.378    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    3  9.916    3 -1.741    9 -3.015
Golden St Baptist        9 15  0 1587 1802 -2.388    4 -2.487    4 -2.665    8 -2.857    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    5  8.547   11 -3.116    5 -2.598
Hesser                  15  7  0 1838 1591 -3.161    5 -2.531    5 -2.752    5 -2.713    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    4  8.557    4 -2.245   10 -3.181
St Joseph's-Brooklyn    17 11  0 2163 2016 -3.088    6 -2.610    6 -2.848    7 -2.855    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    6  8.219    5 -2.352   12 -3.359
Penn St-New Kensington  12 14  0 1771 1827 -2.699    7 -2.651    7 -2.899    4 -2.494    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    8  7.942    6 -2.855    4 -2.133
Southern Maine CC       18 10  0 2166 1888 -3.225    8 -2.684    8 -2.941    6 -2.795    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    7  7.966    9 -2.917    6 -2.673
Central Maine CC        17  8  0 1989 1656 -3.477    9 -2.957    9 -3.096    9 -2.919    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    9  7.599    7 -2.887    8 -2.952
Penn St-Beaver           9 18  0 1820 1978 -2.637   10 -3.045   10 -3.216   10 -3.078    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   10  7.128   12 -3.311    7 -2.844
TEAM                     W  L  T   PF   PA  SCHED  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
New Hampshire Tech      17 11  0 2263 1925 -3.516   11 -3.158   11 -3.367   11 -3.092    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   11  6.786    8 -2.915   11 -3.270
Andrews                  2 19  0 1379 1855 -2.086   12 -3.199   12 -3.419   13 -3.324    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   13  6.285   10 -3.020   13 -3.629
Williamson Trade         6  9  0  907  922 -3.114   13 -3.224   13 -3.467   12 -3.248    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   12  6.316   16 -4.394    3 -2.103
Ohio St-Marion           3 19  0 1463 2481 -2.989   14 -3.483   14 -3.786   19 -5.195    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   15  5.088   14 -4.159   20 -6.230
Maine-Augusta            8 13  0 1543 1642 -3.695   15 -3.605   15 -3.917   14 -3.989    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   14  5.096   13 -3.652   16 -4.326
Warren Wilson            2 15  0  890 1446 -3.257   16 -3.871   16 -4.282   15 -4.540    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   16  4.243   19 -5.363   14 -3.717
Eastern Maine CC         5 15  0 1346 1632 -4.473   17 -4.236   17 -4.966   18 -5.006    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   17  3.302   17 -4.793   17 -5.218
Christendom              8 17  0 1594 1646 -4.405   18 -4.315   18 -5.244   16 -4.599    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   18  3.010   18 -5.351   15 -3.847
Penn St-Fayette          0 25  0 1543 2320 -3.406   19 -4.679   19 -5.647   17 -4.788    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   19  2.027   15 -4.350   18 -5.225
Unity                    2 18  0 1229 1680 -4.487   20 -4.679   20 -5.655   20 -5.600    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   20  1.910   20 -5.588   19 -5.613
TEAM                     W  L  T   PF   PA  SCHED  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
Neb Coll of Tech Agr     0  7  0  444  676 -4.645   21 -4.821   21 -6.041   22 -6.263    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   21  1.268   22 -5.821   22 -6.705
Northern Maine CC        0 16  0 1007 1474 -4.777   22 -4.994   22 -6.548   21 -6.117    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   22  1.002   21 -5.736   21 -6.498


USCAA-II: strength=-3.361 (#1)
                                                    STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI     RPI         POLL       OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM                     W  L  T   PF   PA  SCHED  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
Cincinnati-Clermont     26 10  0 3018 2613 -1.653    1 -1.104    1 -1.110    1 -1.225    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    1 13.617    1 -0.822    1 -1.628
Penn St-DuBois          22  6  0 2227 1932 -2.267    2 -1.390    2 -1.406    2 -1.730    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    2 12.362    2 -1.500    2 -1.960
Taylor-Fort Wayne       14 14  0 2221 2288 -2.170    3 -2.032    3 -2.149    3 -2.378    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    3  9.916    3 -1.741    9 -3.015
Golden St Baptist        9 15  0 1587 1802 -2.388    4 -2.487    4 -2.665    8 -2.857    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    5  8.547   11 -3.116    5 -2.598
St Joseph's-Brooklyn    17 11  0 2163 2016 -3.088    6 -2.610    6 -2.848    7 -2.855    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    6  8.219    5 -2.352   12 -3.359
Penn St-New Kensington  12 14  0 1771 1827 -2.699    7 -2.651    7 -2.899    4 -2.494    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    8  7.942    6 -2.855    4 -2.133
Penn St-Beaver           9 18  0 1820 1978 -2.637   10 -3.045   10 -3.216   10 -3.078    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   10  7.128   12 -3.311    7 -2.844
Vermont Tech            13 17  0 2124 2092 -3.381      -3.118      -3.315      -3.238      0.0000      0.0000       6.737      -3.625      -2.850
Andrews                  2 19  0 1379 1855 -2.086   12 -3.199   12 -3.419   13 -3.324    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   13  6.285   10 -3.020   13 -3.629
Williamson Trade         6  9  0  907  922 -3.114   13 -3.224   13 -3.467   12 -3.248    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   12  6.316   16 -4.394    3 -2.103
Ohio St-Marion           3 19  0 1463 2481 -2.989   14 -3.483   14 -3.786   19 -5.195    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   15  5.088   14 -4.159   20 -6.230
Warren Wilson            2 15  0  890 1446 -3.257   16 -3.871   16 -4.282   15 -4.540    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   16  4.243   19 -5.363   14 -3.717
Christendom              8 17  0 1594 1646 -4.405   18 -4.315   18 -5.244   16 -4.599    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   18  3.010   18 -5.351   15 -3.847
Penn St-Fayette          0 25  0 1543 2320 -3.406   19 -4.679   19 -5.647   17 -4.788    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   19  2.027   15 -4.350   18 -5.225
Neb Coll of Tech Agr     0  7  0  444  676 -4.645   21 -4.821   21 -6.041   22 -6.263    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   21  1.268   22 -5.821   22 -6.705

USCAA-II-Yankee: strength=-3.918 (#2)
                                                    STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI     RPI         POLL       OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM                     W  L  T   PF   PA  SCHED  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
Hesser                  15  7  0 1838 1591 -3.161    5 -2.531    5 -2.752    5 -2.713    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    4  8.557    4 -2.245   10 -3.181
Southern Maine CC       18 10  0 2166 1888 -3.225    8 -2.684    8 -2.941    6 -2.795    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    7  7.966    9 -2.917    6 -2.673
Central Maine CC        17  8  0 1989 1656 -3.477    9 -2.957    9 -3.096    9 -2.919    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    9  7.599    7 -2.887    8 -2.952
New Hampshire Tech      17 11  0 2263 1925 -3.516   11 -3.158   11 -3.367   11 -3.092    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   11  6.786    8 -2.915   11 -3.270
Maine-Augusta            8 13  0 1543 1642 -3.695   15 -3.605   15 -3.917   14 -3.989    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   14  5.096   13 -3.652   16 -4.326
Eastern Maine CC         5 15  0 1346 1632 -4.473   17 -4.236   17 -4.966   18 -5.006    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   17  3.302   17 -4.793   17 -5.218
Unity                    2 18  0 1229 1680 -4.487   20 -4.679   20 -5.655   20 -5.600    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   20  1.910   20 -5.588   19 -5.613
Northern Maine CC        0 16  0 1007 1474 -4.777   22 -4.994   22 -6.548   21 -6.117    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   22  1.002   21 -5.736   21 -6.498

Conference Strengths
CONFERENCE                  W   L   T   PCT  RNK RATING
USCAA-II                  143 216   0 0.398    1 -3.361
USCAA-II-Yankee            82  98   0 0.456    2 -3.918

Home field advantage amounts to:
     0.300 points in main ratings
     0.032 points in improved RPI
Average of 2.15 points per score

Predict score:






Team Strength vs. Time Plot:





posted: Sun Oct 12 21:51:21 2025

Back to Dolphin rankings main page.