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
Apprentice              16 13  0 2217 2168 -0.731    1 -0.605    1 -0.662    2 -0.781    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    1 13.609    2 -0.503    5 -1.060
Concordia AL             9 13  0 1536 1628 -0.322    2 -0.643    2 -0.702    1 -0.687    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    2 13.418    4 -0.722    2 -0.653
Rochester MI            17 11  0 2027 1804 -0.984    3 -0.766    3 -0.819    3 -0.853    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    3 12.948    9 -1.347    1 -0.359
Philander Smith          6 12  0 1325 1454 -0.525    4 -0.992    4 -1.015    7 -1.186    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    4 12.250    3 -0.511    8 -1.861
Florida College         11  8  0 1497 1458 -1.360    5 -1.075    5 -1.105    8 -1.325    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    6 11.448    5 -0.955    6 -1.694
Oakwood                  7 10  0 1197 1219 -0.859    6 -1.178    6 -1.187    4 -1.061    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    5 11.482    7 -1.142    4 -0.979
Robt Morris-Springfield 13 13  0 2025 1982 -1.136    7 -1.220    7 -1.237    5 -1.087    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    7 11.287    1 -0.383    7 -1.791
Spalding                 9 15  0 1665 1640 -1.104    8 -1.512    8 -1.571    6 -1.175    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    8 10.401   10 -1.649    3 -0.701
Briarcliffe              8 13  0 1565 1749 -1.504    9 -1.583    9 -1.650    9 -1.866    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    9  9.791    6 -1.128   10 -2.603
Southern St OH           5  2  0  646  644 -2.849   10 -1.678   10 -1.739   10 -2.332    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   10  9.297    8 -1.174   12 -3.490
TEAM                     W  L  T   PF   PA  SCHED  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
Rhema Bible              4 30  0 2143 2805 -1.423   11 -2.318   11 -2.546   11 -2.362    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   11  7.448   12 -2.531    9 -2.194
Marygrove                2 25  0 1773 2363 -1.506   12 -2.432   12 -2.709   12 -2.437    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   12  7.019   11 -2.043   11 -2.830

USCAA-I: strength=-1.554 (#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
Apprentice              16 13  0 2217 2168 -0.731    1 -0.605    1 -0.662    2 -0.781    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    1 13.609    2 -0.503    5 -1.060
Concordia AL             9 13  0 1536 1628 -0.322    2 -0.643    2 -0.702    1 -0.687    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    2 13.418    4 -0.722    2 -0.653
Rochester MI            17 11  0 2027 1804 -0.984    3 -0.766    3 -0.819    3 -0.853    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    3 12.948    9 -1.347    1 -0.359
Southern Virginia       12 14  0 2247 2413 -0.920      -0.830      -0.871      -1.166      0.0000      0.0000      12.617       0.403      -2.735
Philander Smith          6 12  0 1325 1454 -0.525    4 -0.992    4 -1.015    7 -1.186    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    4 12.250    3 -0.511    8 -1.861
Florida College         11  8  0 1497 1458 -1.360    5 -1.075    5 -1.105    8 -1.325    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    6 11.448    5 -0.955    6 -1.694
Oakwood                  7 10  0 1197 1219 -0.859    6 -1.178    6 -1.187    4 -1.061    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    5 11.482    7 -1.142    4 -0.979
Robt Morris-Springfield 13 13  0 2025 1982 -1.136    7 -1.220    7 -1.237    5 -1.087    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    7 11.287    1 -0.383    7 -1.791
Columbia Union           2 24  0 1899 2449 -0.549      -1.471      -1.520      -1.418      0.0000      0.0000      10.355      -0.402      -2.433
Spalding                 9 15  0 1665 1640 -1.104    8 -1.512    8 -1.571    6 -1.175    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    8 10.401   10 -1.649    3 -0.701
Briarcliffe              8 13  0 1565 1749 -1.504    9 -1.583    9 -1.650    9 -1.866    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    9  9.791    6 -1.128   10 -2.603
Walla Walla              6 13  0 1336 1509 -1.192      -1.637      -1.711      -1.713      0.0000      0.0000       9.684      -1.581      -1.844
Southern St OH           5  2  0  646  644 -2.849   10 -1.678   10 -1.739   10 -2.332    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   10  9.297    8 -1.174   12 -3.490
Johnson & Wales FL       4 15  0 1399 1506 -0.857      -1.687      -1.747      -1.169      0.0000      0.0000       9.823      -0.931      -1.406
Presentation             7 18  0 1678 1913 -1.628      -1.938      -2.058      -2.025      0.0000      0.0000       8.521      -2.237      -1.812
Rhema Bible              4 30  0 2143 2805 -1.423   11 -2.318   11 -2.546   11 -2.362    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   11  7.448   12 -2.531    9 -2.194
Marygrove                2 25  0 1773 2363 -1.506   12 -2.432   12 -2.709   12 -2.437    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   12  7.019   11 -2.043   11 -2.830
Lyndon St                7 18  0 1852 2099 -2.451      -2.495      -2.792      -2.832      0.0000      0.0000       6.810      -2.366      -3.298

Conference Strengths
CONFERENCE                   W   L   T   PCT  RNK RATING
USCAA-I                    145 267   0 0.352    1 -1.554
``````

``````Home field advantage amounts to:
0.295 points in main ratings
0.032 points in improved RPI
Average of 2.15 points per score
``````
```Predict score: vs. hosting at Team Strength vs. Time Plot: posted: Mon Dec 23 16:25:43 2019 ```

Back to Dolphin rankings main page.