**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.

**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
**

** STANDARD MED LIKELY PREDICTIVE IMPRVD RPI RPI POLL OFFENSE DEFENSE **
**TEAM W L PF PA SCHED RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING**
Ottawa AZ 8 13 1677 1838 -0.647 1 -0.996 1 -1.011 1 -1.182 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 13.165 1 -0.490 4 -1.875
Piedmont Int'l 14 10 1855 1968 -1.671 2 -1.219 2 -1.263 6 -1.895 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 2 11.847 6 -1.821 5 -1.969
Hiwassee 13 14 2080 2146 -1.459 3 -1.551 3 -1.584 3 -1.597 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 3 11.074 5 -1.790 1 -1.404
Bethesda 7 23 2009 2519 -0.700 4 -1.561 4 -1.595 4 -1.603 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 4 10.985 4 -1.777 2 -1.429
Carver 3 26 2045 2595 -0.256 5 -1.617 5 -1.636 2 -1.514 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 5 10.926 3 -1.277 3 -1.751
Nebraska Christian 15 14 2482 2390 -1.763 6 -1.744 6 -1.791 5 -1.678 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 6 10.405 2 -1.070 6 -2.286
West Coast Baptist 4 27 2162 2799 -1.337 7 -2.302 7 -2.363 7 -2.463 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 7 8.534 7 -1.994 8 -2.933
New Hope Christian 5 21 1875 2430 -1.779 8 -2.403 8 -2.483 8 -2.701 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 8 8.139 8 -2.328 10 -3.074
Columbia Int'l 7 23 2139 2660 -2.138 9 -2.623 9 -2.759 9 -2.840 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 9 7.412 9 -2.769 7 -2.911
Ecclesia 1 29 1890 2865 -1.444 10 -2.853 10 -3.067 10 -2.909 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 10 6.809 10 -2.869 9 -2.949
**TEAM W L PF PA SCHED RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING RNK RATING**
Yellowstone Christian 2 23 1610 2511 -2.513 11 -3.149 11 -3.581 11 -3.522 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 11 5.667 11 -3.316 11 -3.728

**Conference Strengths**
**CONFERENCE W L PCT RNK RATING**

```
Home field advantage amounts to:
0.251 points in main ratings
0.031 points in improved RPI
Average of 2.15 points per score
```

`Predict score:`

Team Strength vs. Time Plot:

posted: Mon Dec 23 16:26:05 2019

Back to Dolphin rankings main page.