2020 College Basketball Preseason Rankings & Ratings For All 347 Teams

November 24, 2020 - by Jason Lisk

College Basketball Rankings

Gonzaga celebrates being named as the No. 1 team in our preseason ratings (Photo by Robert Johnson/Icon Sportswire)

The official TeamRankings 2020-21 college basketball preseason rankings have arrived.

If you want to read an in depth description of how these rankings are created, check out our blog post on how we make college basketball preseason ratings.

Otherwise, keep reading for a discussion of the preseason rankings highlights, full rankings and ratings for all 347 teams playing this year in Division I, and a breakdown of the underlying factors that contributed the most to each team’s rating.

Let’s start with what everybody asks first: “Who’s your number one?”

Gonzaga Is Our Preseason No. 1, But It’s Close

The Gonzaga Bulldogs start the 2020-21 college basketball season as our No. 1 rated team, just ahead of several others. Why Gonzaga? Here are four primary reasons:

  • Great last season. They were 3rd in our predictive power ratings at the end of last season, behind only Kansas and Duke.
  • Consistently successful program. They have consistently ranked among the top college basketball programs in recent years, so they have a high Program rating (our component metric for how schools have performed in recent past seasons, which has proven to be predictive of future performance).
  • Solid returning production. While they lost some key players to graduation, they have plenty of contributors coming back.
  • Decent enough recruiting class. To that veteran core, they add a better recruiting class than some of last season’s other top contenders.

In the end, Gonzaga clocks in with a preseason predictive rating of 19.8. That means our ratings would expect the Zags to beat an average D1 college basketball team by nearly 20 points on a neutral court.

Note: We adjusted Gonzaga’s original 19.3 preseason rating up to 19.8 on Tuesday, November 24, to account for the just-announced eligibility of Florida transfer Andrew Nembhard.

Several Teams Nipping At Zags’ Heels

Take note, though: That same 19.8 rating is nearly two points less than the preseason top spot last year. In addition, four teams finished last season with a higher predictive rating than Gonzaga’s 2020 preseason rating.

So if you forced us to give you our No. 1 team this year, before the first college basketball game of the season tips off, we’d say Gonzaga — but the Zags are not far and away above other top contenders in 2020.

In fact, Gonzaga rates a very slight 0.6 points higher than our preseason No. 2, Villanova, and less than 1.5 points better than both No. 3 Baylor and No. 4 Kansas.

Veteran Teams Crowd The Top Of The Rankings

Among our top 10 teams in the college basketball preseason rankings, only three teams have an incoming recruiting class that also ranks in the top 10: Duke, Gonzaga, and Texas.

Often an elite recruiting class can catapult a team to an elite ranking, but that’s not the case this season. We project Kentucky with the most impactful incoming recruiting class in 2020, but it’s only the 32nd-best class overall in our database, which dates back to the 1998-99 season. In fact, the last time our top-ranked incoming freshman class was rated worse than Kentucky’s class this year was a whopping 15 years ago (in 2004).

Instead, 2020 looks to be a year where veteran-led teams lead the way.

Several teams, notably led by Baylor and Villanova, have plenty of returning production from last season, but are not expected to add many new faces to improve their 2020 outlook. Other teams, like West Virginia, Iowa, and Texas, also move into the Top 10 in our projections largely because of the strength of returning production.

Coronavirus Impact On The 2020 Rankings

The pandemic is likely to cause plenty of game cancellations during the 2020-21 college basketball season. But in this post, we are talking about team ratings, and not projections of end-of-season win totals or specific records.

These preseason ratings represent our estimate of how good teams will be, regardless of whether the COVID-19 situation results in them having some games canceled or losing opportunities to get key wins.

With that said, we have already seen with college football that positive coronavirus tests can impact who plays, and how teams perform from week-to-week. Lots of teams may play a portion of their schedule short-handed, or end up missing a star player for several games.

Still, trying to predict which teams will be most and least impacted by the pandemic this season is almost certainly a fool’s errand. So just be aware that we expect there to be more variance impacting where teams end up in terms of ratings at the end of the season, compared to non-pandemic years.

Our approach here is to establish a framework for predicting games as best we can using methods that have worked in the past, while acknowledging the unique challenges that the 2020-21 season will bring.

Preseason Top 25 Comparison

Moving on to the rest of our 2020 college basketball Top 25, let’s take a look at all the teams that made it into at least one preseason top 25 from among the following group of college basketball prognosticators:

The table below lists all such teams along with their preseason ranking in each system. It also shows the average rank, and concludes with a column indicating how far TR is from the consensus. (In that last column, a positive number means ranked a team better than the consensus rankings, while a negative number means we ranked a team worse than consensus.)

For teams receiving no votes in the polls, we used a rank of 55. Teams are listed in ascending order by average rank.

Note: We usually include ESPN’s Basketball Power Index preseason ratings (BPI) in this table as well, but the BPI rankings were not yet published when we wrote this post. Since that time, the BPI preseason ratings have been published. In addition, Ken Pomeroy and Bart Torvik have adjusted their ratings to account for recent player eligibility changes. We plan to update this section with final rankings from all sources once the season starts.

TeamTRKPBTAPCoachAVGTR Diff
Gonzaga124122.01.0
Baylor315212.4-0.6
Villanova2410334.42.4
Kansas4512656.42.4
Duke538986.61.6
Virginia7163446.8-0.2
Wisconsin1279778.4-3.6
W Virginia68215159.23.2
Texas Tech1166141310.0-1.0
Michigan St81115131211.83.8
Iowa913275612.03.0
Texas1091192212.22.2
Creighton131413111112.4-0.6
Illinois14171781013.2-0.8
Kentucky15122210913.6-1.4
Tennessee191919121416.6-2.4
Florida St161818211818.22.2
Ohio State201014232418.2-1.8
Oregon182016202018.80.8
Michigan171511252819.22.2
N Carolina242221161619.8-4.2
Houston212123171820.0-1.0
Florida22247272721.4-0.6
Arizona St282325181722.2-5.8
UCLA252934222126.21.2
Rutgers312732242327.4-3.6
Indiana232626303427.84.8
Alabama454637292536.4-8.6
Syracuse433124554239.0-4.0
Purdue262555554441.015.0
Providence465620344239.6-6.4

Preseason Top 25 Comparison Highlights

When comparing how teams are ranked across the various systems above, a few highlights stick out.

Teams The Human Polls Love (Relatively)

Even though rankings systems will always have their differences, there are some teams where the human polls are clearly more optimistic than the data-driven systems (i.e. TeamRankings, Pomeroy, Torvik).

Here are teams that are ranked at least three spots higher in both the preseason AP and Coaches Polls than in any of the data-driven rankings:

  • Iowa
  • Illinois
  • North Carolina
  • Tennessee
  • Houston
  • Arizona State
  • Rutgers
  • UCLA
  • Alabama

Why are the pollsters are higher on those teams? That’s harder to divine. One general theme is that several of those teams had winning percentages that compared favorably to their underlying power rankings at the end of last season.

Team The Human Polls Dislike (Relatively)

Here are the teams that are ranked at least three spots lower in the preseason AP and Coaches Polls than in any of the data-driven rankings:

  • West Virginia
  • Texas
  • Ohio State
  • Michigan
  • Florida
  • Indiana

The Big 12 and Big Ten were very tough conferences last season, and several of these teams rated higher in end-of-year data-driven power ratings than in the human polls.

These conferences also tend to have good program ratings as a group, and either good experience returning and/or good (but not great) recruiting classes. Four of the six teams above were in the Top 20 in our program rating (every one but Texas and Ohio State), and every recruiting class was in our Top 40, though Texas was the only Top 10 recruiting class.

Correlations With Consensus

For the 31 teams listed in the table above, our rankings have the highest correlation coefficient when comparing each ranking system with the consensus. Torvik’s rankings have the lowest overall correlation with consensus rankings.

The rank order of correlation to consensus is:

  • TeamRankings (0.937)
  • Coaches Poll (0.918)
  • AP Poll (0.911)
  • Pomeroy (0.890)
  • Torvik (0.770)

That’s the same order as last year, aside from Pomeroy sliding down below the human polls, but the correlation coefficients are all moderately higher. However, that’s a bit deceiving because we don’t have the ESPN BPI included in this year’s numbers, and that was one of the more outlier-filled systems a year ago. Removing BPI would therefore be expected to increase the correlations.

Still, the order being roughly the same is evidence it wasn’t some kind of fluke. Our rankings do seem to have fewer or smaller outliers than the other systems, and that makes sense, because we use market data to adjust for cases where our raw model seems to be missing something.

Our Rankings Are High On Purdue

Among the 31 teams listed in the table above, we only rank one team at least 9 spots better than consensus this year, and that’s Purdue.

We have the Boilermakers at No. 26, though we aren’t alone there, as Pomeroy has Purdue at No. 25. But the human polls and Torvik rank Purdue much further down.

Purdue had an off year last season in terms of wins and losses, losing lots of close/key games in a rugged Big Ten. But their power rating still ended up in the Top 30 and it is a program with a history of success in recent years.

Our Rankings Are Low On Three Teams

We rank three teams at least five spots worse than consensus (again, only looking at the teams listed in the table above). We’re most pessimistic about:

  • Alabama (TR:45, Average 36.4)
  • Providence (TR: 46, Average 39.6)
  • Arizona State (TR: 28, Average 22.2)

Last season we listed 11 teams that we were high or low on compared to the consensus. Based on their final rankings for the season, we beat the consensus on five, and the consensus beat us on the other six.

Full 2020-21 College Basketball Preseason Rankings, From #1 To #347

The table below shows our 2020-21 preseason ranking of 347 college basketball teams, along with each team’s associated preseason predictive rating.

The team ratings are expressed as points better (positive rating) or worse (negative rating) than a “perfectly average” college basketball team, when playing on a neutral court.

The final eight columns of the table show the relative contribution of specific factors our preseason ratings model considers, as well as a final “market adjustment” we make for each team.

Here’s a quick explanation of those factors. For more detail, read our post on how we make college basketball preseason ratings.

  • LAST YEAR: How good a team was last season (based on final predictive rating)
  • PROGRAM: Recent historical performance, excluding last season
  • RET OFF: Returning offensive production, compared to typical
  • RET DEF: Returning defensive production, compared to typical
  • RECRUIT: Value of incoming freshman recruiting class
  • TRANSFER: Value of incoming Division I transfers (JUCO transfers ignored)
  • COACH: Recent coaching changes expected to have positive or negative impact
  • MARKET: Adjustment if our ratings-based projection for a team is far off the betting market or our rankings differ greatly from the AP poll
TR RankTeam20-21 RatingLAST YRPROGRAMRET OFFRET DEFRECRUITTRANSFERCOACHMARKET
1Gonzaga19.88.75.21.01.62.80.50.00.0
2Villanova19.26.05.23.13.61.30.00.00.0
3Baylor18.67.43.93.63.00.60.00.00.0
4Kansas18.49.55.20.72.20.80.00.00.0
5Duke17.68.45.2-0.70.45.30.00.0-1.0
6W Virginia17.56.74.32.73.20.60.00.00.0
7Virginia17.13.85.20.62.71.23.60.00.0
8Michigan St16.98.25.11.22.21.20.00.0-1.0
9Iowa16.76.02.64.63.30.20.00.00.0
10Texas16.63.13.34.63.52.20.00.00.0
11Texas Tech16.45.94.70.20.71.73.30.00.0
12Wisconsin16.35.63.93.73.20.00.00.00.0
13Creighton16.06.03.83.22.80.30.00.00.0
14Illinois15.25.32.12.22.41.20.00.02.0
15Kentucky14.95.35.2-3.2-2.55.83.20.01.0
16Florida St14.76.24.40.20.82.10.00.01.0
17Michigan14.56.45.11.01.51.30.20.0-1.0
18Oregon14.56.43.80.00.80.72.90.00.0
19Tennessee14.23.44.31.81.92.20.60.00.0
20Ohio State13.97.03.41.01.20.60.70.00.0
21Houston13.95.94.02.01.70.30.00.00.0
22Florida13.95.04.61.72.11.50.00.0-1.0
23Indiana13.74.93.12.52.21.00.00.00.0
24N Carolina13.32.75.20.60.04.80.00.00.0
25UCLA12.82.83.23.82.50.50.00.00.0
26Purdue12.65.74.71.51.50.60.00.0-1.5
27Louisville12.56.44.5-1.4-0.40.43.10.00.0
28Arizona St12.53.52.21.70.61.80.70.02.0
29Oklahoma12.54.43.32.61.90.20.00.00.0
30Stanford12.14.21.52.02.61.80.00.00.0
31Rutgers11.75.61.32.82.50.40.00.0-1.0
32LSU11.64.92.2-0.40.41.30.10.03.0
33Oklahoma St11.03.83.2-1.40.35.20.00.00.0
34Arizona10.87.03.5-2.2-0.71.90.50.01.0
35VA Tech10.82.13.92.11.00.51.20.00.0
36Minnesota10.85.72.70.51.10.00.80.00.0
37Clemson10.73.03.62.21.50.40.00.00.0
38S Carolina10.73.02.91.91.90.00.00.01.0
39Miami (FL)10.61.53.11.50.91.22.50.00.0
40San Diego St10.66.72.10.51.30.00.00.00.0
41Marquette10.65.43.4-1.00.91.10.90.00.0
42NC State10.43.82.71.81.40.50.00.00.0
43Syracuse10.33.93.22.42.40.40.00.0-2.0
44Seton Hall10.36.03.1-0.11.40.00.00.00.0
45Alabama10.33.52.71.11.01.10.00.01.0
46Providence10.34.52.40.10.30.12.80.00.0
47GA Tech10.23.11.52.71.90.00.00.01.0
48Colorado10.15.02.01.81.30.00.00.00.0
49Maryland10.16.33.5-0.70.70.20.00.00.0
50Dayton10.07.02.00.30.70.00.00.00.0
51Connecticut10.03.41.11.61.51.11.20.00.0
52Memphis9.83.91.40.61.32.50.00.00.0
53Arkansas9.84.43.3-2.4-1.31.13.60.01.0
54Butler9.75.43.6-0.20.60.30.00.00.0
55Richmond9.53.70.23.02.60.00.00.00.0
56Loyola-Chi9.51.41.73.82.50.00.00.00.0
57Xavier9.44.03.6-0.10.40.51.10.00.0
58Utah9.32.32.43.72.50.50.00.0-2.0
59BYU9.36.31.9-0.90.00.02.00.00.0
60Missouri9.22.31.93.32.50.20.00.0-1.0
61USC9.23.52.6-3.1-1.43.02.60.02.0
62Cincinnati9.24.04.50.60.60.40.00.0-1.0
63Saint Louis9.22.6-0.13.82.80.00.00.00.0
64S Methodist9.12.22.82.41.80.00.00.00.0
65Washington9.03.91.60.61.21.80.00.00.0
66Notre Dame8.93.43.20.60.70.00.00.01.0
67Mississippi8.81.72.30.91.10.53.40.0-1.0
68Furman8.72.51.82.51.90.00.00.00.0
69Utah State8.24.51.50.71.50.00.00.00.0
70St Johns8.23.11.91.81.30.00.10.00.0
71Penn State8.15.62.91.81.80.00.0-4.00.0
72N Iowa8.03.30.42.81.50.00.00.00.0
73DePaul7.91.91.00.71.00.23.20.00.0
74TX Christian7.72.63.70.01.10.10.10.00.0
75Texas A&M7.70.52.6-0.10.80.73.20.00.0
76Iowa State7.32.43.80.40.20.30.20.00.0
77Davidson7.32.82.11.81.60.00.00.0-1.0
78Rhode Island7.22.92.30.0-0.40.02.40.00.0
79St Bonavent7.20.41.61.90.90.02.40.00.0
80NC-Grnsboro7.02.11.31.91.10.00.60.00.0
81Northwestern6.90.92.71.91.10.10.20.00.0
82W Kentucky6.91.00.92.01.00.02.10.00.0
83Miss State6.93.92.8-1.4-0.20.41.30.00.0
84Boise State6.72.71.8-0.7-0.30.01.30.02.0
85Duquesne6.71.7-0.53.32.20.00.00.00.0
86Vermont6.52.31.90.91.10.00.30.00.0
87St Marys6.43.93.6-1.30.20.00.00.00.0
88Wichita St6.34.53.90.50.40.00.0-3.00.0
89Auburn6.35.03.8-3.2-1.51.30.00.01.0
90Pittsburgh6.31.51.11.70.90.30.80.00.0
91Georgetown6.23.01.9-1.0-0.10.02.40.00.0
92S Dakota St6.20.11.32.91.80.00.00.00.0
93Georgia6.11.92.1-2.0-1.21.33.90.00.0
94Marshall5.8-0.10.53.42.00.00.00.00.0
95San Fransco5.32.61.20.10.70.00.80.00.0
96S Florida5.30.7-0.91.10.70.30.30.03.0
97VCU5.32.92.2-0.9-0.20.11.10.00.0
98Georgia St5.20.70.92.21.10.00.40.00.0
99California5.1-0.30.01.60.80.02.90.00.0
100LA Tech4.82.40.90.70.70.00.00.00.0
101Wake Forest4.51.51.8-2.1-0.50.01.72.00.0
102Old Dominion4.5-0.91.52.50.90.00.50.00.0
103Murray St4.50.31.51.70.90.00.00.00.0
104Central FL4.50.92.3-0.7-0.20.02.20.00.0
105Belmont4.41.62.10.40.40.00.00.00.0
106Colorado St4.41.50.12.10.70.00.00.00.0
107Kansas St4.42.33.6-1.1-0.40.00.00.00.0
108Buffalo4.3-0.22.41.50.60.00.00.00.0
109Winthrop4.30.00.22.51.70.00.00.00.0
110Oregon St4.32.70.70.10.70.00.10.00.0
111Boston Col4.2-0.81.20.3-0.10.03.60.00.0
112N Mex State4.21.32.20.1-0.30.01.00.00.0
113North Texas4.12.3-0.61.51.00.00.00.00.0
114Tulsa4.12.20.9-0.10.30.00.80.00.0
115Indiana St3.90.4-0.11.10.60.02.00.00.0
116Nevada3.52.53.6-2.3-0.50.02.30.0-2.0
117Geo Mason3.5-0.90.02.91.50.00.00.00.0
118UAB3.3-1.30.50.7-0.20.03.60.00.0
119UNLV3.31.50.3-0.30.00.01.90.00.0
120Vanderbilt3.2-0.32.0-0.40.60.01.20.00.0
121E Washingtn3.00.6-0.41.31.50.00.00.00.0
122Bradley2.71.40.0-0.10.50.00.90.00.0
123Ball State2.71.00.20.60.60.00.20.00.0
124Wright State2.60.20.60.50.70.00.60.00.0
125Akron2.62.40.4-0.1-0.30.00.20.00.0
126UCSB2.4-0.8-0.81.21.10.01.70.00.0
127Ste F Austin2.21.4-0.80.40.60.00.60.00.0
128Pepperdine2.10.0-1.41.50.90.00.00.01.0
129Colgate2.00.2-0.51.30.70.00.20.00.0
130AR Lit Rock1.90.3-1.41.71.20.00.00.00.0
131UC Irvine1.91.00.9-0.30.20.00.00.00.0
132Texas State1.81.6-0.10.91.30.00.0-2.00.0
133U Mass1.7-0.8-0.41.40.00.11.20.00.0
134Wofford1.7-0.11.5-0.10.00.00.30.00.0
135Ohio1.5-0.50.11.50.50.00.00.00.0
136Toledo1.2-0.11.30.3-0.30.00.00.00.0
137Loyola Mymt1.2-1.9-0.21.1-0.30.02.40.00.0
138Santa Clara1.1-0.7-0.71.50.90.00.10.00.0
139Nebraska0.9-0.52.6-2.1-1.10.02.10.00.0
140TX-Arlington0.80.31.1-0.4-0.20.00.00.00.0
141Temple0.81.51.7-1.7-0.90.00.20.00.0
142Austin Peay0.6-0.8-0.71.60.20.00.40.00.0
143Liberty0.51.40.1-1.20.20.00.00.00.0
144Wyoming0.5-2.8-0.30.3-0.60.00.04.00.0
145Bowling Grn0.5-0.7-0.51.30.30.00.00.00.0
146Valparaiso0.4-0.40.30.00.50.00.00.00.0
147Col Charlestn0.4-0.71.1-1.0-0.20.01.30.00.0
148E Carolina0.3-2.2-1.52.61.30.00.20.00.0
149Pacific0.30.3-0.6-0.60.20.00.90.00.0
150Grd Canyon0.2-3.70.9-0.2-0.70.01.92.00.0
151Boston U0.1-1.1-0.91.01.10.00.00.00.0
152Florida Intl0.1-0.2-1.3-0.6-0.20.02.40.00.0
153Drake-0.1-0.8-0.10.60.20.00.00.00.0
154TX-San Ant-0.2-2.3-0.42.10.20.00.30.00.0
155Montana-0.2-0.40.9-1.8-0.40.01.60.00.0
156New Mexico-0.20.20.7-1.9-1.30.00.10.02.0
157Chattanooga-0.3-0.2-1.1-1.1-0.40.02.50.00.0
158Wash State-0.40.8-0.4-0.80.00.00.00.00.0
159Siena-0.4-0.8-1.30.50.20.00.90.00.0
160Missouri St-0.60.50.5-0.8-0.90.00.00.00.0
161E Michigan-0.7-2.10.30.80.20.00.00.00.0
162Fresno St-0.7-0.31.9-1.7-0.80.00.20.00.0
163N Kentucky-0.7-0.51.2-1.1-0.30.00.00.00.0
164Abl Christian-0.8-1.5-1.51.50.60.00.00.00.0
165E Illinois-0.8-2.3-1.72.10.40.00.50.00.0
166TX El Paso-0.8-1.4-1.31.2-0.10.00.80.00.0
167S Illinois-0.9-1.00.4-0.7-0.60.01.10.00.0
168Coastal Car-1.0-1.3-0.40.30.00.00.40.00.0
169E Tenn St-1.03.31.9-3.3-2.40.02.5-3.00.0
170Towson-1.0-1.3-0.2-1.2-0.50.02.10.00.0
171Miami (OH)-1.1-2.2-0.71.00.50.00.30.00.0
172Northeastrn-1.1-0.21.1-1.6-0.50.00.10.00.0
173Middle Tenn-1.1-4.31.4-1.6-0.70.04.10.00.0
174S Alabama-1.2-1.1-1.0-2.7-1.50.05.00.00.0
175San Diego-1.2-2.80.3-0.2-0.40.01.80.00.0
176N Dakota St-1.40.4-0.1-1.4-0.20.00.00.00.0
177La Salle-1.4-1.3-0.10.30.40.00.20.0-1.0
178Hofstra-1.50.60.6-0.30.60.00.0-3.00.0
179Kent State-1.50.70.1-1.6-0.90.00.20.00.0
180Monmouth-1.6-2.3-0.20.70.00.00.30.00.0
181Lipscomb-1.6-3.41.10.7-0.10.00.00.00.0
182Drexel-1.6-3.1-1.52.20.80.00.00.00.0
183Oral Roberts-1.60.5-1.5-0.2-0.40.00.00.00.0
184W Carolina-1.7-0.3-2.70.60.70.00.00.00.0
185Mercer-1.9-2.10.0-0.9-0.30.01.40.00.0
186St Peters-1.9-2.0-0.90.20.10.00.60.00.0
187N Colorado-2.11.8-0.3-1.20.00.00.6-3.00.0
188St Josephs-2.1-3.60.31.5-0.30.00.00.00.0
189N Illinois-2.3-1.2-0.4-0.6-0.30.00.20.00.0
190LA Lafayette-2.3-2.81.0-0.3-0.20.00.00.00.0
191Charlotte-2.4-0.6-2.00.3-0.40.00.30.00.0
192S Utah-2.4-0.3-2.30.1-0.10.00.20.00.0
193App State-2.4-1.1-0.8-0.4-0.20.00.10.00.0
194Geo Wshgtn-2.4-2.9-0.6-0.30.00.01.40.00.0
195CS Bakersfld-2.5-3.7-0.31.10.10.00.30.00.0
196Hawaii-2.5-1.7-0.9-1.0-0.80.01.90.00.0
197Illinois St-2.6-2.30.8-0.8-0.50.00.20.00.0
198Canisius-2.6-3.6-0.50.7-0.30.01.10.00.0
199Fla Atlantic-2.6-1.6-1.00.1-0.20.00.00.00.0
200South Dakota-2.6-1.10.4-1.7-0.70.00.40.00.0
201Maryland BC-2.8-3.8-0.71.0-0.20.00.70.00.0
202Neb Omaha-2.8-2.8-0.80.20.50.00.00.00.0
203IPFW-2.8-4.00.2-0.1-0.50.01.60.00.0
204UC Riverside-3.0-2.3-2.30.80.30.00.50.00.0
205Fla Gulf Cst-3.0-4.90.40.9-0.70.01.30.00.0
206NC-Asheville-3.1-4.7-1.51.80.20.01.10.00.0
207Navy-3.1-3.6-1.31.30.40.00.00.00.0
208James Mad-3.1-4.8-1.3-0.4-1.00.02.42.00.0
209N Hampshire-3.3-3.4-2.21.60.60.00.00.00.0
210N Florida-3.4-0.7-1.5-1.2-0.70.00.70.00.0
211UC Davis-3.4-2.6-0.5-0.40.00.00.10.00.0
212Nicholls St-3.5-1.5-1.8-1.0-0.90.01.70.00.0
213Iona-3.7-3.10.2-1.8-1.30.00.22.00.0
214UC San Diego-4.5-1.5-3.3-0.4-0.20.00.80.00.0
215Stony Brook-3.7-1.4-0.6-2.6-1.00.01.90.00.0
216IL-Chicago-3.7-2.5-0.7-0.6-0.50.00.60.00.0
217Bucknell-3.7-3.61.4-1.0-0.60.00.00.00.0
218Montana St-3.8-2.7-1.6-0.5-0.40.01.40.00.0
219Portland St-4.0-1.3-0.9-2.6-1.80.02.60.00.0
220Air Force-4.0-1.5-1.1-1.1-0.70.00.40.00.0
221Youngs St-4.1-3.0-2.31.10.10.00.00.00.0
222Wm & Mary-4.1-1.80.0-1.2-1.10.00.00.00.0
223Arkansas St-4.1-2.1-0.9-0.3-0.80.00.00.00.0
224Norfolk St-4.2-3.3-2.20.0-0.20.01.50.00.0
225Tulane-4.2-0.9-1.0-2.5-1.10.01.30.00.0
226NJIT-4.3-4.6-1.31.1-0.40.00.90.00.0
227Delaware-4.3-1.4-1.7-0.8-0.40.00.00.00.0
228Elon-4.3-4.5-1.10.2-0.20.01.30.00.0
229St Fran (PA)-4.3-1.1-1.5-1.3-0.40.00.00.00.0
230WI-Grn Bay-4.3-2.7-0.8-1.5-1.50.01.11.00.0
231NC-Wilmgton-4.4-4.7-0.20.7-0.10.00.00.00.0
232Rob Morris-4.4-2.3-1.6-0.3-0.30.00.00.00.0
233Lamar-4.5-3.3-0.7-0.3-0.20.00.00.00.0
234W Michigan-4.5-2.9-0.7-1.4-0.10.00.70.00.0
235Utah Val St-4.5-3.41.0-2.7-1.60.02.20.00.0
236Oakland-4.5-3.30.3-1.2-1.00.00.60.00.0
237Central Mich-4.6-1.60.0-2.0-1.00.00.00.00.0
238GA Southern-4.7-0.30.6-2.4-1.50.00.9-2.00.0
239E Kentucky-4.7-4.4-1.80.5-0.40.01.40.00.0
240TX-Pan Am-4.9-3.8-1.5-0.8-0.30.01.50.00.0
241TX Southern-4.9-4.5-0.90.4-0.30.00.30.00.0
242Mass Lowell-5.0-3.7-1.9-0.4-0.40.01.50.00.0
243Lafayette-5.0-2.8-2.60.5-0.10.00.10.00.0
244Sac State-5.0-1.4-2.1-1.2-0.70.00.40.00.0
245F Dickinson-5.1-4.3-1.71.1-0.10.00.00.00.0
246Fordham-5.1-2.9-1.3-1.00.20.00.00.00.0
247American-5.1-2.2-2.1-0.6-0.20.00.00.00.0
248Rice-5.1-2.0-1.0-2.5-1.10.01.50.00.0
249Campbell-5.2-3.7-1.20.2-0.60.00.00.00.0
250Lg Beach St-5.2-4.5-0.90.4-0.20.00.00.00.0
251Gard-Webb-5.2-2.7-0.7-1.0-0.80.00.00.00.0
252Hartford-5.2-3.3-1.8-0.3-0.40.00.40.00.0
253Weber State-5.3-4.00.0-2.4-1.20.02.40.00.0
254Sam Hous St-5.3-2.0-0.7-1.4-1.30.00.00.00.0
255Mt St Marys-5.5-4.2-1.90.8-0.20.00.00.00.0
256Albany-5.5-4.0-0.3-0.7-0.80.00.40.00.0
257S Mississippi-5.5-3.8-1.20.1-0.80.00.10.00.0
258No. Alabama-5.5-4.4-2.91.0-0.30.01.10.00.0
259North Dakota-5.6-2.9-1.1-0.9-0.60.00.00.00.0
260McNeese St-5.7-3.2-3.0-0.9-1.50.02.90.00.0
261Jksnville St-5.7-3.70.5-2.0-1.50.01.00.00.0
262Fairfield-5.8-4.6-1.3-0.7-0.90.01.60.00.0
263LIU-5.9-3.8-1.7-0.7-0.60.00.90.00.0
264Niagara-5.9-4.9-1.70.8-0.10.00.00.00.0
265Rider-6.0-1.6-0.3-3.1-1.60.00.60.00.0
266Manhattan-6.1-3.9-2.0-0.6-0.90.01.40.00.0
267Lehigh-6.3-4.9-0.1-0.8-0.60.00.00.00.0
268Detroit-6.4-4.9-2.20.5-0.80.01.10.00.0
269NC Central-6.4-4.3-1.7-0.5-0.50.00.60.00.0
270UMKC-6.5-3.2-1.6-0.9-0.80.00.00.00.0
271WI-Milwkee-6.5-3.8-1.5-0.5-0.70.00.10.00.0
272Radford-6.5-1.6-0.6-3.0-1.70.00.40.00.0
273TN State-6.6-3.4-1.1-1.4-0.70.00.00.00.0
274CS Fullerton-6.7-3.4-0.7-2.4-1.30.01.10.00.0
275N Arizona-6.7-2.5-2.9-0.6-0.80.00.20.00.0
276Cleveland St-6.7-5.4-1.91.1-0.60.00.00.00.0
277Samford-6.8-5.8-0.6-2.0-1.60.03.20.00.0
278LA Monroe-6.8-3.5-0.6-2.7-1.30.01.30.00.0
279Central Ark-6.8-4.9-2.00.6-0.50.00.00.00.0
280Seattle-7.0-2.4-0.8-2.4-1.50.00.10.00.0
281Sacred Hrt-7.0-2.1-2.1-2.0-1.50.00.80.00.0
282Loyola-MD-7.0-4.3-1.9-0.4-0.40.00.00.00.0
283VA Military-7.0-3.4-3.1-0.2-0.40.00.00.00.0
284Stetson-7.1-4.5-3.21.0-0.30.00.00.00.0
285Cal Baptist-7.1-1.6-2.5-2.9-1.70.01.50.00.0
286Evansville-7.2-4.0-0.2-2.1-1.20.00.20.00.0
287Army-7.3-4.2-1.4-1.3-0.40.00.00.00.0
288Morehead St-7.3-4.9-1.5-0.6-1.10.00.80.00.0
289San Jose St-7.4-4.8-2.50.6-0.70.00.00.00.0
290Bellarmine-7.5-4.1-2.0-0.9-0.90.00.50.00.0
291Charl South-7.5-5.8-1.60.5-0.70.00.00.00.0
292Jacksonville-7.5-3.3-2.1-2.2-1.10.01.10.00.0
293Marist-7.7-5.5-2.50.7-0.50.00.00.00.0
294Troy-7.7-4.8-0.3-1.3-1.30.00.00.00.0
295Quinnipiac-7.7-3.7-1.8-1.5-0.70.00.00.00.0
296TX A&M-CC-7.7-5.0-1.6-0.2-0.90.00.10.00.0
297Merrimack-7.8-3.0-3.3-0.9-0.60.00.00.00.0
298St Fran (NY)-7.9-4.9-3.10.1-0.50.00.50.00.0
299Southern-7.9-4.0-3.3-0.2-0.70.00.40.00.0
300New Orleans-7.9-5.6-1.4-0.9-1.10.01.00.00.0
301Portland-7.9-4.0-2.1-1.8-1.00.00.90.00.0
302Denver-8.1-5.0-1.3-1.1-0.80.00.00.00.0
303IUPUI-8.2-6.7-1.00.5-1.10.00.10.00.0
304SC Upstate-8.2-6.0-3.01.1-0.30.00.00.00.0
305NC A&T-8.3-4.2-3.6-0.6-0.60.00.60.00.0
306Idaho State-8.3-4.4-2.5-0.8-1.10.00.40.00.0
307NW State-8.4-4.4-3.90.5-0.60.00.00.00.0
308Bryant-8.4-3.0-3.3-1.5-1.10.00.50.00.0
309Grambling St-8.6-5.1-2.6-1.4-1.10.01.70.00.0
310Jackson St-8.8-4.7-3.6-0.2-0.90.00.50.00.0
311Prairie View-8.9-2.7-2.0-2.9-1.40.00.20.00.0
312SE Louisiana-9.1-7.1-1.2-0.9-1.50.01.60.00.0
313Cal Poly-9.2-4.8-2.8-0.9-0.80.00.10.00.0
314Wagner-9.3-6.4-1.5-0.7-1.00.00.20.00.0
315SE Missouri-9.4-6.4-1.8-2.3-1.70.00.82.00.0
316Cal St Nrdge-9.7-3.4-2.2-1.9-2.80.00.60.00.0
317TN Tech-9.9-6.1-2.0-0.8-1.10.00.00.00.0
318Citadel-10.0-5.6-2.3-0.7-1.30.00.00.00.0
319High Point-10.2-7.2-1.4-0.5-1.00.00.00.00.0
320Hampton-10.3-5.3-1.6-2.4-0.90.00.00.00.0
321Morgan St-10.3-5.9-3.5-0.4-0.80.00.30.00.0
322TN Martin-10.4-6.2-1.9-2.0-1.30.01.00.00.0
323Idaho-10.4-5.7-1.6-1.8-1.30.00.00.00.0
324Longwood-10.5-5.4-3.7-1.1-1.10.00.90.00.0
325W Illinois-10.8-6.6-2.4-3.4-1.10.00.72.00.0
326Florida A&M-11.0-5.3-4.1-1.0-0.60.00.00.00.0
327Coppin State-11.1-6.0-4.2-0.6-1.50.01.20.00.0
328Tarleton State-11.9-7.1-3.0-1.5-1.50.01.20.00.0
329Alcorn State-11.9-5.7-3.7-1.8-1.30.00.60.00.0
330SIU Edward-12.2-6.2-3.0-1.6-1.40.00.10.00.0
331Binghamton-12.5-6.5-2.7-1.7-1.90.00.30.00.0
332Maine-12.7-5.3-3.5-2.5-1.30.00.00.00.0
332Holy Cross-12.8-7.9-1.4-2.2-1.40.00.00.00.0
334Dixie State-12.9-6.1-4.2-1.3-1.30.00.00.00.0
335Houston Bap-12.9-7.3-2.3-2.6-1.50.00.80.00.0
336Presbyterian-13.1-6.5-3.0-2.0-1.60.00.00.00.0
337Central Conn-13.5-8.5-3.2-0.2-1.60.00.00.00.0
338Alab A&M-13.7-7.8-4.2-0.2-1.50.00.00.00.0
339Incar Word-13.8-7.7-3.8-0.8-1.60.00.00.00.0
340Howard-14.7-8.8-3.4-2.1-2.10.90.80.00.0
341Ark Pine Bl-15.2-8.9-3.8-0.6-1.90.00.00.00.0
342S Car State-15.2-7.0-4.1-2.2-1.80.00.00.00.0
343Alabama St-15.3-6.7-4.0-2.9-1.70.00.10.00.0
344Delaware St-15.9-8.6-4.2-1.7-1.80.00.50.00.0
345Kennesaw St-16.7-9.6-2.6-2.2-2.20.00.00.00.0
346Miss Val St-19.8-11.9-4.2-1.6-2.60.00.50.00.0
347Chicago St-20.1-12.1-4.2-1.2-2.50.00.00.00.0

What Do We Use These For?

These preseason ratings drive our preseason projections, and they serve as the Bayesian priors for our predictive ratings as the season progresses. (Translation: our preseason ratings still impact our team ratings even months into the season, because that has shown to be more predictive than not.)

Using these ratings, we’ve run full season projections, which are live on the site now. Key pages include:

This is all data-driven, and automated, so it will update every morning throughout the season.

Ratings Accuracy

It’s worth noting that Ken Pomeroy, Dan Hanner and Bart Torvik have compared our preseason ratings and/or projections with other stat-based prognosticators in past years. Our finish has been consistently good, though it was consistently a bit behind Dan Hanner’s bottom-up, player-based projections while Dan doing them (he unfortunately stopped after the 2017-18 season).

  • 2019-20: (unfortunately, we couldn’t find a comparison for the most recent season)
  • 2018-19: 4th of 18 (behind Torvik, Gasaway, Pomeroy*)
  • 2017-18: 2nd of 7 (behind Hanner)
  • 2016-17: 4th of 7 (behind Torvik, Hanner, Gasaway)
  • 2015-16: 2nd of 7 (behind Hanner)
  • 2014-15: 2nd of 4 (behind Hanner)
  • 2013-14: 2nd of 4 (behind Hanner)
  • 2012-13: 1st of 3

*It’s worth noting that this analysis used the final Pomeroy ratings as the “true” result, so Pomeroy may have a bit of an advantage here.

(Links go to the comparison blog posts or Google Doc data files from Ken/Dan/Bart.)

Taking several years of data into account, and placing some emphasis on long term consistency, we feel we’re objectively right up at the top of the standings for “most accurate preseason computer rankings” based on the tracking above — not as good as Dan Hanner’s now-defunct player lineup based projections were, but ahead of systems like KenPom and ESPN BPI.

In terms of human ratings, John Gasaway leads the pack, and has performed only slightly worse than our computer ratings longer term.

We say this not to brag, but to try to preemptively defend ourselves against the inevitable “Team X is WAY too high/low in your rankings! You guys have no idea what you’re doing!” comments. While our rankings are by no means perfect, the projections they drive have more than held their own in comparisons with other “famous” projection systems. We expect them to do so again this season.

Some Final Advice On Interpreting Preseason College Basketball Rankings

Some people get quite worked up about preseason college basketball rankings — especially when our approach thinks their favorite team is going to be worse than the prevailing consensus.

Differences are to be expected, though. No one else ranks teams exactly like we do, and our approach often discounts things that media analysts and other basketball “experts” believe to be important, because we haven’t found any hard data to back up their supposed value.

Just remember, we’re going to get plenty of individual teams wrong this year, and some teams very wrong, for a variety of reasons. But that’s inevitable when the challenge is to project over 300 different teams. If we’re down on your team, just hope that we’re wrong! No system is perfect, and just like the rest of them, ours has both strengths and weaknesses.

We also have a very specific goals for our preseason college basketball team ratings, which include predicting both the margins of victory of future college basketball games and the end-of-season ratings of all 347 teams, in a way that minimizes error over the entire universe of games and teams. That goal doesn’t line up with the motivations of many other rankings makers.

Look at Ratings, Not Just Rankings

Finally, please remember to look at our team ratings and not just rankings, because ratings tell a much more precise story.

For example, Florida is our No. 22 team in our preseason rankings this year. However, their rating is only one point lower than No. 15 Kentucky’s rating, meaning that there’s a cluster of 8 teams all rated within one point of one another, a very slim difference.

So don’t overreact to a team’s ranking number. Look at the rating as well, and you’ll be able to tell which generally expected performance tier a team is in.

Before You Go …

As a final reminder, be sure to check out the season projections we create using these 2020 college basketball preseason rankings. There’s a ton to see: