2021 College Basketball Preseason Rankings & Ratings For All 358 Teams

Gonzaga tops our 2021 college basketball preseason rankings, but clusters of teams with similar power ratings portend a balanced year.

November 4, 2021 - by Jason Lisk

Drew Timme will try to get Gonzaga back to No. 1 (Brian Rothmuller/Icon Sportswire)

The official TeamRankings 2021-22 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 358 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 No. 1 team?”

Gonzaga Is Our Preseason No. 1 Again

For the second year in a row, the Gonzaga Bulldogs start the season as our No. 1 team.

Gonzaga hasn’t done anything to lessen the view that they are a consistently great program that has become a recruiting power. The only thing they haven’t done at this point is win the national title.

They did lose some key players, including freshman Jalen Suggs and senior Corey Kispert. But star forward Drew Timme is back, and they also added another top prospect this year in Chet Holmgren.

But What About Baylor?

Baylor, along with Gonzaga, was one of the two most dominant teams in college basketball last season. The Bears overcame some midseason issues with COVID-19 and surged to the title in an NCAA tournament where they played their best basketball in the Final Four.

They were also a team loaded with seniors, so they’ve lost a lot of production. Baylor has established a program and a level of consistent success, but relative to last year, this will probably be a reloading season.

We still have Baylor at No. 12, in a large group of teams that should be in contention if things break right.

Golf Pool Picks

Get an edge in your PGA Majors and One And Done pools

Learn MoreGet Picks Now

Coronavirus Impact On The 2021-22 Rankings

While we hopefully won’t see the volume of postponements that we did last season, it’s inevitable that there will still be some pandemic-related disruptions. But we’re talking here about team ratings, 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 COVID-19 results in them having some games canceled or losing opportunities to get key wins.

Trying to predict which teams will be most and least impacted by the pandemic is a fool’s errand. But we expect more variance impacting where teams end up 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 2021-22 season will bring.

Preseason Top 25 Comparison

Moving on to the rest of our 2021-22 college basketball Top 25, let’s take a look at all of the teams that made it into at least one preseason Top 25 from 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 we 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. 

TeamTRKPBTAPCPAVGTR Diff
Gonzaga111111.00.0
UCLA372223.20.2
Kansas636334.2-1.8
Michigan227664.62.6
Purdue468776.42.4
Texas5144556.61.6
Illinois75511107.60.6
Villanova10912447.8-2.2
Baylor1249888.2-3.8
Duke1510109910.6-4.4
Memphis11163121611.60.6
Houston81113151412.24.2
Ohio State9811171712.43.4
Kentucky131717101113.60.6
Alabama141915141315.01.0
Tennessee171314181715.8-1.2
Arkansas161531161518.62.6
Maryland221823212121.0-1.0
Auburn182819222221.83.8
Connecticut232118242321.8-1.2
Oregon202936131222.02.0
Florida St272427201923.4-3.6
Texas Tech211226332723.82.8
USC192025282824.05.0
St Bonavent303016232424.6-5.4
N Carolina284020192025.4-2.6
Michigan St312228262626.6-4.4
Indiana243130273028.44.4
Xavier382621324532.4-5.6
Oklahoma St253742303333.48.4
Florida262522555536.610.6
Louisville293624455537.88.8
Virginia374567252539.82.8
Iowa392361553943.44.4

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, the human polls are clearly more optimistic about some teams than data-driven systems are.

Here are teams that are ranked higher in both the preseason AP and Coaches Polls than in any of three leading data-driven rankings systems (TeamRankings, Pomeroy, Torvik). We list each team below, along with the difference between (a) its human poll ranking and (b) its BEST ranking out of those three data-driven systems.

  • Virginia +12 (No. 25 in both polls, No. 37 in TR)
  • Oregon +7 (No. 13 in AP Poll, No. 20 in TR)
  • Villanova +6 (No. 4 in both polls, No. 10 in TR)
  • Florida State +4 (No. 20 in AP Poll, No. 24 in KP)
  • Kentucky +2 (No. 11 in Coaches Poll, No. 13 TR)
  • Duke +1 (No. 9 in both polls, No. 10 in KP and BT)

Why are the pollsters higher on those teams? We can’t say for sure, but for the most part, these seem to be big program names or teams that have enjoyed recent tournament success.

Teams The Human Polls Dislike (Relatively)

These teams are lower in the preseason AP and Coaches Polls than in any of the data-driven rankings. Here we list the difference between (a) its human poll ranking and (b) its WORST ranking out of the three data-driven systems.

  • Florida -29 (unranked, no votes in either pool, No. 26 in TR)
  • Louisville -9 (No. 45 in AP Poll, No. 36 in KP)
  • Ohio State -6 (No. 17 in both polls, No. 11 in BT)
  • USC -3 (No. 28 in both polls, No. 25 in BT)
  • Illinois -3 (No. 10 in Coaches Poll, No. 7 in TR)
  • Texas Tech -1 (No. 27 in Coaches Poll, No. 26 in BT)
  • Houston -1 (No. 14 in Coaches Poll, No. 13 in BT)

The first two teams on the list play in tough conferences, and Louisville didn’t make the tournament last year, while Florida lost in the second round to Oral Roberts.

The rest of the list includes two Big Ten teams who disappointed in the NCAA tournament, a USC team that lost a top NBA draft pick, a veteran Houston team not being given the benefit of the doubt, and a Texas Tech team with a new head coach.

Correlations With Consensus

For the 34 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 by a hair, just behind Pomeroy.

The rank order of correlation to consensus is:

  • TeamRankings (0.938)
  • AP Poll (0.910)
  • Coaches Poll (0.895)
  • Pomeroy (0.847)
  • Torvik (0.839)

That’s the same order as last year, aside from the two human polls flipping places, and the correlation coefficients are roughly in line with last year as well.

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. 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 and Houston

Among the 34 teams listed in the table above, here are the teams where our ranking is the highest (all by itself) for that team. We list our ranking and then the next closest for that same team:

  • Purdue (4th/6th)
  • Houston (8th/11th)
  • Auburn (18th/19th)
  • USC (19th/20th)
  • Indiana (24th/27th)
  • Oklahoma State (25th/30th)

Our differences on Purdue may not seem large, but given that they are fourth for us and not in the top five in any of the other rating/rankings systems, that’s a potentially sizable difference in terms of odds of winning the title or getting a top seed.

We also give Houston more of a chance of repeating last year’s run.

Meanwhile, Oklahoma State is on probation and lost a top player in Cade Cunningham, but we expect them to be better than other ratings do.

Last year in this section, we identified only one team as being ranked highly by TR compared to the consensus: Purdue. We had the Boilermakers ranked No. 26 in the preseason, while they received zero votes in the preseason AP Poll and only a few in the Coaches Poll, and were ranked No. 55 by Torvik. They finished the season ranked between No. 20 and No. 29 in all five systems, as well as in ESPN’s BPI ratings.

Our Rankings Are Low On Baylor, Duke, and Michigan State

Here are the teams where we had the lowest ranking on a team. We list our ranking and then the next closest for that same team:

  • Baylor (12th/9th)
  • Duke (15th/10th)
  • Michigan State (31st/28th)

All of these are prominent programs. One is the defending national champs, and the other two have Hall of Fame coaches.

In addition to these three, we are most below consensus on Xavier, St. Bonaventure, Florida State, North Carolina, and Villanova, though at least one other rating/ranking system joins us in the relative pessimism on that group.

Last year, we identified three teams that we were lowest on. Alabama had a really good season, outperforming expectations, while both Arizona State and Providence had disappointing years and missed the NCAA tournament despite higher expectations from others.

Full 2021-22 College Basketball Preseason Rankings, From #1 To #358

The table below shows our 2021-22 preseason ranking of all 358 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 some teams.

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 RankTeam21-22 RatingLAST YRPROGRAMRET OFFRET DEFRECRUITTRANSFERCOACHMARKET
1Gonzaga22.612.23.8-0.30.16.70.00.00.0
2Michigan19.79.13.7-0.7-0.54.14.00.00.0
3UCLA18.76.22.13.52.52.81.60.00.0
4Purdue18.75.74.83.52.62.10.00.00.0
5Texas18.55.62.2-1.4-0.83.07.92.00.0
6Kansas18.25.64.81.91.82.91.20.00.0
7Illinois18.19.92.41.61.52.80.80.0-1.0
8Houston17.49.33.3-0.40.00.45.80.0-1.0
9Ohio State17.17.13.91.91.62.10.40.00.0
10Villanova16.96.84.61.91.52.20.00.00.0
11Memphis16.94.92.80.61.05.50.90.01.0
12Baylor16.410.92.5-1.1-0.52.71.90.00.0
13Kentucky16.43.73.6-0.7-0.55.05.30.00.0
14Alabama16.38.01.8-0.50.03.42.50.01.0
15Duke16.24.24.0-1.4-0.95.92.40.02.0
16Arkansas15.97.02.3-0.7-0.62.16.90.0-1.0
17Tennessee15.76.43.90.10.54.20.50.00.0
18Auburn15.73.04.0-0.1-0.23.55.60.00.0
19USC15.78.52.40.70.33.41.40.0-1.0
20Oregon15.66.11.8-1.9-1.02.77.00.01.0
21Texas Tech15.66.34.0-0.30.21.67.7-4.00.0
22Maryland15.64.73.3-0.30.41.94.60.01.0
23Connecticut15.05.91.32.11.63.00.00.01.0
24Indiana14.84.22.91.40.92.82.60.00.0
25Oklahoma St14.84.82.41.71.22.32.40.00.0
26Florida14.64.83.1-0.6-0.22.75.90.0-1.0
27Florida St14.66.33.2-1.3-0.73.62.40.01.0
28N Carolina14.55.34.20.70.63.92.8-3.00.0
29Louisville14.22.83.6-0.6-0.22.26.50.00.0
30St Bonavent13.94.71.33.22.60.01.20.01.0
31Michigan St13.92.54.8-0.20.23.32.30.01.0
32Seton Hall13.93.43.30.30.71.24.90.00.0
33Oklahoma13.84.72.4-1.3-0.71.86.90.00.0
34W Virginia13.75.62.9-0.6-0.11.14.80.00.0
35Arizona13.75.53.0-0.20.03.14.2-1.0-1.0
36VA Tech13.73.83.21.31.11.03.20.00.0
37Virginia13.55.63.6-1.9-1.31.43.30.03.0
38Xavier13.23.23.12.51.91.01.50.00.0
39Iowa12.78.82.7-0.4-0.30.50.50.01.0
40Penn State12.64.53.0-0.30.20.05.10.00.0
41S Methodist12.33.51.1-0.40.20.07.90.00.0
42LSU11.85.92.2-1.8-1.23.22.50.01.0
43San Diego St11.75.22.90.50.10.02.10.01.0
44BYU11.56.12.51.11.20.00.50.00.0
45Notre Dame11.41.52.51.00.90.05.50.00.0
46St Johns11.22.41.7-0.6-0.20.07.90.00.0
47UAB10.81.10.50.80.70.07.90.00.0
48Loyola-Chi10.85.31.71.91.50.00.40.00.0
49Nevada10.70.63.11.91.50.03.60.00.0
50St Marys10.61.92.93.52.20.00.00.00.0
51Wichita St10.32.32.91.11.20.02.70.00.0
52Arizona St10.21.42.1-1.9-1.02.47.30.00.0
53San Fransco10.21.01.51.91.30.03.50.01.0
54Butler10.1-0.23.23.01.90.51.70.00.0
55Colorado10.07.71.5-0.5-0.21.60.00.00.0
56Cincinnati10.0-0.43.6-0.50.20.57.60.0-1.0
57Central FL9.90.71.73.21.90.02.40.00.0
58Miss State9.82.42.8-0.30.40.54.00.00.0
59Mississippi9.73.51.9-0.1-0.21.92.70.00.0
60Wisconsin9.76.52.8-0.6-0.30.00.40.01.0
61Colgate9.54.90.32.42.00.00.00.00.0
62Rutgers9.44.82.20.60.70.50.50.00.0
63Northwestern9.42.51.81.91.40.51.40.00.0
64Richmond9.42.20.72.71.80.01.00.01.0
65Colorado St9.22.30.13.22.10.00.60.01.0
66NC State9.22.53.00.40.22.50.60.00.0
67Drake9.12.60.32.51.70.02.00.00.0
68Utah State9.13.71.9-0.50.00.06.9-3.00.0
69Providence9.02.22.41.01.00.51.90.00.0
70Clemson8.93.82.9-0.20.10.51.70.00.0
71Wash State8.71.80.11.00.61.33.90.00.0
72Creighton8.56.11.9-2.7-1.51.91.80.01.0
73Marquette8.51.92.2-2.4-1.12.15.80.00.0
74GA Tech8.34.11.60.60.31.30.40.00.0
75Boise State8.23.41.91.71.30.00.00.00.0
76VCU8.03.51.90.80.40.50.70.00.0
77Stanford7.83.12.0-0.1-0.33.20.00.00.0
78TX Christian7.7-1.22.7-1.6-0.50.57.90.00.0
79Syracuse7.74.41.8-1.5-0.72.31.50.00.0
80Nebraska7.40.61.9-0.6-0.11.42.20.02.0
81Oregon St7.43.81.80.80.60.00.30.00.0
82Texas A&M7.1-1.31.8-1.3-1.32.07.10.00.0
83Ohio7.10.6-0.22.01.50.01.20.02.0
84Miami (FL)7.0-1.22.20.60.22.83.40.0-1.0
85Loyola Mymt6.90.7-0.22.31.50.02.70.00.0
86Buffalo6.91.12.21.51.30.00.70.00.0
87Missouri St6.60.40.52.61.70.01.40.00.0
88Belmont6.6-0.21.93.01.80.00.00.00.0
89Utah6.63.90.8-2.0-0.91.05.80.0-2.0
90S Dakota St6.1-0.61.53.21.90.00.00.00.0
91Northeastrn5.9-2.61.00.60.30.06.70.00.0
92Tulsa5.9-0.31.2-0.6-0.40.06.10.00.0
93Davidson5.82.32.10.60.30.00.50.00.0
94Washington5.7-1.52.2-1.50.02.34.30.00.0
95UCSB5.62.40.30.50.30.02.20.00.0
96N Mex State5.6-2.02.00.50.50.04.60.00.0
97Rhode Island5.50.41.91.10.70.01.40.00.0
98LA Tech5.51.41.01.10.80.01.30.00.0
99UC Irvine5.50.51.11.91.30.00.70.00.0
100Vanderbilt5.30.70.7-0.20.20.03.90.00.0
101N Iowa5.3-3.11.13.32.10.00.00.02.0
102W Kentucky5.30.51.2-1.5-0.41.33.20.01.0
103Furman5.21.51.91.00.70.00.00.00.0
104Vermont5.1-0.91.72.11.40.00.80.00.0
105Murray St5.0-3.11.80.50.20.05.70.00.0
106Dayton5.00.92.0-1.4-0.81.31.90.01.0
107Saint Louis5.03.61.10.40.80.01.00.0-2.0
108Wake Forest4.9-1.90.9-1.4-0.60.07.90.00.0
109Georgetown4.92.71.0-1.6-0.91.41.20.01.0
110Wright State4.81.40.71.21.00.00.40.00.0
111Weber State4.70.1-0.71.70.90.02.60.00.0
112Kansas St4.6-2.32.80.81.00.02.30.00.0
113Minnesota4.53.11.4-3.0-1.80.05.90.0-1.0
114DePaul4.4-1.31.1-1.8-0.21.84.80.00.0
115U Mass4.30.1-0.4-0.2-0.40.54.70.00.0
116Toledo4.21.21.1-0.3-0.10.02.30.00.0
117Pittsburgh3.81.30.3-1.6-1.20.44.50.00.0
118Missouri3.64.00.8-2.5-1.30.54.00.0-2.0
119Marshall3.60.90.61.20.90.00.00.00.0
120Georgia St3.5-2.31.02.51.40.00.80.00.0
121S Carolina3.3-0.71.8-1.3-1.11.23.30.00.0
122Winthrop3.2-0.10.1-0.30.10.03.40.00.0
123UNLV3.0-2.20.9-2.2-1.41.36.50.00.0
124Iona2.9-2.7-0.4-0.3-0.20.06.50.00.0
125Liberty2.9-0.10.91.20.90.00.00.00.0
126Pacific2.8-0.90.0-0.40.30.03.80.00.0
127California2.8-0.2-0.61.30.60.01.80.00.0
128Akron2.8-1.20.6-0.1-0.10.03.50.00.0
129Iowa State2.7-3.02.5-2.4-2.21.86.90.0-1.0
130NC-Grnsboro2.6-0.41.5-0.8-0.10.02.40.00.0
131E Tenn St2.4-1.51.90.90.90.02.40.0-2.0
132Bowling Grn2.4-2.20.10.80.30.04.40.0-1.0
133S Utah2.3-1.6-0.92.31.50.01.00.00.0
134Old Dominion2.2-2.41.2-0.10.40.03.10.00.0
135North Texas2.22.00.7-0.8-0.50.00.70.00.0
136Yale2.21.40.9-0.6-0.40.02.90.0-2.0
137S Illinois2.0-4.20.32.31.00.02.60.00.0
138Grd Canyon1.70.60.1-0.7-0.40.02.10.00.0
139James Mad1.7-2.1-1.60.10.00.05.40.00.0
140N Dakota St1.7-2.50.12.61.50.00.00.00.0
141Georgia1.30.70.9-2.6-1.91.43.70.0-1.0
142UC Riverside1.30.3-1.50.30.60.01.60.00.0
143Cleveland St1.3-4.9-2.22.21.00.03.20.02.0
144Charlotte1.2-4.9-1.3-0.70.20.07.90.00.0
145Tulane1.1-2.0-0.50.80.40.02.30.00.0
146Santa Clara1.1-2.4-0.70.80.60.02.80.00.0
147Temple1.0-1.21.70.6-0.10.00.20.00.0
148Kent State1.0-1.10.30.20.20.01.50.00.0
149Jksnville St0.9-3.7-0.12.51.30.00.90.00.0
150Fla Atlantic0.9-0.8-0.40.30.10.01.70.00.0
151Portland St0.8-5.6-0.5-1.10.20.07.90.00.0
152Wyoming0.8-2.7-0.80.80.60.00.00.03.0
153Chattanooga0.8-3.0-1.11.40.50.01.00.02.0
154San Diego0.8-4.90.6-1.01.40.04.70.00.0
155Montana0.8-3.81.01.61.20.00.70.00.0
156Ste F Austin0.7-2.60.21.00.80.01.40.00.0
157Fresno St0.7-3.81.52.01.00.00.00.00.0
158Princeton0.7-2.60.80.40.10.00.00.02.0
159Coastal Car0.6-1.9-0.10.0-0.10.02.80.00.0
160Wofford0.6-1.51.50.50.10.00.00.00.0
161Boston Col0.6-2.31.1-1.2-0.90.03.90.00.0
162N Kentucky0.5-5.91.11.60.80.02.90.00.0
163Drexel0.5-2.5-1.30.70.40.03.30.00.0
164TX Southern0.5-5.0-1.30.80.40.05.50.00.0
165Seattle0.3-4.0-0.41.71.20.01.80.00.0
166Abl Christian0.1-0.4-0.60.80.30.00.00.00.0
167Boston U-0.1-4.3-0.82.21.30.01.60.00.0
168Morehead St-0.1-2.9-2.00.00.00.04.70.00.0
169LA Lafayette-0.2-4.60.4-0.6-0.70.05.20.00.0
170Duquesne-0.3-1.30.0-2.8-2.00.05.80.00.0
171Utah Val St-0.3-3.70.40.40.40.02.20.00.0
172Miami (OH)-0.3-4.1-0.22.51.50.00.00.00.0
173Oral Roberts-0.4-1.3-0.80.50.30.00.90.00.0
174St Peters-0.5-5.0-1.32.21.60.00.00.02.0
175Hofstra-0.5-3.50.9-0.2-0.10.02.30.00.0
176N Colorado-0.6-5.40.81.41.10.01.50.00.0
177Pepperdine-0.70.8-0.5-1.4-1.00.01.50.00.0
178Bradley-0.7-1.80.6-0.80.00.01.10.00.0
179App State-0.9-4.1-0.32.11.40.00.00.00.0
180Stony Brook-0.9-5.0-0.30.70.90.02.80.00.0
181Fla Gulf Cst-0.9-7.7-0.7-0.1-0.30.07.90.00.0
182Bryant-1.0-2.6-2.81.41.10.01.80.00.0
183E Kentucky-1.0-3.4-1.7-0.5-0.10.04.70.00.0
184Indiana St-1.2-1.30.1-0.60.20.00.50.00.0
185Rice-1.2-4.5-1.31.31.00.02.30.00.0
186Ball State-1.2-3.30.7-1.3-1.10.03.90.00.0
187South Dakota-1.3-2.90.30.80.50.00.00.00.0
188Navy-1.4-1.8-1.51.40.50.00.00.00.0
189Harvard-1.4-0.50.7-0.5-0.10.00.00.0-1.0
190Arkansas St-1.5-5.9-1.32.21.10.02.40.00.0
191Cal Baptist-1.5-3.8-1.40.40.40.02.90.00.0
192Towson-1.5-7.5-0.3-1.2-0.40.07.90.00.0
193TX El Paso-1.6-2.0-1.11.00.30.00.10.00.0
194S Mississippi-1.6-5.3-0.50.31.10.02.90.00.0
195Delaware-1.6-5.0-1.02.61.20.00.50.00.0
196Nicholls St-1.6-4.7-0.6-1.7-0.70.06.10.00.0
197Monmouth-1.8-5.1-1.0-0.30.00.02.70.02.0
198S Florida-1.9-3.00.2-2.3-2.10.45.90.0-1.0
199Mercer-1.9-1.7-0.3-0.4-0.40.00.90.00.0
200Sam Hous St-1.9-3.3-0.4-0.20.10.02.00.00.0
201Valparaiso-1.9-4.70.1-1.10.10.03.70.00.0
202Hawaii-2.1-3.5-0.4-1.3-1.30.04.50.00.0
203TX-San Ant-2.1-2.2-0.2-0.7-0.40.01.30.00.0
204IPFW-2.3-8.7-0.60.30.30.06.50.00.0
205Geo Mason-2.3-1.7-0.4-1.7-1.10.02.50.00.0
206St Josephs-2.3-4.8-0.21.41.00.00.30.00.0
207U Penn-2.4-1.10.6-1.2-0.70.00.00.00.0
208TX-Arlington-2.5-5.60.8-1.4-1.20.04.90.00.0
209Hartford-2.5-3.8-0.9-0.5-0.30.03.00.00.0
210Prairie View-2.6-6.1-1.21.30.70.02.90.00.0
211S Alabama-2.6-3.9-0.4-2.4-1.50.05.60.00.0
212Texas State-2.6-4.70.50.90.90.0-0.20.00.0
213Marist-2.7-6.8-2.31.20.00.03.30.02.0
214IL-Chicago-2.9-8.7-0.5-1.2-0.40.07.90.00.0
215CS Bakersfld-2.9-1.9-1.2-0.10.20.00.10.00.0
216E Carolina-2.9-2.3-1.5-0.2-0.40.01.50.00.0
217Illinois St-3.1-5.0-0.3-0.1-0.40.02.70.00.0
218La Salle-3.1-4.1-0.20.80.30.00.20.00.0
219Merrimack-3.3-6.7-2.42.62.20.00.00.01.0
220Tarleton State-3.3-5.3-3.12.01.60.01.40.00.0
221UC Davis-3.4-4.7-0.50.80.10.00.90.00.0
222NC-Wilmgton-3.4-5.3-1.6-0.8-1.00.05.30.00.0
223Col Charlestn-3.5-4.90.9-2.4-1.50.04.50.00.0
224Lipscomb-3.5-6.20.50.20.20.01.70.00.0
225Wagner-3.6-4.7-2.01.81.10.00.30.00.0
226Bellarmine-3.6-2.3-3.11.10.60.00.00.00.0
227Campbell-3.8-6.1-1.02.31.00.00.00.00.0
228Radford-3.9-6.00.10.30.30.01.40.00.0
229UMKC-4.0-5.3-1.4-0.9-0.30.04.00.00.0
230Detroit-4.1-4.3-2.0-0.6-0.20.03.00.00.0
231Evansville-4.1-5.0-0.81.00.60.00.00.00.0
232E Washingtn-4.30.2-0.7-3.1-2.50.02.80.0-1.0
233Montana St-4.4-5.1-1.41.60.70.0-0.20.00.0
234Albany-4.4-4.5-1.0-1.0-0.60.02.70.00.0
235CS Fullerton-4.5-6.0-0.60.10.50.01.60.00.0
236Idaho State-4.5-6.1-1.92.10.90.00.50.00.0
237Gard-Webb-4.5-4.7-0.9-0.2-0.50.01.80.00.0
238Oakland-4.6-7.1-0.60.5-0.20.02.80.00.0
239WI-Milwkee-4.8-6.3-1.4-0.7-0.41.92.20.00.0
240Mt St Marys-4.8-4.9-2.10.1-0.40.02.50.00.0
241Maryland BC-4.9-2.5-1.0-0.1-0.50.02.2-3.00.0
242Jackson St-4.9-7.7-2.90.4-0.20.04.50.01.0
243LA Monroe-5.0-7.7-0.60.1-0.20.03.50.00.0
244Niagara-5.0-6.1-1.81.00.30.01.60.00.0
245Morgan St-5.0-5.4-3.10.60.50.00.50.02.0
246Fairfield-5.0-8.2-1.62.11.80.00.00.01.0
247Portland-5.0-9.8-1.8-1.9-2.40.07.93.00.0
248Rider-5.1-8.6-0.1-0.40.30.03.60.00.0
249Longwood-5.2-7.4-2.7-0.3-0.30.03.60.02.0
250Mass Lowell-5.2-5.1-1.60.1-0.60.02.00.00.0
251Florida Intl-5.2-7.50.1-1.9-0.90.05.00.00.0
252LIU-5.3-6.0-2.50.50.70.00.00.02.0
253GA Southern-5.4-6.30.80.1-0.30.00.30.00.0
254Elon-5.4-4.7-1.90.60.30.00.30.00.0
255VA Military-5.4-3.3-2.30.20.00.00.00.00.0
256Rob Morris-5.6-9.5-0.7-2.0-1.30.07.90.00.0
257New Mexico-5.6-7.60.9-1.2-2.00.02.42.00.0
258Siena-5.7-4.1-1.0-2.1-0.90.02.50.00.0
259N Hampshire-5.8-6.4-2.41.50.90.00.50.00.0
260Canisius-5.9-6.4-0.90.90.50.00.00.00.0
261American-6.0-5.5-1.41.1-0.70.00.50.00.0
262St Fran (PA)-6.1-7.4-0.91.60.60.00.00.00.0
263Stetson-6.3-6.5-2.72.00.90.00.00.00.0
264Troy-6.4-7.5-1.10.90.70.00.60.00.0
265Quinnipiac-6.4-7.1-1.51.3-0.10.01.10.00.0
266Geo Wshgtn-6.4-5.6-0.8-1.5-0.80.02.20.00.0
267Brown-6.5-4.0-0.6-0.4-0.90.00.50.0-1.0
268TN State-6.5-10.1-0.6-2.3-0.50.07.00.00.0
269Central Mich-6.5-8.41.1-2.6-1.50.05.90.0-1.0
270NC-Asheville-6.5-6.3-2.41.21.10.0-0.10.00.0
271Citadel-6.6-5.9-2.21.1-0.20.00.70.00.0
272W Illinois-6.6-8.7-2.60.20.40.04.10.00.0
273Youngs St-6.9-7.4-1.8-0.2-0.10.02.60.00.0
274Dartmouth-6.9-4.3-1.2-0.8-1.00.02.30.0-2.0
275Jacksonville-7.0-8.0-1.2-1.7-0.50.04.40.00.0
276Austin Peay-7.1-5.60.4-2.0-1.50.01.60.00.0
277NJIT-7.1-7.1-1.2-0.9-0.40.02.60.00.0
278Fordham-7.1-8.9-1.3-0.2-0.90.04.20.00.0
279Samford-7.2-6.8-1.5-0.5-0.91.21.30.00.0
280Army-7.2-2.3-1.5-0.5-0.80.00.00.0-2.0
281Sacred Hrt-7.2-8.3-1.41.80.60.00.00.00.0
282Loyola-MD-7.3-3.3-2.0-1.2-0.80.00.00.00.0
283Manhattan-7.4-8.7-1.71.20.70.01.20.00.0
284AR Lit Rock-7.4-5.8-0.5-1.0-1.10.00.90.00.0
285TX-Pan Am-7.4-6.6-1.0-1.0-0.80.02.00.00.0
286Sac State-7.5-5.5-0.9-1.7-0.50.01.10.00.0
287Cal St Nrdge-7.6-6.7-1.7-1.3-0.80.02.90.00.0
288NC A&T-7.6-8.8-2.2-0.6-0.30.04.20.00.0
289Cornell-7.7-5.8-1.40.7-1.10.00.00.00.0
290Bucknell-7.7-6.30.4-1.2-0.60.00.00.00.0
291Kennesaw St-7.7-9.3-3.71.40.40.03.40.00.0
292Grambling St-7.8-9.4-2.20.40.80.02.50.00.0
293N Florida-7.9-8.2-0.81.00.20.00.00.00.0
294Southern-7.9-8.9-2.7-0.8-0.70.05.20.00.0
295Middle Tenn-8.0-7.70.0-0.7-1.30.01.70.00.0
296Lehigh-8.1-9.0-1.11.50.50.00.00.00.0
297Lafayette-8.1-5.2-1.7-0.6-0.60.00.00.00.0
298SE Missouri-8.2-7.7-2.41.30.40.00.10.00.0
299TN Tech-8.2-9.6-2.40.50.30.03.00.00.0
300Binghamton-8.3-8.6-2.70.3-0.10.02.80.00.0
301Wm & Mary-8.4-7.8-0.30.6-0.90.00.00.00.0
302Lamar-8.5-8.9-0.4-1.2-0.40.02.40.00.0
303New Orleans-8.5-7.7-1.9-0.6-0.30.02.00.00.0
304Lg Beach St-8.5-6.3-1.1-0.6-0.50.00.00.00.0
305Norfolk St-8.6-5.8-1.5-1.4-1.00.01.10.00.0
306Cal Poly-8.8-8.8-2.3-1.1-0.30.03.80.00.0
307St Fran (NY)-9.0-7.4-1.5-2.4-1.30.03.60.00.0
308Holy Cross-9.2-5.1-2.2-1.1-0.80.00.00.00.0
309Florida A&M-9.3-8.3-3.01.60.50.00.00.00.0
310Idaho-9.4-11.7-0.4-3.0-1.20.06.90.00.0
311Hampton-9.5-10.0-1.4-0.8-1.20.04.00.00.0
312W Michigan-9.5-9.0-0.3-1.90.10.01.60.00.0
313McNeese St-9.7-9.8-1.1-2.5-1.80.05.50.00.0
314High Point-9.8-8.3-2.00.50.00.00.00.00.0
315N Alabama-9.9-7.0-2.4-0.4-0.20.00.00.00.0
316UC San Diego-9.9-6.1-3.0-0.6-0.60.00.40.00.0
317Columbia-10.1-6.3-1.2-0.9-1.40.01.70.0-2.0
318Coppin State-10.1-8.8-2.9-2.7-0.50.04.80.00.0
319Howard-10.4-10.5-1.2-2.70.10.73.20.00.0
320W Carolina-10.5-6.0-0.8-2.7-2.00.01.00.00.0
321F Dickinson-10.7-7.3-1.3-1.5-0.50.00.00.00.0
322North Dakota-10.7-7.7-0.9-1.6-0.40.00.00.00.0
323E Michigan-10.7-9.61.9-3.4-1.10.01.40.00.0
324N Arizona-10.7-8.9-1.9-1.1-1.20.02.30.00.0
325WI-Grn Bay-10.8-7.7-0.7-1.7-1.40.00.70.00.0
326Air Force-10.9-8.9-0.8-0.8-0.40.00.00.00.0
327Presbyterian-10.9-10.4-2.21.40.20.00.10.00.0
328SE Louisiana-11.0-10.7-1.90.0-0.40.02.00.00.0
329NC Central-11.0-10.9-0.5-3.1-2.00.05.50.00.0
330Central Ark-11.3-9.1-1.7-0.6-0.80.01.00.00.0
331Dixie State-11.5-9.4-3.10.50.30.00.10.00.0
332Alcorn State-11.5-12.2-2.4-2.3-2.40.07.90.00.0
333Maine-11.7-10.0-2.9-0.90.50.01.60.00.0
334Neb Omaha-12.2-8.9-1.0-0.8-2.30.00.90.00.0
335N Illinois-12.2-11.90.8-1.9-0.70.01.50.00.0
336Charl South-12.7-11.9-1.3-1.1-1.10.02.70.00.0
337E Illinois-13.0-8.9-0.5-2.7-1.30.00.40.00.0
338IUPUI-13.0-8.5-1.5-1.9-1.70.00.70.00.0
339TN Martin-13.2-12.60.4-3.8-2.00.04.90.00.0
340SIU Edward-13.2-10.1-3.0-0.6-1.00.01.50.00.0
341NW State-13.5-9.0-3.4-0.7-0.40.00.00.00.0
342TX A&M-CC-13.8-11.0-1.1-2.0-1.50.01.90.00.0
343SC Upstate-14.0-10.1-3.3-1.0-1.10.01.50.00.0
344Central Conn-14.4-10.0-2.7-1.5-0.10.00.00.00.0
345Denver-14.5-11.0-0.8-2.6-1.80.01.70.00.0
346Beth-Cook-14.5-7.0-2.4-3.4-2.00.03.20.0-3.0
347Alab A&M-14.6-11.7-3.91.2-0.20.00.00.00.0
348Incar Word-14.6-11.0-3.6-1.5-1.00.02.40.00.0
349San Jose St-15.1-11.5-2.70.3-1.70.00.60.00.0
350Houston Bap-15.2-11.0-2.7-1.1-0.80.00.40.00.0
351St. Thomas (MN)-17.3-13.9-3.9-0.2-0.80.01.50.00.0
352S Car State-19.7-15.2-3.7-1.4-0.20.00.80.00.0
353Ark Pine Bl-19.8-13.7-1.7-3.1-1.50.00.20.00.0
354Alabama St-19.9-14.7-3.5-0.6-1.60.00.50.00.0
355Delaware St-20.3-15.2-3.9-0.4-0.70.00.00.00.0
356Maryland ES-20.3-13.4-3.3-1.9-1.20.01.50.0-2.0
357Chicago St-27.1-18.8-3.5-2.7-1.70.0-0.40.00.0
358Miss Val St-29.2-22.1-3.4-1.8-1.90.00.00.00.0

A Quick 2021 Note on Teams That Didn’t Play Last Season

We should note that several schools, including the Ivy League, Maryland-Eastern Shore, and Bethune-Cookman, did not play last year. So their ratings could be a little less reliable.

We treated players that played for them two seasons ago as if they played last year, and used ratings information from two seasons ago. That may not be the best way to handle it, but it’s hard to know since this is a unique situation.

What Do We Use These Ratings 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 was doing them (he unfortunately stopped after the 2017-18 season).

We also found this comparison for the most recent seasons, and while we cannot attest to the methodology or vouch for the accuracy, our ranking in predicting wins based on preseason ratings was similar to our past performance from other estimates. Note that we are ignoring the “Consensus” system on that page when tallying ranks.

  • 2020-21: 3rd of 21 (behind Lefevre, INCC)
  • 2019-20: 5th of 20 (behind Lefevre, INCC, Sagarin, Pomeroy)
  • 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’re objectively right up at the top of the standings for most accurate preseason computer rankings based on the tracking above. We aren’t as good as Hanner’s now-defunct projections were, but we’re as good as or better than systems like KenPom and ESPN BPI.

In terms of human ratings, John Gasaway leads the pack. He 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 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 358 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, Maryland is our No. 22 team in our preseason rankings this year. However, their rating is less than one point lower than No. 12 Baylor’s rating, meaning that there’s a cluster of 11 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.

Golf Pool Picks

Get an edge in your PGA Majors and One And Done pools

Learn MoreGet Picks Now