aubiefifty

College football: Miami, Auburn, Oklahoma, Nebraska poised to make 'big jumps' in 2023, Josh Pate says Grant Hughes With the 2022 college football season in the books, 247Sports’ Josh Pate looked ahead to 2023 on Friday’s episode of Late Kick and labeled Miami, Auburn, Oklahoma and Nebraska as teams that should be significantly improved from a season ago and make big jumps in the fall. Auburn and Nebraska each fired their coaches amid losing seasons in 2022. The Tigers entered the season with second-year head coach Bryan Harsin at the helm and let him go following a 3-5 start that included four consecutive losses. The Cornhuskers weren’t as patient, canning Scott Frost three games into the season. Miami and Oklahoma fell short of their usual standards under first-year head coaches Mario Cristobal and Brent Venables, respectively. The Hurricanes (5-7) won less than six games in a season for the first time since 2007, while the Sooners (6-7) stumbled to their first losing season since 1998. Get the fastest scores, stats, news, LIVE videos, and more. CLICK HERE to download the CBS Sports Mobile App and get the latest on your team today. Keep scrolling to see why Pate says Miami, Auburn, Oklahoma and Nebraska can make big jumps next season. Miami head coach Mario Cristobal (Photo: Scott Utterback, Getty) Coming off a 7-5 record in 2021, Miami fired head coach Manny Diaz and lured Mario Cristobal away from Oregon with a 10-year, $80 million deal, making him the second-highest-paid coach in the ACC (Clemson's Dabo Swinney). The Hurricanes fell short of expectations in 2022 with their first losing record since 2007 (5-7). Despite Miami's poor finish, Cristobal has been flexing his recruiting muscles. During the Early Signing Period in December, Miami received national letters of intent from 25 of its 26 commitments in a 2023 class that ranks No. 4 in the nation. The 2023 Miami recruiting class is the highest signed by Cristobal during his 12-year coaching career and is poised to give the Hurricanes their first top-5 finish in the recruiting rankings since 2008. Pate's take: "They can't really get much worse, but how big will the jump be? They were a bad team last year. They have a lot of true freshmen that I think will be immediate contributors. They started three quarterbacks last year. Offensively, they were out of sync. I think Miami fans are wondering if the totality of the upheaval has concluded. Are there going to be more staff changes? I think maybe. Their running game is not good enough, but they're bringing in a high four-star running back and a couple of offensive tackles." Auburn head coach Hugh Freeze (Photo: 247Sports) Auburn went 5-7 last season and parted ways with Bryan Harsin along the way. The Tigers hired former Ole Miss and Liberty head coach Hugh Freeze to take the helm in November, a move that has paid dividends in the transfer portal. In convincing eight four-star transfers to join him on The Plains ahead of the 2023 season, Freeze signed the nation's No. 2 transfer class. The portal's No. 4 defensive lineman, Justin Rogers (Kentucky), highlights the Tigers' class. The Tigers return Robby Ashford at quarterback after he completed 49.2% of his passes for 1,613 yards and seven touchdowns with seven interceptions a season ago. He added 710 yards and seven more scores on the ground. Pate's take: "I expect them to get better. But with this schedule they play, even if you improve a little bit, you still got LSU, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia and Texas A&M. Maybe some of those teams fall short of expectations, but you can't count on that. Auburn could be improved, but they're still 7-5 instead of 5-7. They have the No. 3 portal class in the country right now. I don't think the country has watched much Robby Ashford, but he is a guy I expect to be the starting quarterback. He strikes me as a guy that has a skill set that hasn't been tapped into yet. If I were to pick a guy that could tap into that, I'd probably pick Hugh Freeze. How many guys on Auburn's roster were not being properly utilized? There could be a few guys on this roster that could surprise you." Oklahoma head coach Brent Venables (Photo: Bryan Terry/The Oklahoman, USA TODAY Sports) Brent Venables' debut season at Oklahoma went hardly as planned, with the Sooners stumbling to their first losing record (6-7) since 1998. However, Oklahoma's poor performance on the field has yet to carry over to the recruiting trail. The Sooners are one of two teams in the nation with a top-5 recruiting class and top-10 transfer portal class for the 2023 cycle. Five-star quarterback Jackson Arnold, who enrolled at Oklahoma on Jan. 16 as the No. 8 prospect and No. 4 quarterback in the Class of 2023, headlines the OU recruiting class. He is the third-highest-rated signal-caller to commit to Oklahoma since 2000, behind Rhett Bomar and Caleb Williams. Pate's take: "You have to expect Oklahoma to make a big jump this year. Oklahoma is certainly going to improve on (last year), I think by leaps and bounds. They're well on their way to replenishing the roster. They've done a really good job of balancing traditional recruiting with the transfer portal. I'm interested in the fact they have a top-5 recruiting class and the top-10 portal class. They have Jackson Arnold possibly pound-for-pound my favorite quarterback in the cycle. I just happen to believe he's got the right stuff to come in there and compete for a starting job right away. And here's the thing about that. It's kind of a blessing if he wins the job. It's because he was good enough. And if he doesn't win the job, it's not because he wasn't good enough. It's just because Dylan Gabriel beat him out." Nebraska went 4-8 in 2022, including a 3-6 record under interim coach Mickey Joseph after the firing of Scott Frost. The Cornhuskers handed the keys to former Carolina Panthers head coach Matt Rhule, a known program-builder among the collegiate ranks with successful stops at Temple and Baylor. Rhule went 11-27 over two seasons and five games with the Panthers. Prior to his stint in the pros, Rhule churned a Baylor program that went 1-11 in his first year to a 7-6 mark the next season and an 11-3 season in year three, one that ended with the Bears in the Big 12 Championship Game. Rhule reeled in former Georgia Tech star Jeff Sims via the transfer portal, giving Nebraska a potential playmaker at quarterback. 1COMMENTS Pate's take: "I remember Matt Rhule at Baylor; that is why I am so confident that Nebraska is going to massively upgrade, even in year one. They do not have Ohio State or Penn State this upcoming year. I have this very strange fascination with Jeff Sims and what he could be there. We are probably going to look at Nebraska and view them as a product that is vastly improved in October and November than what they were to start the season in September. That is the team Nebraska is going to be." ">247Sports

Former SEC quarterback believes Hugh Freeze can win national title at Auburn Taylor Jones ~3 minutes Auburn head coach Hugh Freeze has not stopped working since being hired to take over the position in late November. He has hauled in the nation’s No. 17 recruiting class according to 247Sports and has snagged the No. 3 transfer portal class, behind only LSU and Florida State. Buy Tigers Tickets The recent improvements to the program have many Auburn fans excited for the future, and college football analysts believing that he can lead Auburn to the top within a few seasons. One of those analysts is ESPN’s Aaron Murray. In a recent episode of Snaps, a podcast hosted by the former Georgia quarterback and former LSU lineman T-Bob Hebert, the duo ranked their top five coaches who could win a title, with the only criteria being that said coaches have not won a title before. Murray included Freeze at No. 3 on the list. LSU has won titles under Nick Saban, Les Miles, and Ed Orgeron over the last 20 years. Auburn has also seen that success by winning a title under Gene Chizik and playing for another under Gus Malzahn. Murray uses that point to share why he added Freeze to his list. “You look at Auburn, two of their past three head coaches have either won a national championship or have been to a national championship,” Murray said. “At least it has been shown in the last 13 years that you can win a national championship at Auburn, you can win the SEC at Auburn, and you can get to a national championship.” Murray also believes that Freeze has come into Auburn at a good time, citing that Nick Saban could retire from Alabama at some point in the near future, which could make way for Freeze to reach the top of the mountain. Freeze has also shown signs of regret for his past faults during his time at Ole Miss, which can also be a sign of great things to come. “Ever since he has set foot on campus at Auburn, he as recruited at a high clip, he also has a top transfer portal class as well. They have plenty of money at Auburn, they are doing a great job when it comes to NIL as well,” Murray said. “Hugh Freeze, the offense, the connections, the fact that he has had success in this league, the fact that Auburn has won championships in the past gives me confidence that he can get that thing going again in the next four years.” The first time that Auburn fans can see a Hugh Freeze-led team on the field will be on April 8 for the annual A-Day spring game. The official opening day for spring practice has yet to be determined. https://t.co/pWq7pI9Vp0 pic.twitter.com/AcDMjlHFjH — Aaron Murray (@aaronmurray11) January 27, 2023

Five expectations for Auburn football's quarterbacks under Hugh Freeze New Auburn head coach Hugh Freeze is known as a bit of a quarterback guru. Now entering his first season on the Plains, Freeze will have that reputation put to the test. Auburn quarterback Robby Ashford was thrown into the fire as a freshman and unsurprisingly struggled in a variety of areas - accuracy, decision making, turnovers, etc. However, he did flash glimpses of potential, rushing for over 700 yards and finished sixth in the SEC in yards per completion (min. 100 attempts). Unless Freeze decides to roll with a quarterback out of the portal, he's going to have the chance to build on Ashford's foundation and unlock his potential. Regardless of who the signal-caller is, here are five things we can expect out of Freeze's quarterbacks at Auburn. More gambling Jason Homan/ Auburn Daily Over the course of his ten seasons coaching Division I college football, Hugh Freeze quarterbacks throw an interception on 2.9% of their passes. Compare this to Auburn, who from 2013-2022 threw a pick on 2.1% of their passes. The gap between these two styles of play starts to shift when you look at interception totals - Hugh Freeze QB's 117 interceptions to Auburn's 65 - but that's not a fair comparison because of two reasons. One, the Tigers have thrown the ball significantly less than the average SEC team over the last decade. Two, there's a two-year gap in the Hugh Freeze numbers because he was out of coaching. Only twice has Auburn eclipsed double-digit interceptions since 2013. Hugh Freeze quarterbacks have done it seven out of his nine seasons. More turnovers come with throwing the ball more. Especially in Freeze's offenses. More explosive play Matt Bush-USA TODAY Sports While turnovers may be a downside, more explosive play is also to be expected from Freeze signal-callers. During his time at Ole Miss, Freeze never had a passing offense finish outside of the top five in the SEC in yards per game and only had one aerial attack step outside the top five of the league in yards per attempt. If we're looking at this year specifically, there's reason to expect Auburn's receiver room to be used pretty differently considering the blend of size and speed the Tigers have in the rotation. Physical, big-bodied receivers are what have thrived in Freeze's systems in the past - and part of it has to do with the downfield passing from his quarterback. This isn't Joe Burrow and the 2019 LSU Tigers by any stretch. However, fans should be excited about a more, well, exciting passing game. Better accuracy Eric Starling/Auburn Daily Seven of Freeze's ten offenses have seen better completion percentages than Auburn's passing attacks in the same year. We won't sit here and tell you that every year Freeze beat out the Tigers' passing attack by a wide margin in that category, but it's not unfair to say Freeze's quarterbacks have had a consistent edge over Auburn's from a raw numbers perspective - more reps, completions, accuracy, etc. If we're talking specifically about this upcoming season, there's little doubt that Ashford will improve on his 49.5% completion percentage. Dual-threat abilities Eric Starling/Auburn Daily Freeze has utilized his quarterback's legs to not just produce yardage, but to actually get in the endzone. His starting signal-callers have averaged 447.1 yards on the ground per season to go along with 7.5 rushing touchdowns. What's interesting about Freeze's use of dual-threat quarterbacks is that the more he's used them in a given season, the better the team has done overall. Now, the utilization of a QBs legs may not directly correlate to wins, but it does indicate that the offense probably performs better and therefore the team as a whole is more competitive. Four of Freeze's ten seasons have included his starting quarterback rushing for over 500 yards. Those teams went a combined 38-11 (0.78 win percentage) and produced all three of his ten-win seasons. It does make one wonder what could be in store if Auburn were to ride with Robby Ashford and improve his passing game... Big performances in big wins Dale Zanine-USA TODAY Sports Excluding 2012, Hugh Freeze is 5-7 against top 10 opponents. In those five wins, his quarterbacks produced some solid (averaged) stat lines: - 314.4 passing yards per game - 10 total TD/2 INT - 79.6 QBR When the quarterback plays well in important contests, the team plays well.

Opinion: Auburn Football Is Gonna Be Okay Matthew Redding 7–9 minutes At 28 years old, having bled blue and orange since birth, I have grown up witnessing some of the finest moments from one of the finest programs in America. My dad, Jeff Redding, made sure that the reason I cheered for Auburn wasn't just because I wanted to be like my old man (which I still do) but because I loved its rich history and trendsetting traditions, and that no matter the weather of the season, I wouldn't just crawl under a rock and wait until a better year came around like some "fans" of the OTHER school would do. And at 28 years old, I have seen plenty. No, not as much as your grandfather or legendary columnist Philip Marshall. I was never in the stands for "Bo Over the Top" or welcomed Georgia Tech to Auburn with slicked-down railway tracks. But I was there to watch Brodie Croyle get sacked fifty bajillion times in '05. I was there the year before when Auburn went 14-0 without a national championship and a few years later when Cam took us 14-0 again WITH a national championship. I was at a college banquet watching Auburn on my phone when the Prayer at Jordan-Hare was answered as we sunk Georgia, and who can forget where they were when the Kick-Six happened? (For me, it was in the living room and my mom screamed so loud that my eardrum almost burst as Davis rounded the 50 yard line). My family and I were at a funeral for my grandfather, having the most balanced of emotions as the side of grief of losing someone was counterbalanced by the side of "whipping the dog crap" out of No. 1 Georgia all night that night (no doubt, Grandad Redding was smiling too from above). It also, unfortunately, means that I have seen some of the lowest. That same 2017 year was the 20-0 blown lead at LSU. 13 seconds from a national title in 2013. 3-9 in Chizik's final year at the helm the year before, and 5-7 the year Tuberville resigned in '08. Games that slipped away in the last quarter or second, penalties that go the other way (or should never have happened) to hiring coaches from up north who know nothing of the juggernaut that is SEC football and southern recruiting. When it rains, it pours. Marvin Gentry-USA TODAY Sports Thankfully, this year, Auburn has learned how to dance in the rain. The media reaction from the 13-10 victory over Texas A&M this year at Jordan-Hare was as electric as a power plant. Our own coach Freeze even admitted that it "looked like a national title game" with everything on the line. Coach Cadillac was handed an unfair hand with a team sitting in a muddle of doubt and a 3-5 record. Bowl eligibility was on the line, but the prestige of the Cheese-It Bowl is lost in the age of the College Football Playoff. What was left to play for now? Pride. The Auburn Spirit and Auburn pride. Upon being named the interim, his message echoed that sentiment. "I don’t know if we’re going to win a ballgame or not" he had said "One thing that’s going to make me happy is if we play good football - and hard, Auburn football. I honestly -- that’s what I want to get these kids to do, man -- play hard and compete. At the end of the day, I told these kids, win, lose or draw, if we do that, not only will we make ourselves proud, but I know the Auburn family will be proud of us, too." And who can forget the whirlwind of emotions as Auburn looked for the next man up. Names from Dabo Swinney to Jeff Grimes to the four-week favorite Lane Kiffin circled Twitter like buzzards over TCU's offense against Georgia. John Cohen eventually went the Bruce Pearl route and gave a former SEC coach a second chance and went with Hugh Freeze. The reactions were... Immediate, so to say. Personally, I was underwhelmed after all the speculation of a big-name playoff coach coming to the Plains, but I thought he was worth a shot. His recruiting abilities in the dirty south and offensive prowess made him a far better option than the previous regime. Others were not so accepting of the former Ole Miss coach, and World War III took place on Twitter between Auburn and... Well, Auburn. At the end of the day, the only thing to do was wait and see what his next moves were as the new head man at Auburn. And what a delivery. All Freeze did was put together a sneaky good staff while bringing Auburn recruiting from nothing to the #16 class in the country (per 247) and brought in the #2 transfer class per On3's rankings. The offensive line grew faster than the Grinch's heart on Christmas Day. Auburn flipped a five star in Keldrik Faulk on signing day and for the first time in what feels like a while, the national media is gushing over what's going on in an Auburn offseason. And he's only getting started. Todd Van Emst/AU Athletics So what now? Should we believe again just because of top-20 recruiting class and a cool new "Yahtzee" catchphrase? The short answer is simple: yes. Yes indeed. Any coach who begins recruiting for their school 20 minutes after taking the job is going to have some early returns as a reward for their hard work. In Auburn history, every time a new coach is hired, a title-contending season is usually not far behind. Tuberville went from jet-gate to undefeated in two years after being relatively new to the job. Chizik coached the team to the promised land in year 2 at the helm, and Gus almost topped them both with a title in year ONE. But the gimmicky plays that powered fluke years are over, as Freeze has demonstrated that his recruiting plan is not just for a miracle season, but for sustained success. At Ole Miss, he wasn't afraid to make changes that were crucial for continuous winning. When he realized that the solution to quarterback after Bo Wallace wasn't on the roster, he took a shortcut rather than frustrating development and got Chad Kelly to come to Oxford, all while recruiting five-star quarterback Shea Patterson to come sit behind him and learn the ropes. That kind of thinking is why Georgia and Alabama are always in the SEC championship. That kind of thinking is now on the Plains. As we wrote here, Hugh Freeze's passing offenses averaged 293 yards per game at Arkansas State, 290 at , and 250 at Liberty. Auburn hasn't seen that kind of passing attack since Jason Campbell. No, I don't think that we have a huge chance of winning the national championship game in the 2023 season, but if TCU taught us anything, it's that anything can happen, and if there's one thing the 2013 Auburn Tigers taught us, it's not to count out the loveliest village every football season. If there's one thing I do believe- and something we should all look to as Spring practices warm up- It's the statement our own Cadillac Williams made after the victory over Texas A&M "Auburn football is gonna be ok." Related Stories

Hugh Freeze starting fast at Auburn through transfer portal, Cole Cubelic says Brad Crawford 3–4 minutes First-year Auburn coach Hugh Freeze has signed the nation's third-best transfer class during the 2023 recruiting cycle, according to 247Sports — a testament to how hard his staff has worked in the portal, former Tiger and current SEC Network analyst Cole Cubelic says. Not only did the Tigers land a dozen players with previous college experience, but several are expected to be Day 1 starters on The Plains next fall. "The line of scrimmage had to be addressed immediately, it wasn’t a position of concern on both sides of the ball, it was almost a position of panic on both side s of the ball based on where it’s been the last few years," Cubelic said this past week on The Paul Finebaum Show. "You bring in a tackle from Tulsa who I think will be a starter on the left side, you bring a center from ECU that is athletic and I think has a a chance to start right away and a tackle from Western Kentucky who has a chance to start at right tackle." Freeze landed several defensive stalwarts at the line of scrimmage as well, including Kentucky's Justin Rodgers, one of the top transfers available. “You went and got big, physical bodies on the defensive side that can help you right now,” Cubelic said. Auburn did not sign a quarterback and many assumed Freeze would considering the lack of depth returning at the position. "I know people wanted another quarterback, (Coastal Carolina's) Grayson McCall had some potential issues getting in and Hugh decided to go a different direction with (Oklahoma State's) Spencer Sanders, some of that hasn't worked, but I don't think it was emergency mode there," Cubelic said. "Look at how these quarterbacks are being stocked up at different schools. Hugh just realized we must have as much quarterback talent in that room as possible to give us the best chance to be successful no matter what. "That's whether Robby works or doesn't work. He sees the fact that Robby Ashford still overall hasn't played a ton of football and there's a lot of development there." Cubelic did say wide receivers still need to be addressed Auburn ahead of the 2023 season and he worries a bit within that position group. Cubelic, an Auburn center from 1996-01, is not the only former Tiger impressed with Freeze thus far. Get the fastest scores, stats, news, LIVE videos, and more. CLICK HERE to download the CBS Sports Mobile App and get the latest on your team today. "I think he's done a pretty good job to this point of bringing in new blood," said Takeo Spikes, a two-time Pro Bowl selection in the NFL and former Auburn linebacker from 1996-97, said this week on McElroy & Cubelic in the Morning. "You have to change the culture. What Hugh is doing is bringing in outside guys from other schools, as you mentioned. And he's tapping into the portal where you have guys with different experience, some of them from successful programs. I think he's doing a good job so far of bringing in the guys. Ideally we'd love to see more five-stars, but at the end of the day, I don't get too caught up on that." ">247Sports

all this crap and you people still do not get it. did god or jesus not tell us to take care of our planet? i am pretty sure i read that somewhere. we have places here in alabama that on certain days they tell you NOT to go swimming in the water. this is fact. and the same folks tell you not to eat catfish are they contain poisons and are not healthy to eat. it has been on al.com several times. but at the end of the day we should search for the truth and no partison crap on either side. also let me point out i know christians that say no need to worry or do anything because the rapture is coming and there is no need. i have heard it a few times starting back in the eighties. now is this just a handful or a whole ton of people? and does it include christian pols as well?

i have no use for anyone who steals from charity which still was not clear to me. but this kind of crap should not be any kind of party line crap. they are scum. just like trump was scum to do so. so tell me exactly who did they steal from and how much? were they arrested or did they pay the money back?

si.com Five expectations for Auburn football's quarterbacks under Hugh Freeze Lance Dawe 5–6 minutes Home Auburn Daily Football Hank Brown talks about Hugh Freeze Hank Brown talks about Hugh Freeze. 0 seconds of 1 minute, 50 secondsVolume 0% Here are five things we can expect out of Hugh Freeze's quarterbacks at Auburn. New Auburn head coach Hugh Freeze is known as a bit of a quarterback guru. Now entering his first season on the Plains, Freeze will have that reputation put to the test. Auburn quarterback Robby Ashford was thrown into the fire as a freshman and unsurprisingly struggled in a variety of areas - accuracy, decision making, turnovers, etc. However, he did flash glimpses of potential, rushing for over 700 yards and finished sixth in the SEC in yards per completion (min. 100 attempts). Unless Freeze decides to roll with a quarterback out of the portal, he's going to have the chance to build on Ashford's foundation and unlock his potential. Regardless of who the signal-caller is, here are five things we can expect out of Freeze's quarterbacks at Auburn. More gambling Jason Homan/ Auburn Daily Over the course of his ten seasons coaching Division I college football, Hugh Freeze quarterbacks throw an interception on 2.9% of their passes. Compare this to Auburn, who from 2013-2022 threw a pick on 2.1% of their passes. The gap between these two styles of play starts to shift when you look at interception totals - Hugh Freeze QB's 117 interceptions to Auburn's 65 - but that's not a fair comparison because of two reasons. One, the Tigers have thrown the ball significantly less than the average SEC team over the last decade. Two, there's a two-year gap in the Hugh Freeze numbers because he was out of coaching. Only twice has Auburn eclipsed double-digit interceptions since 2013. Hugh Freeze quarterbacks have done it seven out of his nine seasons. More turnovers come with throwing the ball more. Especially in Freeze's offenses. More explosive play Matt Bush-USA TODAY Sports While turnovers may be a downside, more explosive play is also to be expected from Freeze signal-callers. During his time at Ole Miss, Freeze never had a passing offense finish outside of the top five in the SEC in yards per game and only had one aerial attack step outside the top five of the league in yards per attempt. If we're looking at this year specifically, there's reason to expect Auburn's receiver room to be used pretty differently considering the blend of size and speed the Tigers have in the rotation. Physical, big-bodied receivers are what have thrived in Freeze's systems in the past - and part of it has to do with the downfield passing from his quarterback. This isn't Joe Burrow and the 2019 LSU Tigers by any stretch. However, fans should be excited about a more, well, exciting passing game. Better accuracy Eric Starling/Auburn Daily Seven of Freeze's ten offenses have seen better completion percentages than Auburn's passing attacks in the same year. We won't sit here and tell you that every year Freeze beat out the Tigers' passing attack by a wide margin in that category, but it's not unfair to say Freeze's quarterbacks have had a consistent edge over Auburn's from a raw numbers perspective - more reps, completions, accuracy, etc. If we're talking specifically about this upcoming season, there's little doubt that Ashford will improve on his 49.5% completion percentage. Dual-threat abilities Eric Starling/Auburn Daily Freeze has utilized his quarterback's legs to not just produce yardage, but to actually get in the endzone. His starting signal-callers have averaged 447.1 yards on the ground per season to go along with 7.5 rushing touchdowns. What's interesting about Freeze's use of dual-threat quarterbacks is that the more he's used them in a given season, the better the team has done overall. Now, the utilization of a QBs legs may not directly correlate to wins, but it does indicate that the offense probably performs better and therefore the team as a whole is more competitive. Four of Freeze's ten seasons have included his starting quarterback rushing for over 500 yards. Those teams went a combined 38-11 (0.78 win percentage) and produced all three of his ten-win seasons. It does make one wonder what could be in store if Auburn were to ride with Robby Ashford and improve his passing game... Big performances in big wins Dale Zanine-USA TODAY Sports Excluding 2012, Hugh Freeze is 5-7 against top 10 opponents. In those five wins, his quarterbacks produced some solid (averaged) stat lines: - 314.4 passing yards per game - 10 total TD/2 INT - 79.6 QBR When the quarterback plays well in important contests, the team plays well.

Wendell Green Jr. more than Auburn's leading score. He's the Tigers' closer Published: Jan. 15, 2023, 10:15 a.m. 6–7 minutes Auburn’s offense was out of sync late Saturday night, struggling to cobble together points for a 4 ½-minute stretch late in the second half as Mississippi State crept closer and closer. The Bulldogs cut the Tigers’ lead, once as large as 13 points, down to four with 2:34 to play. Bruce Pearl wanted a timeout to talk things over and draw up a play to get Wendell Green Jr. and Allen Flanigan, who was playing the four after Jaylin Williams fouled out late, at the top of the key. Flanigan got the ball on the right side of the floor and took a hard dribble toward the top of the key, drawing Green’s defender just enough to create sufficient space for a dribble-handoff to the Tigers’ point guard, who circled back behind Flanigan. Read more Auburn basketball: No. 21 Auburn sets season high from deep, holds off Mississippi State for 69-63 win Rewinding No. 21 Auburn basketball’s 69-63 win against Mississippi State Allen Flanigan is back to his old ways for Auburn Green gathered his feet from the outskirts of the halfcourt AU logo and spotted up, drilling the deep 3-pointer to snap Auburn’s lengthy scoring drought and push the lead back to seven with 2:13 to play at Neville Arena. Moments later, Green got a steal on the other end of the floor and raced downcourt for a layup that put Auburn up by nine, eventually staving off Mississippi State for a 69-63 win. “It was a big shot,” Pearl said. “It was what we wanted. And then come down to the other end and Wendell makes a great defensive play, and all of a sudden, now the game is ours. Making plays on both ends of the floor is what you’ve got to do to win.” No one has seemingly affected winning more for Auburn in SEC play than Green, the audacious point guard and the team’s leading scorer this season. In all four of the Tigers’ conference wins, Green has come up big in late-game situations — with Saturday’s late surge against Mississippi State, when he scored 11 of Auburn’s final 12 points, the latest example. Closing out games is nothing new for Green. He was in the closing lineup throughout last season, even when he wasn’t starting games for Auburn in his first year with the program. Now, the poised veteran has not only been closing out games for the Tigers, but he has undeniably been Auburn’s certified closer in late-game situations. “I’m experienced,” Green said. “Coach trusts me out there. Last year, I was in, so you know, I have experience, just over from last year (to) this year. And my guys expect me, you know, to take care of the ball the end of the game, make my free throws. And it’s just what’s expected.” In each of Auburn’s four SEC wins this season, Green has impacted the game late, which has helped the Tigers get off to such a strong start in league play, sitting just behind Alabama and Texas A&M — both of which are undefeated in SEC action — in the standings. In Auburn’s SEC opener against Florida, a tight game at Neville Arena on Dec. 28, Green hit a tough left-handed layup in transition off a Chris Moore steal in the closing seconds to seal the Tigers’ 61-58 win. Green finished that game with a team-high tying 14 points and five rebounds. The 5-foot-11 junior struggled in a loss at Georgia to open the new year, but he has responded in a big way in the three games since, each of them Auburn wins. He is averaging 19.7 points, five assists and 3.3 steals per game during that stretch while shooting 41.2 percent from the field, 40 percent from beyond the arc and 92.6 percent (25-of-27) from the free-throw line. Green scored five of Auburn’s final eight points, including 3-of-4 free throws in the final minute, during the team’s bounceback win against then-No. 13 Arkansas last weekend. He scored or assisted on all three of Auburn’s final made baskets of the game and finished with 19 points and five assists while posting his most efficient shooting performance (5-of-8 overall) of the season. Then on the road at Ole Miss on Tuesday, Green poured on a season-high 23 points and seven assists, with most of his damage coming in the second half. Despite a quiet first half, when he shot 1-of-7 overall and 0-of-2 from deep for five points, Green found his rhythm after halftime, scoring 18 points while going 2-of-3 from 3-point range and 8-of-8 from the line in the second half of the 82-73 win. He accounted for Auburn’s final eight points of the game, including a 6-of-6 clip at the free-throw line to seal the win in the final three minutes. Then came Saturday’s clutch effort down the stretch against an unforgiving Mississippi State defense, when Green finished with 17 points while scoring 11 of the Tigers’ final 12 of the game. Included in that stretch: his long-range 3 and fastbreak layup—which Williams, and many others in the building, thought might be a rare dunk from the 5-11 guard—as well as a 6-for-6 effort from the free-throw line to ice the game. “Obviously, the experience,” Pearl said. “He’s got a swag and a confidence, and he’s able to make plays. He’s not afraid of the moment. He’s fearless, and he’s a really smart player.” Perhaps making Green’s finish against the Bulldogs—and his penchant for making big plays late—more impressive was the fact he wasn’t having a particularly great game until those final three minutes. Prior to his drought-ending 3-pointer, Green had just six points on the night and was just 2-of-9 from the field with two turnovers, three assists (none in the second half) and no rebounds. Despite that, the only thing going through his mind during the timeout with 2:34 to play was to find a way to win another tough SEC game. “Do whatever,” Green said. “I struggled offensively throughout the game, but got it going, like you said, the last 2 1/2 minutes, and we ended up winning. And that was my goal.” Tom Green is an Auburn beat reporter for Alabama Media Group. Follow him on Twitter @Tomas_Verde.

si.com SEC men's basketball power rankings: Auburn moves up Cooper Posey ~3 minutes It was a wild weekend of basketball in the SEC. Auburn puts another game in the win column while Tennessee and Arkansas both take a loss. Alabama and Texas A&M remain the only two teams undefeated in conference play. Let's rank each team 1-14. 1. Alabama Crimson Tide (15-2) Alabama remains unbeaten in conference play, along with some big wins early in the season it's hard to argue anyone else would be in the number one spot. 2. Auburn Tigers (14-3) The Tigers extended their home winning streak this weekend against Mississippi State. Auburn is at number two because they are the second-highest-ranked SEC team in the RPI rankings. 3. Tennessee Volunteers (14-3) Tennessee falls to number three after a poor performance against Kentucky. Despite their big wins this season the Vols didn't seem to have it together this weekend. 4. Arkansas Razorbacks (12-5) Despite their four SEC losses the Razorbacks still remain in the top 25 at #15. 5. Missouri Tigers (13-4) Missouri is 2-3 in the SEC and is ranked #20th in the country. 6. Texas A&M (12-5) The Aggies remain unbeaten in conference play including a win over Missouri but with Auburn and Arkansas coming up on their schedule many don't expect them to remain undefeated. 7. Kentucky Wildcats (11-6) Kentucky moves from nine to seven after their win against Tennessee. 8. LSU Tigers (12-5) LSU is 1-4 in conference team and only has one impressive win this season. 9. Georgia Bulldogs (13-4) Georgia is 3-1 in SEC play with a win over Auburn. 10. Florida Gators (10-7) Florida has a win over Missouri and their only in-conference loss is to Texas A&M. 11. Mississippi State (12-5) Of the Bulldogs' four SEC losses, three of those came from Alabama, Tennessee, and Auburn. As the season progresses we will find out what kind of team Mississippi State actually Is. 12. Vanderbilt Commodores (9-8) Yes, they beat Arkansas but they do not have any other impressive wins so far. 13. South Carolina Gamecocks ( 8-9) The Gamecocks have been beaten by a large margin more than once this year. 14. Ole Miss Rebels (8-9) Ole Miss has still not won an in-conference game this season.

kenpom vs. the world Ken Pomeroy | 11.01.22 I have previously acknowledged my appreciation for the preseason AP poll. Once the season starts, the poll becomes a clerical exercise that isn’t useful in the analytical realm, but before the games are played, humans and computers alike are trying to do the same thing: figure out which teams are the best. Get 60-65 experts together and you should have something more powerful than what a computer rating can provide. Wisdom of crowds and all. For that reason, whenever I have the typical 6-10 outliers in the top 25 to start the season, I usually assume the AP poll has the better ranking. Wisdom of crowds will generally beat my simple algorithm. But I never really tested how the preseason ratings do when it’s kenpom vs. the world, and instead of continuing to kiss the AP’s butt in the preseason, I wanted to know how good kenpom is when it disagrees with the computer. So I designed a study like so… (more…) 2022 NCAA tournament probabilities Ken Pomeroy | 03.13.22 Rd2 Swt16 Elite8 Final4 Final Champ 1W Gonzaga 97.9 84.4 70.8 53.7 38.5 27.5 1S Arizona 97.1 76.3 47.2 29.1 18.1 8.9 1MW Kansas 96.4 68.7 44.3 27.9 14.6 6.6 1E Baylor 94.5 71.9 43.3 25.2 11.6 6.4 2E Kentucky 91.1 64.9 41.3 23.6 11.0 6.2 2MW Auburn 91.5 68.8 47.9 26.3 13.2 5.6 3S Tennessee 91.5 65.4 39.2 20.0 11.4 5.1 5S Houston 77.3 54.4 29.8 17.6 10.5 5.0 3W Texas Tech 89.7 63.7 38.2 15.4 7.9 4.0 4E UCLA 88.4 58.2 31.4 17.2 7.4 3.8 2S Villanova 89.4 58.8 32.3 15.7 8.5 3.6 5MW Iowa 80.5 60.4 31.4 18.3 8.7 3.5 2W Duke 90.4 63.6 35.5 13.6 6.7 3.3 3E Purdue 89.0 50.5 24.1 11.4 4.2 1.9 6MW LSU 62.4 40.2 18.2 7.6 2.8 0.9 6E Texas 55.5 27.9 12.2 5.2 1.8 0.7 5E Saint Mary's 63.0 27.5 11.7 5.1 1.7 0.7 5W Connecticut 70.6 39.1 9.9 4.4 1.7 0.7 4S Illinois 68.8 28.2 10.8 4.7 2.1 0.7 4W Arkansas 64.5 36.0 8.5 3.6 1.4 0.5 8MW San Diego St. 61.0 21.2 10.1 4.6 1.6 0.5 10S Loyola Chicago 54.3 22.2 9.0 3.1 1.2 0.4 10E San Francisco 54.8 19.1 8.6 3.2 0.9 0.3 3MW Wisconsin 75.5 34.8 13.1 4.5 1.3 0.3 11E Virginia Tech 44.5 19.9 7.6 2.8 0.8 0.3 6W Alabama 62.3 23.1 9.9 2.4 0.8 0.3 6S Colorado St. 50.4 16.7 6.5 2.0 0.7 0.2 7S Ohio St. 45.7 16.9 6.2 1.9 0.7 0.2 7E Murray St. 45.2 14.1 5.7 1.9 0.5 0.2 8W Boise St. 50.6 8.1 3.9 1.5 0.5 0.2 11S Michigan 49.6 16.0 6.2 1.8 0.6 0.2 7MW USC 54.5 16.8 7.8 2.5 0.7 0.2 8E North Carolina 55.3 16.1 5.9 2.0 0.5 0.1 11MW Iowa St. 37.6 19.8 6.7 2.1 0.6 0.1 4MW Providence 55.9 18.9 5.7 2.1 0.6 0.1 9W Memphis 49.4 7.1 3.3 1.2 0.4 0.1 10W Davidson 49.8 17.1 6.1 1.3 0.4 0.1 9S TCU 49.9 11.7 4.0 1.3 0.4 0.1 7W Michigan St. 50.2 17.2 6.1 1.3 0.4 0.1 8S Seton Hall 50.1 11.5 3.9 1.3 0.4 0.09 9MW Creighton 39.0 9.7 3.6 1.2 0.3 0.06 10MW Miami FL 45.5 12.3 5.1 1.4 0.3 0.06 12S UAB 22.7 9.7 2.5 0.8 0.3 0.06 9E Marquette 44.7 11.1 3.6 1.1 0.2 0.05 13W Vermont 35.5 14.9 2.3 0.7 0.2 0.05 12E Indiana 21.1 7.0 2.2 0.7 0.2 0.05 11W Notre Dame 22.9 7.0 2.4 0.5 0.1 0.04 13MW South Dakota St. 44.1 12.3 3.0 0.9 0.2 0.03 13S Chattanooga 31.2 7.7 1.7 0.5 0.1 0.02 12E Wyoming 15.9 4.8 1.3 0.4 0.08 0.02 12MW Richmond 19.5 8.4 1.8 0.5 0.10 0.01 12W New Mexico St. 29.4 9.9 1.2 0.3 0.06 0.01 11W Rutgers 14.8 3.8 1.1 0.2 0.04 0.008 14MW Colgate 24.5 5.3 0.9 0.1 0.01 0.001 15MW Jacksonville St. 8.5 2.1 0.4 0.06 0.006 <.001 14W Montana St. 10.3 2.4 0.4 0.03 0.005 <.001 13E Akron 11.6 2.5 0.4 0.05 0.004 <.001 15E Saint Peter's 8.9 1.9 0.3 0.04 0.004 <.001 14S Longwood 8.5 1.8 0.3 0.03 0.004 <.001 15S Delaware 10.6 2.1 0.3 0.03 0.002 <.001 15W Cal St. Fullerton 9.6 2.2 0.3 0.02 0.002 <.001 14E Yale 11.0 1.7 0.2 0.02 0.001 <.001 16W Georgia St. 2.1 0.4 0.07 0.009 <.001 <.001 16E Norfolk St. 5.5 0.9 0.1 0.009 <.001 <.001 16MW Texas Southern 2.8 0.4 0.05 0.006 <.001 <.001 16S Wright St. 1.6 0.3 0.02 0.002 <.001 <.001 16S Bryant 1.3 0.2 0.02 0.002 <.001 <.001 16MW Texas A&M Corpus Chris 0.8 0.07 0.003 <.001 <.001 <.001

Remember me Forgot password? ADVANCED ANALYSIS OF COLLEGE BASKETBALL Stats FanMatch D-I Universe Miscellany Contact 2023 Pomeroy College Basketball Ratings help 02⋅03⋅04⋅05⋅06⋅07⋅08⋅09⋅10⋅11⋅12⋅13⋅14⋅15⋅16⋅17⋅18⋅19⋅20⋅21⋅22⋅23 Data through games of Sunday, January 15 (3517 games) Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 1 Houston Amer 17-1 +30.61 117.3 10 86.7 3 63.9 335 +.031 118 +1.01 145 104.7 132 103.7 159 +0.08 171 2 Tennessee SEC 14-3 +28.04 111.0 58 82.9 1 67.6 191 -.027 239 +4.00 63 106.0 65 102.0 73 +2.21 111 3 UCLA P12 16-2 +27.40 115.9 15 88.5 4 66.8 241 -.007 189 +5.02 46 106.7 41 101.7 67 +0.83 153 4 Alabama SEC 15-2 +26.81 116.9 12 90.1 8 74.0 4 +.058 71 +9.32 2 107.8 13 98.5 3 +8.08 14 5 Purdue B10 16-1 +25.87 120.1 1 94.3 29 64.3 324 +.003 167 +5.01 47 106.6 43 101.6 62 +1.11 143 6 Connecticut BE 15-4 +25.07 116.1 14 91.0 11 68.0 169 -.033 254 +6.72 21 107.1 28 100.4 23 -0.35 186 7 Kansas B12 16-1 +24.51 116.2 13 91.7 12 69.0 115 +.121 19 +9.15 4 107.2 26 98.0 1 +5.83 33 8 Saint Mary's WCC 16-4 +22.38 111.8 46 89.4 6 63.2 351 -.058 302 +3.47 78 106.7 39 103.3 137 +3.85 67 9 Texas B12 15-2 +21.67 115.8 17 94.1 28 69.3 104 +.070 60 +2.16 110 105.0 104 102.8 117 -4.33 302 10 Gonzaga WCC 16-3 +21.19 119.3 3 98.1 70 71.4 33 +.101 30 +8.37 8 108.9 2 100.5 30 +9.57 6 11 Marquette BE 14-5 +20.54 119.5 2 99.0 83 69.7 81 -.085 331 +7.29 15 107.6 14 100.3 21 +0.42 161 12 Virginia ACC 13-3 +20.53 113.4 30 92.9 16 61.9 361 +.037 107 +5.67 33 107.4 19 101.7 65 +2.12 112 13 Iowa St. B12 13-3 +20.17 108.9 82 88.8 5 65.1 307 +.064 63 +5.97 28 108.2 10 102.2 84 -2.59 261 14 Rutgers B10 13-5 +19.84 106.5 117 86.6 2 66.1 268 -.068 318 +3.41 80 106.6 45 103.2 134 -6.52 340 15 Xavier BE 15-3 +19.31 118.5 5 99.2 91 72.5 18 +.021 133 +8.46 6 108.3 8 99.9 15 +4.42 57 16 Baylor B12 12-5 +19.12 117.8 8 98.7 77 69.2 110 +.004 164 +6.41 23 107.3 22 100.9 40 -0.08 177 17 Ohio St. B10 10-7 +19.11 118.7 4 99.6 94 66.9 234 -.157 359 +5.32 41 105.5 80 100.2 20 -2.55 259 18 Creighton BE 10-8 +18.95 113.0 33 94.1 27 69.3 100 -.148 357 +9.43 1 108.7 3 99.3 8 +5.70 34 19 Auburn SEC 14-3 +18.93 110.8 60 91.9 13 68.4 157 +.029 123 +5.73 31 105.4 87 99.7 13 +2.72 93 20 Arizona P12 15-3 +18.80 117.9 7 99.1 88 73.1 13 +.080 47 +5.33 40 104.8 118 99.5 11 +3.28 77 21 Arkansas SEC 12-5 +18.44 111.8 44 93.4 22 70.5 55 -.024 229 +5.60 35 106.0 63 100.4 25 +0.89 151 22 North Carolina ACC 12-6 +18.22 115.4 18 97.2 57 69.4 91 -.057 300 +8.05 10 108.2 9 100.2 19 +7.96 15 23 Illinois B10 12-5 +18.05 112.0 40 94.0 26 70.2 60 -.025 231 +4.08 60 104.8 126 100.7 34 -4.59 309 24 West Virginia B12 10-7 +17.58 114.3 20 96.7 48 68.7 139 -.123 348 +7.45 14 108.5 6 101.0 46 +0.81 154 25 TCU B12 14-3 +17.16 110.5 65 93.3 21 70.8 47 +.020 138 -0.13 176 103.4 213 103.6 151 -8.97 357 26 Kansas St. B12 15-2 +17.15 112.7 36 95.6 39 69.9 72 +.110 22 +4.56 51 105.0 105 100.4 27 -1.76 235 27 Boise St. MWC 14-4 +16.91 107.7 98 90.8 10 67.8 179 -.016 216 +4.00 62 106.6 44 102.6 101 +1.30 140 28 Indiana B10 11-6 +16.86 113.3 32 96.4 44 69.7 79 -.047 284 +3.83 67 106.3 55 102.5 93 -4.90 315 29 Duke ACC 13-5 +16.84 111.8 47 94.9 33 66.4 253 +.031 119 +5.37 38 107.4 17 102.1 79 +3.49 74 30 Providence BE 14-4 +16.71 114.0 21 97.3 59 68.3 164 +.009 159 +3.08 83 104.8 122 101.7 68 -7.52 349 31 San Diego St. MWC 13-4 +16.71 110.5 66 93.8 25 69.0 116 +.027 125 +6.63 22 107.2 25 100.6 32 +6.39 25 32 Iowa B10 12-6 +16.61 118.2 6 101.6 122 70.2 62 -.041 269 +6.33 25 105.9 68 99.6 12 -0.31 184 33 Oklahoma B12 11-6 +16.41 113.8 26 97.3 60 64.1 330 -.078 326 +7.68 12 106.1 59 98.4 2 +2.50 101 34 Kentucky SEC 11-6 +16.23 114.0 23 97.8 65 65.9 276 -.026 232 +2.89 89 105.8 71 102.9 123 -2.54 258 35 Memphis Amer 13-5 +15.65 110.6 63 94.9 34 72.5 19 -.081 327 +5.83 30 106.6 48 100.7 35 +5.57 38 36 N.C. State ACC 14-4 +15.63 112.4 38 96.7 49 70.1 65 +.017 145 +2.81 92 106.2 58 103.4 141 -3.53 286 37 Penn St. B10 12-5 +15.48 114.0 22 98.5 75 65.7 286 -.026 234 +4.46 54 107.1 30 102.6 99 -3.41 282 38 Oklahoma St. B12 9-8 +15.28 105.7 133 90.4 9 67.0 224 -.118 347 +7.87 11 107.3 23 99.4 9 +1.65 130 39 Miami FL ACC 14-3 +15.26 117.0 11 101.8 127 68.6 148 +.044 93 +2.99 85 104.5 143 101.5 57 -1.14 213 40 Florida Atlantic CUSA 16-1 +14.99 113.4 31 98.4 74 67.0 225 +.104 26 -0.34 181 103.9 180 104.3 195 -2.81 268 Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 41 UCF Amer 13-5 +14.95 109.6 76 94.6 32 63.7 342 -.041 268 +2.80 94 105.7 76 102.9 120 -0.01 175 42 Michigan St. B10 12-5 +14.92 110.7 62 95.7 40 65.1 303 +.056 73 +8.12 9 108.6 4 100.4 26 +4.70 52 43 Maryland B10 11-6 +14.76 110.3 69 95.5 38 67.1 222 +.014 152 +6.39 24 107.3 21 100.9 41 -2.58 260 44 Florida SEC 10-7 +14.72 107.0 110 92.3 14 70.6 51 -.068 319 +6.11 26 108.0 11 101.9 72 +3.26 78 45 Virginia Tech ACC 11-6 +14.50 112.0 41 97.5 61 66.8 239 -.088 335 +2.87 90 105.3 90 102.5 95 -2.78 266 46 Utah St. MWC 14-4 +14.48 114.5 19 100.0 98 70.4 57 +.034 112 +3.82 69 105.9 69 102.0 78 +2.54 100 47 Texas A&M SEC 12-5 +14.43 113.5 28 99.1 85 67.2 218 -.014 207 +0.58 159 103.5 208 102.9 124 -1.80 238 48 Colorado P12 11-8 +14.21 107.5 100 93.3 20 70.7 48 -.086 332 +5.60 36 106.1 60 100.5 28 +2.26 108 49 Nevada MWC 15-4 +14.13 111.3 51 97.2 56 66.3 259 +.050 83 +5.58 37 106.7 40 101.2 48 +3.28 76 50 Michigan B10 10-7 +13.96 112.8 35 98.8 78 69.2 107 -.049 288 +6.05 27 107.0 31 100.9 43 +1.71 129 51 Mississippi St. SEC 12-5 +13.88 103.7 181 89.9 7 64.7 317 +.032 115 +2.30 107 103.7 193 101.4 53 -5.06 319 52 Dayton A10 12-6 +13.83 106.8 111 93.0 18 63.8 339 -.057 298 -0.62 195 103.2 229 103.8 163 -1.41 221 53 Arizona St. P12 15-3 +13.83 108.8 83 94.9 35 68.1 168 +.135 10 +3.41 79 105.4 85 102.0 77 -0.26 181 54 Clemson ACC 15-3 +13.80 111.8 43 98.0 69 68.5 150 +.046 86 +1.05 143 104.8 114 103.8 170 -4.30 301 55 Seton Hall BE 11-8 +13.69 106.7 114 93.0 17 66.9 235 -.037 258 +8.93 5 108.4 7 99.5 10 +4.32 60 56 Missouri SEC 13-4 +13.54 117.7 9 104.2 185 71.2 39 +.078 48 +2.32 106 104.9 112 102.6 100 -4.62 310 57 Northwestern B10 12-5 +13.52 105.9 130 92.4 15 67.0 228 +.032 114 +4.16 59 105.2 97 101.0 45 -3.82 291 58 USC P12 13-5 +13.43 109.9 73 96.5 45 68.0 171 +.032 116 +4.62 50 104.4 156 99.7 14 +1.02 147 59 Texas Tech B12 10-7 +13.41 108.0 92 94.5 31 68.8 128 -.087 334 +0.54 160 104.4 150 103.8 171 -7.83 351 60 New Mexico MWC 16-2 +13.30 111.6 48 98.3 73 72.4 20 +.024 128 +0.31 163 104.3 159 104.0 182 -2.75 265 61 St. John's BE 13-6 +13.15 109.9 72 96.8 50 74.4 2 -.002 180 +3.63 74 105.1 101 101.4 54 -6.49 339 62 Pittsburgh ACC 12-6 +12.80 112.0 39 99.2 90 67.9 178 +.023 129 +4.83 49 107.1 29 102.2 85 -3.42 284 63 North Texas CUSA 14-4 +12.78 108.0 90 95.2 37 59.4 363 +.083 44 +2.59 101 104.7 129 102.1 81 +1.98 119 64 Oregon P12 10-8 +12.63 110.8 61 98.2 71 67.2 220 -.011 198 +8.42 7 107.6 15 99.2 5 +5.18 44 65 Washington St. P12 9-10 +12.52 111.2 54 98.7 76 63.8 337 -.137 352 +7.53 13 107.6 16 100.0 18 +4.42 56 66 Utah P12 12-7 +12.40 106.1 124 93.7 23 67.8 182 -.044 275 +3.01 84 104.8 119 101.8 70 -4.50 307 67 Wisconsin B10 11-5 +12.25 106.0 129 93.7 24 63.8 338 +.045 90 +6.93 20 108.5 5 101.6 63 +1.47 135 68 UAB CUSA 13-5 +12.00 113.7 27 101.7 125 72.7 15 -.086 333 -2.05 258 102.5 268 104.6 226 -3.41 283 69 Kent St. MAC 14-3 +11.94 105.2 145 93.3 19 68.6 144 -.011 200 +0.66 155 105.2 95 104.5 220 +2.29 106 70 Liberty ASun 14-5 +11.72 109.4 77 97.7 64 63.3 349 -.027 240 -3.98 306 101.7 310 105.7 290 +0.37 164 71 Villanova BE 8-10 +11.07 113.5 29 102.4 145 64.2 326 -.135 351 +7.23 16 108.0 12 100.8 37 +3.22 81 72 Cincinnati Amer 13-6 +10.98 108.1 89 97.1 54 69.2 109 +.007 161 +0.62 157 105.2 94 104.6 225 -2.95 271 73 Marshall SB 15-4 +10.69 110.3 68 99.6 95 71.3 35 -.083 328 -3.82 300 102.7 254 106.6 331 -4.40 305 74 Wake Forest ACC 13-5 +10.45 112.8 34 102.3 142 69.4 93 +.073 55 +2.85 91 104.3 160 101.5 55 -0.84 201 75 Oral Roberts Sum 15-4 +10.23 114.0 24 103.7 172 71.2 38 +.083 46 +0.11 169 104.4 146 104.3 203 +8.22 12 76 Iona MAAC 12-6 +10.23 109.2 78 99.0 82 69.6 82 -.061 307 -0.32 180 103.6 202 103.9 177 +4.37 59 77 Sam Houston St. WAC 13-5 +10.12 106.7 113 96.6 46 66.3 260 +.002 171 +5.27 43 105.8 72 100.5 31 +6.89 20 78 BYU WCC 14-7 +9.83 104.3 166 94.4 30 70.5 52 -.041 270 +2.32 105 105.0 106 102.7 106 +1.62 131 79 Tulane Amer 12-5 +9.38 111.0 59 101.6 120 73.8 6 -.045 277 -1.74 249 103.2 227 104.9 244 -6.58 341 80 Charleston CAA 18-1 +9.18 109.6 75 100.4 104 70.7 49 +.124 17 -1.84 253 104.1 172 105.9 303 +0.41 162 Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 81 Saint Louis A10 12-6 +9.08 111.5 49 102.4 144 69.5 85 +.055 76 +3.64 73 104.5 138 100.9 39 +4.93 49 82 UNLV MWC 12-5 +9.08 106.1 125 97.0 52 70.1 64 -.014 206 +2.50 102 104.4 149 101.9 71 -1.27 216 83 Georgia SEC 13-4 +9.04 106.1 126 97.0 53 67.3 209 +.014 150 -1.19 224 103.5 204 104.7 231 -6.29 337 84 Butler BE 11-8 +9.03 106.6 115 97.6 63 67.3 210 +.017 144 +6.98 18 107.3 20 100.3 22 +2.05 115 85 Santa Clara WCC 15-5 +9.02 109.1 80 100.1 100 70.0 67 +.071 57 +2.97 86 106.0 62 103.0 126 +1.08 144 86 Syracuse ACC 12-6 +8.51 110.4 67 101.9 130 67.4 204 +.020 136 -0.40 182 104.5 137 104.9 246 -4.03 296 87 Bradley MVC 12-7 +8.45 104.7 158 96.2 43 65.4 294 -.037 257 -0.87 208 102.3 287 103.2 135 +0.90 149 88 Vanderbilt SEC 9-8 +8.28 111.4 50 103.1 158 66.4 257 -.063 312 +3.91 66 105.0 109 101.1 47 +0.96 148 89 Drake MVC 14-5 +8.12 106.3 120 98.2 72 67.3 211 +.037 109 -1.03 215 102.6 265 103.6 157 -1.08 210 90 James Madison SB 12-7 +7.97 105.5 140 97.5 62 71.7 27 -.160 360 -3.01 279 101.4 322 104.4 209 -4.68 311 91 Mississippi SEC 8-9 +7.84 105.6 136 97.8 66 66.2 264 -.074 323 +5.31 42 106.0 61 100.7 36 -0.47 193 92 Utah Valley WAC 14-5 +7.57 106.7 112 99.2 89 68.5 156 +.036 110 +1.50 133 104.2 166 102.7 108 +4.03 63 93 VCU A10 13-5 +7.49 103.4 187 95.9 41 69.8 76 +.039 104 -1.03 216 103.1 230 104.2 191 -2.46 255 94 Nebraska B10 9-9 +7.23 103.9 173 96.7 47 65.5 290 +.021 132 +9.32 3 109.3 1 100.0 17 +2.55 98 95 LSU SEC 12-5 +7.07 106.3 119 99.3 92 67.0 229 +.134 12 +0.76 152 104.3 162 103.5 148 -6.82 344 96 UC Irvine BW 12-5 +7.02 107.8 95 100.8 108 69.3 99 -.014 209 +0.75 153 103.2 228 102.4 92 +3.54 71 97 Yale Ivy 11-6 +6.93 106.1 127 99.1 87 66.7 243 -.093 338 -2.02 257 101.1 332 103.1 130 -0.46 190 98 Grand Canyon WAC 12-6 +6.74 106.4 118 99.6 97 65.1 305 -.008 190 +0.58 158 103.0 239 102.5 96 -0.21 179 99 Charlotte CUSA 12-5 +6.53 107.4 103 100.9 109 60.9 362 +.008 160 -3.22 284 102.7 259 105.9 299 -6.02 334 100 Loyola Marymount WCC 13-7 +6.50 108.1 87 101.6 123 68.3 161 +.023 130 +1.94 117 105.7 75 103.8 166 +0.89 150 101 UC Santa Barbara BW 13-3 +6.29 105.3 143 99.0 81 65.5 289 +.005 162 -4.55 320 101.0 333 105.5 282 -4.21 300 102 Princeton Ivy 12-5 +6.17 107.4 101 101.3 114 67.5 197 -.066 314 -3.26 286 101.9 304 105.2 262 -4.01 295 103 Richmond A10 10-8 +6.15 104.0 172 97.8 67 65.3 296 -.058 301 -0.05 172 105.3 89 105.4 275 -1.59 228 104 Toledo MAC 11-6 +6.03 115.8 16 109.8 298 72.0 24 -.009 192 -0.84 205 103.1 237 103.9 178 -0.35 185 105 Washington P12 11-8 +5.88 104.7 156 98.8 79 69.4 96 +.041 100 +3.68 70 104.8 117 101.2 49 -1.38 220 106 Duquesne A10 13-5 +5.87 111.2 53 105.3 212 67.3 213 +.075 53 -1.34 228 104.0 177 105.3 267 -3.81 290 107 Southern Illinois MVC 14-5 +5.78 100.8 243 95.0 36 64.0 332 +.071 56 -1.42 234 103.0 242 104.4 213 -2.79 267 108 Furman SC 13-6 +5.75 111.1 56 105.3 211 69.5 87 -.051 290 -3.85 301 102.6 266 106.4 322 -1.81 239 109 Colorado St. MWC 10-9 +5.50 111.1 55 105.6 216 67.5 199 -.048 286 +3.53 77 105.0 103 101.5 58 +1.50 134 110 Indiana St. MVC 13-6 +5.41 107.2 108 101.8 128 71.6 29 -.072 322 -4.23 315 100.8 338 105.1 250 -5.54 326 111 Hofstra CAA 12-7 +5.40 109.1 81 103.7 170 68.3 160 +.045 88 +2.06 114 104.8 125 102.7 107 +8.12 13 112 Stanford P12 5-12 +5.32 107.9 93 102.6 149 66.3 261 -.206 363 +7.10 17 106.3 54 99.2 6 +2.10 113 113 Youngstown St. Horz 14-5 +5.27 113.9 25 108.7 281 69.0 119 -.062 310 -5.26 334 101.6 311 106.9 341 -4.72 312 114 Cornell Ivy 13-4 +5.25 111.8 45 106.5 227 71.4 32 -.015 214 -3.23 285 102.7 256 105.9 302 -4.05 297 115 George Mason A10 11-7 +5.18 105.4 141 100.2 101 66.1 270 -.015 212 -0.41 183 104.4 155 104.8 234 -1.14 212 116 San Francisco WCC 12-9 +5.08 107.4 102 102.3 141 69.8 74 -.039 262 +1.31 140 103.5 209 102.2 83 -3.02 274 117 Southern Miss SB 15-4 +4.97 104.6 160 99.6 96 68.6 143 +.044 94 -1.94 256 103.5 203 105.5 278 -3.67 289 118 Colgate Pat 12-7 +4.75 112.6 37 107.8 261 68.4 158 -.045 278 -3.70 297 102.6 264 106.3 315 -0.91 204 119 Louisiana SB 14-4 +4.73 110.0 71 105.3 208 69.8 77 +.110 23 -0.43 184 103.3 219 103.7 161 +0.36 165 120 Akron MAC 11-6 +4.65 105.0 151 100.4 103 65.8 281 -.002 179 -1.66 244 102.5 270 104.2 192 +0.65 157 Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 121 Hawaii BW 13-4 +4.55 101.7 225 97.2 55 65.4 291 -.016 215 -5.58 338 100.5 345 106.0 305 -5.80 331 122 Montana St. BSky 12-7 +4.48 103.4 186 98.9 80 67.7 188 -.006 186 -0.54 189 104.6 134 105.1 256 +4.08 62 123 UNC Greensboro SC 11-8 +4.30 100.5 253 96.2 42 66.9 231 -.010 197 +1.72 127 106.9 37 105.2 259 +2.98 86 124 Wichita St. Amer 9-8 +4.17 101.0 240 96.8 51 65.2 299 -.062 309 -0.09 173 103.2 225 103.3 138 -1.35 218 125 Quinnipiac MAAC 14-5 +3.98 104.0 171 100.0 99 69.6 84 -.013 205 -3.89 304 100.7 339 104.6 227 -2.72 263 126 UNC Wilmington CAA 14-5 +3.71 105.7 134 101.9 133 65.5 288 +.131 14 -1.34 230 103.2 223 104.6 222 +4.69 53 127 Belmont MVC 13-6 +3.57 108.3 86 104.7 198 68.4 159 +.073 54 -0.62 194 103.0 245 103.6 153 +1.08 146 128 Southern Utah WAC 13-6 +3.54 107.4 104 103.9 178 72.0 23 +.034 113 +2.11 113 104.5 144 102.4 91 +3.94 66 129 Middle Tennessee CUSA 10-7 +3.53 104.1 169 100.6 106 67.4 201 +.002 170 +1.92 120 106.4 52 104.5 216 +2.71 95 130 Notre Dame ACC 9-9 +3.47 110.1 70 106.7 232 63.7 341 +.009 158 +2.05 115 105.9 67 103.9 174 -1.78 237 131 Chattanooga SC 11-8 +3.42 111.9 42 108.5 273 67.3 214 -.084 329 +0.13 168 103.7 188 103.6 155 +2.32 105 132 Seattle WAC 14-4 +3.42 104.6 161 101.2 112 69.4 95 +.158 2 -0.77 200 103.7 194 104.5 215 -0.46 191 133 Troy SB 12-7 +3.40 102.4 204 99.0 84 68.7 137 -.059 304 +0.16 167 103.2 222 103.1 129 +0.79 155 134 San Jose St. MWC 12-6 +3.38 107.3 107 103.9 181 63.4 346 +.109 24 +1.35 139 104.2 168 102.8 114 -1.67 230 135 Temple Amer 10-9 +3.35 105.2 146 101.9 131 66.4 256 +.020 137 +2.78 95 104.5 141 101.7 66 +1.51 133 136 Missouri St. MVC 9-9 +3.14 104.5 164 101.4 117 63.3 347 -.065 313 +1.50 134 103.7 196 102.2 82 +3.44 75 137 DePaul BE 8-10 +3.05 106.6 116 103.6 168 69.7 80 +.022 131 +5.96 29 106.6 47 100.6 33 +2.72 94 138 Ball St. MAC 12-5 +2.96 107.8 97 104.8 199 67.5 196 -.055 295 -2.67 270 103.4 212 106.1 307 -4.00 294 139 Longwood BSth 13-6 +2.90 104.2 168 101.3 115 67.2 217 -.012 202 -6.25 347 102.0 302 108.3 359 -5.76 330 140 Georgia Tech ACC 8-9 +2.67 103.5 185 100.8 107 67.7 189 -.035 256 +5.11 45 107.4 18 102.3 87 -1.43 223 141 Samford SC 12-7 +2.56 109.2 79 106.6 229 66.9 238 -.022 226 -3.49 294 102.8 250 106.3 314 -1.52 226 142 Western Kentucky CUSA 11-6 +2.47 105.2 147 102.7 150 67.4 203 +.040 103 -1.13 221 103.8 185 104.9 245 -2.46 254 143 South Florida Amer 8-10 +2.42 104.7 159 102.2 139 68.2 166 -.142 354 -1.43 235 103.1 231 104.6 223 -5.41 322 144 Stephen F. Austin WAC 13-6 +2.30 105.6 135 103.3 163 68.6 142 +.019 140 -1.34 231 102.4 280 103.8 162 -1.47 224 145 Louisiana Tech CUSA 10-8 +2.22 106.0 128 103.8 176 68.9 122 -.053 292 +1.47 136 104.4 147 102.9 125 +0.31 166 146 Davidson A10 9-9 +2.12 105.2 149 103.0 156 67.2 215 -.029 246 +1.09 142 104.2 169 103.1 127 -0.83 200 147 Air Force MWC 11-7 +2.00 103.7 180 101.7 126 63.2 352 -.038 259 -4.89 326 102.1 297 107.0 345 -10.67 362 148 Massachusetts A10 11-6 +1.75 102.1 215 100.4 102 71.7 26 +.075 52 -0.85 206 103.1 232 104.0 180 -0.69 199 149 Pepperdine WCC 7-12 +1.59 105.5 139 103.9 183 73.2 11 -.170 362 +4.19 58 106.7 42 102.5 97 +2.89 90 150 Ohio MAC 9-8 +1.45 106.3 121 104.9 200 68.5 152 -.029 247 +0.75 154 105.8 74 105.0 249 +0.66 156 151 Florida Gulf Coast ASun 13-6 +1.33 105.2 148 103.9 179 67.0 226 +.136 9 -0.87 207 103.1 238 103.9 179 +1.80 124 152 Cal Baptist WAC 11-8 +1.22 102.8 194 101.6 121 65.1 308 -.042 271 -2.58 266 101.5 315 104.1 188 -5.61 327 153 Towson CAA 11-7 +1.16 105.0 152 103.9 180 63.4 345 -.004 184 -3.82 299 101.9 306 105.7 292 -3.08 276 154 Penn Ivy 9-9 +0.92 108.8 84 107.8 262 66.9 232 -.029 245 +0.36 162 104.2 163 103.9 176 +1.08 145 155 St. Bonaventure A10 9-9 +0.90 102.9 193 102.0 134 65.8 279 -.027 237 -1.03 217 103.5 210 104.5 217 -2.49 257 156 Harvard Ivy 11-7 +0.89 98.8 286 97.9 68 66.2 265 -.010 194 -1.64 242 102.1 295 103.8 165 -2.66 262 157 SIU Edwardsville OVC 14-5 +0.88 102.5 202 101.6 119 68.7 132 +.049 84 -3.18 283 102.5 276 105.6 288 +2.07 114 158 Drexel CAA 10-8 +0.84 102.6 198 101.7 124 63.9 336 -.095 341 -5.04 328 100.7 342 105.7 294 -1.73 232 159 UC Riverside BW 12-6 +0.83 104.1 170 103.2 159 67.8 180 +.139 8 +0.65 156 104.1 170 103.5 146 +3.83 68 160 Wyoming MWC 5-12 +0.80 108.5 85 107.7 257 65.1 306 -.147 356 +3.58 76 104.5 139 100.9 42 -0.52 195 Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 161 Eastern Washington BSky 11-7 +0.71 106.3 122 105.6 215 69.8 75 +.065 61 -0.10 174 103.2 224 103.3 139 +1.75 126 162 Purdue Fort Wayne Horz 12-6 +0.67 101.8 224 101.2 113 68.8 124 +.010 156 -4.77 324 102.4 285 107.1 349 -0.04 176 163 Siena MAAC 12-6 +0.51 105.0 153 104.5 191 67.7 184 +.043 97 -2.66 269 101.7 308 104.4 210 -1.07 209 164 Old Dominion SB 10-8 +0.45 104.2 167 103.8 173 65.3 297 -.012 203 -0.69 196 103.4 214 104.1 187 -0.84 202 165 Montana BSky 9-9 +0.36 107.1 109 106.7 237 64.6 320 -.056 296 -1.42 233 103.7 190 105.1 255 +3.06 85 166 UC Davis BW 10-7 +0.23 102.5 201 102.3 140 72.6 16 -.004 183 -1.53 240 102.5 273 104.0 185 -0.28 182 167 Radford BSth 10-9 +0.13 102.2 208 102.1 135 66.4 254 -.112 346 -1.49 237 104.7 131 106.2 311 +1.75 127 168 UMass Lowell AE 15-4 +0.08 103.9 174 103.8 174 69.4 97 +.057 72 -9.59 361 97.1 362 106.7 338 -9.73 360 169 Vermont AE 8-10 +0.05 103.1 189 103.1 157 65.0 309 -.002 181 +3.18 82 105.5 81 102.4 89 +4.61 54 170 Portland WCC 9-11 +0.03 107.3 105 107.3 251 71.1 42 -.052 291 +4.25 57 105.8 73 101.5 61 +0.27 168 171 Northern Iowa MVC 9-9 +0.00 102.1 216 102.1 136 68.3 162 -.055 294 -1.68 246 102.7 260 104.4 207 -1.68 231 172 New Mexico St. WAC 7-11 -0.03 104.6 162 104.6 194 68.7 135 -.150 358 +3.30 81 104.6 135 101.2 52 +5.32 42 173 Florida St. ACC 5-13 -0.07 105.8 132 105.8 220 69.2 105 -.056 297 +5.72 32 106.9 34 101.2 51 +3.98 65 174 Murray St. MVC 10-8 -0.09 104.5 163 104.6 195 67.3 212 +.029 122 -0.81 204 103.0 244 103.8 169 +1.23 142 175 Minnesota B10 7-8 -0.10 102.7 196 102.8 152 65.2 301 +.053 80 +1.87 123 104.2 164 102.4 90 -5.96 333 176 SMU Amer 6-12 -0.16 102.2 210 102.4 143 68.5 153 -.067 316 +5.36 39 106.2 57 100.8 38 +3.49 73 177 Kennesaw St. ASun 13-6 -0.19 104.3 165 104.5 193 68.7 140 +.129 15 -0.61 190 104.2 167 104.8 235 +4.38 58 178 Tarleton St. WAC 10-8 -0.28 103.0 192 103.3 162 68.6 147 +.040 102 +3.66 71 104.8 116 101.2 50 +6.54 24 179 Stetson ASun 10-7 -0.28 111.3 52 111.6 321 63.0 353 +.053 78 +2.65 99 105.5 83 102.9 118 +7.11 17 180 Fresno St. MWC 6-11 -0.35 98.9 281 99.3 93 64.1 327 -.047 281 +3.83 68 106.5 50 102.7 104 +2.01 118 181 Long Beach St. BW 8-10 -0.40 103.8 177 104.2 186 74.0 3 -.070 320 +1.64 129 103.9 179 102.3 88 +5.16 45 182 Jacksonville ASun 10-7 -0.42 101.0 239 101.5 118 62.7 355 +.062 67 +2.91 87 106.9 33 104.0 183 +6.61 23 183 Rice CUSA 12-5 -0.93 107.9 94 108.8 283 71.1 41 +.133 13 -2.31 263 101.7 309 104.0 186 -5.67 328 184 Lipscomb ASun 11-8 -1.05 103.9 175 104.9 201 69.4 92 -.021 224 -2.72 271 104.4 152 107.1 347 -2.41 253 185 Bryant AE 12-6 -1.18 107.3 106 108.5 274 73.6 8 +.098 33 -2.34 264 103.1 236 105.4 277 +0.85 152 186 Cal St. Fullerton BW 9-9 -1.35 102.2 214 103.5 166 65.0 311 +.012 155 +1.60 131 104.3 158 102.7 111 +1.83 123 187 Gardner Webb BSth 8-10 -1.48 97.7 302 99.1 86 66.6 250 -.111 345 -0.79 203 104.9 111 105.7 293 +2.87 91 188 UNC Asheville BSth 13-6 -1.49 101.4 233 102.9 153 68.7 134 +.183 1 -1.51 238 102.5 271 104.0 184 +0.01 172 189 South Alabama SB 8-10 -1.57 100.9 242 102.4 146 66.8 242 -.063 311 +1.75 126 104.4 153 102.6 103 +5.57 37 190 Eastern Kentucky ASun 12-7 -1.69 103.0 191 104.7 197 71.1 40 +.135 11 +0.85 148 103.7 195 102.8 116 +3.22 82 191 Wofford SC 11-8 -1.70 105.6 138 107.3 249 65.8 282 -.002 178 -2.64 268 102.7 255 105.4 271 +0.39 163 192 Fordham A10 14-4 -1.76 100.4 255 102.2 138 69.9 73 +.146 3 -8.77 359 98.3 360 107.1 348 -12.33 363 193 South Dakota St. Sum 9-9 -1.78 101.0 241 102.8 151 68.0 172 +.114 21 +4.00 61 106.3 56 102.3 86 +8.55 10 194 George Washington A10 8-9 -1.84 107.8 96 109.7 295 68.7 141 -.106 343 -3.14 282 102.0 303 105.1 252 -5.40 321 195 Appalachian St. SB 10-9 -1.98 98.5 289 100.5 105 66.4 255 +.018 142 +0.24 165 104.0 174 103.8 168 -1.34 217 196 Texas A&M Corpus Chris Slnd 11-7 -2.01 103.5 184 105.5 214 70.3 59 -.046 279 -6.01 345 100.1 349 106.2 308 -0.01 174 197 Queens ASun 13-6 -2.01 108.0 91 110.0 301 69.7 78 +.028 124 -4.64 323 102.3 290 106.9 342 -1.95 241 198 Rider MAAC 7-9 -2.05 104.7 155 106.8 238 66.3 258 -.057 299 -0.78 201 102.7 258 103.5 145 -0.51 194 199 UTEP CUSA 9-8 -2.07 95.2 332 97.3 58 66.5 251 +.019 139 -0.71 197 104.5 140 105.2 264 -1.48 225 200 Boston College ACC 8-10 -2.08 99.0 279 101.1 111 66.9 233 +.090 40 +2.61 100 106.8 38 104.2 194 -3.37 278 Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 201 Cleveland St. Horz 10-8 -2.11 102.3 205 104.4 190 64.0 333 -.009 191 -4.42 318 102.5 274 106.9 344 +0.60 159 202 Texas St. SB 10-9 -2.19 99.6 268 101.8 129 64.8 314 +.046 87 -1.08 219 102.5 272 103.6 152 -0.37 187 203 East Carolina Amer 10-9 -2.23 102.2 211 104.4 189 67.6 195 +.016 146 -2.72 272 102.7 261 105.4 273 -8.02 352 204 California P12 3-15 -2.27 101.7 228 104.0 184 62.6 357 -.162 361 +5.26 44 105.6 78 100.4 24 +1.33 138 205 San Diego WCC 9-11 -2.49 109.7 74 112.1 330 69.5 88 -.018 219 +0.91 146 103.7 192 102.8 112 -1.73 233 206 Norfolk St. MEAC 12-6 -2.61 105.3 144 107.9 263 65.8 280 +.144 4 -3.30 287 102.1 300 105.4 270 +1.85 121 207 Detroit Mercy Horz 7-12 -2.68 111.0 57 113.7 344 67.6 194 -.097 342 +0.90 147 104.8 124 103.9 175 +4.94 47 208 Wright St. Horz 11-8 -2.75 102.6 199 105.3 210 71.3 36 -.030 248 -5.09 329 102.2 292 107.3 351 -1.76 236 209 North Carolina Central MEAC 9-8 -2.84 102.3 206 105.1 206 68.0 170 -.009 193 +1.82 124 103.6 199 101.8 69 +5.91 32 210 Rhode Island A10 6-11 -2.86 100.2 258 103.0 155 67.4 202 -.044 276 -0.44 185 102.9 248 103.3 140 -0.98 207 211 American Pat 12-5 -2.99 102.6 200 105.5 213 64.0 331 +.085 43 -6.94 353 100.7 340 107.6 354 -6.41 338 212 Buffalo MAC 8-9 -3.03 102.6 197 105.7 217 73.8 5 +.018 143 +2.11 112 105.0 108 102.9 119 +6.14 27 213 Georgia Southern SB 11-8 -3.06 100.3 256 103.4 165 65.7 283 +.043 98 -1.21 225 104.4 154 105.6 283 -2.96 273 214 St. Thomas Sum 13-8 -3.07 110.5 64 113.6 343 65.9 274 +.044 96 -4.06 309 101.3 325 105.4 274 -2.21 249 215 Abilene Christian WAC 9-9 -3.20 101.9 222 105.1 205 69.3 102 -.020 222 -0.99 214 103.3 217 104.3 201 -1.60 229 216 Brown Ivy 9-8 -3.37 97.6 303 101.0 110 67.9 174 +.012 154 -4.26 316 101.3 327 105.5 280 -3.83 292 217 UMBC AE 12-6 -3.39 108.1 88 111.5 320 68.7 138 +.101 29 -5.99 344 100.5 343 106.5 329 -4.95 316 218 Delaware CAA 10-8 -3.39 103.2 188 106.6 230 67.6 193 +.095 37 +0.06 171 105.2 96 105.1 253 -0.12 178 219 Saint Joseph's A10 7-10 -3.47 101.7 227 105.2 207 70.2 61 -.044 274 -1.72 247 103.5 211 105.2 261 -4.20 299 220 Sacramento St. BSky 11-7 -3.51 103.8 179 107.3 248 63.3 348 +.128 16 -0.96 213 103.9 182 104.8 237 +2.36 102 221 Army Pat 11-8 -3.58 106.2 123 109.8 296 68.8 130 -.048 285 -6.41 351 100.2 348 106.6 332 -6.62 342 222 Northern Kentucky Horz 11-8 -3.64 99.6 270 103.2 160 62.8 354 +.062 68 -3.46 293 103.3 216 106.8 339 +3.23 80 223 Oregon St. P12 7-11 -3.64 100.2 260 103.8 175 64.6 318 +.000 173 +3.92 65 105.4 86 101.5 60 -5.41 323 224 Pacific WCC 10-10 -3.91 104.7 157 108.6 279 70.4 58 +.014 149 -2.80 274 102.3 289 105.1 251 -5.91 332 225 Weber St. BSky 8-10 -4.19 99.6 267 103.8 177 65.4 293 -.014 210 +1.47 135 104.5 136 103.1 128 +4.21 61 226 Southern SWAC 9-9 -4.25 98.3 293 102.5 148 73.4 9 +.020 134 +1.43 138 104.8 115 103.4 144 +8.98 8 227 North Dakota St. Sum 8-11 -4.31 102.4 203 106.7 236 67.9 176 -.040 265 +0.11 170 106.0 64 105.9 297 +5.58 36 228 Georgia St. SB 9-9 -4.38 97.7 301 102.1 137 66.0 272 -.077 325 -3.42 290 101.5 314 105.0 247 -4.34 303 229 Grambling St. SWAC 10-7 -4.45 97.4 308 101.9 132 68.6 145 +.044 95 -2.16 262 101.4 319 103.6 154 +3.72 70 230 Milwaukee Horz 12-6 -4.55 99.0 280 103.5 167 71.6 30 +.106 25 -2.94 276 103.7 189 106.6 334 +2.32 104 231 Utah Tech WAC 9-9 -4.55 102.0 219 106.6 228 69.3 103 -.012 201 +1.53 132 104.7 133 103.1 131 +1.59 132 232 UMKC Sum 7-12 -4.56 97.9 297 102.5 147 63.8 340 -.072 321 -0.21 178 105.5 82 105.7 295 +3.52 72 233 Georgetown BE 5-13 -4.94 103.6 183 108.6 278 68.8 127 -.059 303 +3.64 72 106.6 46 102.9 122 -3.37 280 234 Portland St. BSky 8-10 -5.20 101.4 232 106.6 231 72.5 17 +.019 141 +1.92 119 105.5 84 103.5 150 +5.21 43 235 South Carolina SEC 8-9 -5.20 101.2 237 106.4 226 63.6 343 +.139 6 +1.94 118 106.5 51 104.5 221 -2.74 264 236 Southeast Missouri St. OVC 9-10 -5.30 101.9 220 107.2 247 72.3 21 -.015 211 -1.81 252 102.4 277 104.3 196 +2.28 107 237 Loyola Chicago A10 6-11 -5.46 101.5 230 107.0 244 66.2 267 -.029 244 -0.93 210 103.8 186 104.7 230 -2.96 272 238 FIU CUSA 8-9 -5.48 98.8 287 104.3 188 71.4 34 +.005 163 -0.12 175 105.0 102 105.1 257 -8.47 355 239 Navy Pat 8-10 -5.78 105.3 142 111.1 315 64.4 322 -.031 251 -3.44 292 102.5 275 105.9 298 -0.66 198 240 Mercer SC 8-11 -5.80 101.9 221 107.7 256 65.3 295 -.060 306 -1.75 250 103.9 181 105.7 289 -2.31 250 Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 241 Illinois St. MVC 8-11 -6.14 100.2 257 106.4 225 65.2 300 -.003 182 -4.04 308 101.5 318 105.5 279 -6.17 336 242 Nicholls St. Slnd 8-9 -6.16 97.8 300 103.9 182 71.7 28 +.014 151 +4.48 53 107.2 24 102.7 110 +13.62 3 243 Northwestern St. Slnd 10-8 -6.20 102.2 207 108.4 272 66.7 244 +.101 28 -1.46 236 103.7 191 105.1 258 +3.11 84 244 Campbell BSth 7-11 -6.21 100.6 249 106.8 239 65.7 284 -.094 339 -2.54 265 102.4 283 104.9 243 -0.85 203 245 Tulsa Amer 4-12 -6.24 101.7 226 108.0 265 70.0 68 -.068 317 +1.87 122 104.3 157 102.5 94 -2.20 247 246 Morgan St. MEAC 9-8 -6.37 96.9 315 103.3 161 69.2 106 +.053 79 +2.15 111 106.5 49 104.3 206 +6.81 21 247 Northern Colorado BSky 6-12 -6.46 105.2 150 111.6 323 70.0 69 +.063 66 +2.20 108 105.4 88 103.2 132 +4.89 51 248 Niagara MAAC 9-8 -6.66 99.5 273 106.2 223 62.7 356 +.091 39 -3.85 302 102.1 299 105.9 300 -4.11 298 249 Boston University Pat 9-10 -6.71 100.8 244 107.5 253 66.6 247 -.007 188 -4.02 307 101.3 326 105.3 266 -3.91 293 250 Western Carolina SC 10-9 -6.74 101.1 238 107.8 260 67.7 187 +.002 169 -2.94 277 102.2 294 105.2 260 -3.67 288 251 Coastal Carolina SB 8-9 -6.80 102.2 212 109.0 287 68.8 125 +.070 59 +0.81 151 105.6 79 104.7 233 -0.60 197 252 La Salle A10 8-9 -6.82 100.2 259 107.0 243 68.5 154 +.122 18 -1.58 241 103.0 241 104.6 224 -2.47 256 253 Bowling Green MAC 8-9 -7.08 103.8 178 110.9 312 70.2 63 -.047 283 -4.59 322 103.1 233 107.7 355 -4.55 308 254 Southern Indiana OVC 10-9 -7.22 101.5 231 108.7 282 71.2 37 +.002 168 -4.31 317 102.1 296 106.4 324 +0.60 160 255 Austin Peay ASun 8-11 -7.25 101.4 234 108.6 280 64.8 315 -.043 272 -0.47 187 104.4 148 104.9 239 +2.65 97 256 Western Illinois Sum 10-8 -7.29 102.2 209 109.5 291 67.7 183 +.047 85 -3.54 296 103.3 221 106.8 340 -2.91 270 257 Fairfield MAAC 7-10 -7.32 97.6 305 104.9 202 65.8 278 -.015 213 -4.23 314 101.2 329 105.4 276 -1.52 227 258 Lafayette Pat 5-14 -7.34 97.1 312 104.5 192 62.6 358 -.091 337 +0.25 164 105.0 107 104.7 232 +4.93 50 259 East Tennessee St. SC 7-12 -7.42 99.3 277 106.7 235 67.1 221 -.142 353 -5.66 340 102.1 298 107.7 356 -5.51 325 260 Idaho St. BSky 6-12 -7.68 99.3 276 107.0 246 66.6 248 -.143 355 -1.33 226 103.3 218 104.6 228 -1.00 208 261 Robert Morris Horz 8-11 -7.69 98.1 294 105.8 219 67.2 219 -.027 235 -1.91 254 103.2 226 105.1 254 -0.95 206 262 Alcorn St. SWAC 6-10 -7.71 100.7 245 108.4 271 68.5 155 +.050 82 +3.62 75 102.7 257 99.1 4 +9.79 5 263 Charleston Southern BSth 7-10 -7.73 107.5 99 115.2 356 66.7 246 -.062 308 -1.13 220 103.3 220 104.4 211 +2.25 109 264 Winthrop BSth 8-11 -7.90 105.8 131 113.7 346 66.9 236 +.050 81 +0.18 166 104.5 145 104.3 200 +3.24 79 265 Northeastern CAA 6-10 -7.95 97.8 299 105.8 218 67.9 175 -.010 196 -3.53 295 101.3 324 104.9 242 +0.10 170 266 North Carolina A&T CAA 8-11 -8.01 101.8 223 109.9 299 68.7 131 +.038 106 +2.40 103 104.0 175 101.6 64 +6.10 28 267 Southeastern Louisiana Slnd 10-8 -8.09 102.7 195 110.8 310 69.1 111 +.094 38 -0.27 179 104.0 176 104.3 199 +5.45 40 268 Bellarmine ASun 8-11 -8.13 101.3 235 109.4 290 62.0 360 -.002 177 +1.43 137 105.8 70 104.4 212 +6.00 30 269 North Florida ASun 7-11 -8.17 103.9 176 112.0 329 69.5 89 -.001 175 +2.81 93 107.0 32 104.2 190 +6.61 22 270 Mount St. Mary's MAAC 6-12 -8.29 95.1 333 103.4 164 66.4 252 -.088 336 -4.17 312 101.4 323 105.5 281 -2.35 252 271 Canisius MAAC 5-12 -8.40 98.5 290 106.9 241 67.6 192 -.038 261 +0.40 161 105.1 100 104.7 229 +4.58 55 272 Oakland Horz 7-12 -8.48 103.1 190 111.6 322 68.9 123 +.045 91 +1.03 144 104.8 123 103.8 167 +5.49 39 273 Prairie View A&M SWAC 7-11 -8.52 94.5 342 103.0 154 69.0 113 -.006 187 -1.07 218 102.3 288 103.4 142 +5.07 46 274 UT Arlington WAC 6-13 -8.54 96.1 325 104.7 196 66.0 271 -.016 217 +4.45 55 104.9 110 100.5 29 +5.33 41 275 High Point BSth 9-9 -8.62 99.7 265 108.3 268 73.3 10 +.059 69 -4.19 313 102.3 291 106.4 325 -3.56 287 276 Northern Arizona BSky 5-14 -8.88 100.5 252 109.4 288 67.4 205 -.002 176 +3.94 64 105.9 66 102.0 75 +7.01 19 277 USC Upstate BSth 8-9 -8.89 99.4 274 108.3 269 67.8 181 +.063 65 -0.62 193 104.7 130 105.3 268 +2.55 99 278 Howard MEAC 9-10 -8.92 98.8 285 107.8 259 69.5 90 +.076 51 -1.33 227 102.8 251 104.1 189 +0.24 169 279 William & Mary CAA 8-10 -9.00 100.5 250 109.5 293 65.1 304 +.077 49 +0.84 150 105.3 92 104.4 214 +2.97 87 280 Bucknell Pat 7-12 -9.01 99.5 272 108.5 275 67.3 207 -.109 344 -6.76 352 98.8 357 105.6 284 -5.70 329 Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 281 Central Michigan MAC 7-10 -9.02 94.7 339 103.7 171 68.6 149 -.032 252 -3.09 280 103.1 235 106.2 310 -0.00 173 282 Lehigh Pat 9-8 -9.03 97.9 296 107.0 242 70.5 53 +.096 35 -2.72 273 103.6 201 106.3 317 -0.55 196 283 Louisville ACC 2-16 -9.12 97.6 306 106.7 233 68.3 163 -.050 289 +5.63 34 107.1 27 101.5 59 +1.37 137 284 Illinois Chicago MVC 9-10 -9.16 95.9 327 105.1 204 69.5 86 +.070 58 -3.43 291 101.4 320 104.8 238 -9.58 359 285 UT Rio Grande Valley WAC 10-8 -9.34 101.6 229 111.0 313 74.8 1 +.103 27 -3.11 281 103.5 205 106.6 333 -5.50 324 286 Cal Poly BW 7-10 -9.40 94.3 344 103.7 169 64.9 312 -.022 225 -1.41 232 102.4 278 103.9 172 -1.38 219 287 New Hampshire AE 8-9 -9.49 97.3 311 106.8 240 63.9 334 -.030 249 -5.58 337 100.5 344 106.1 306 -4.85 314 288 Miami OH MAC 7-10 -9.53 103.7 182 113.2 341 69.0 118 -.026 233 -0.61 192 102.9 247 103.5 147 -1.22 215 289 Maryland Eastern Shore MEAC 9-8 -9.86 95.4 331 105.3 209 68.7 133 +.139 5 +1.61 130 104.2 165 102.6 102 +5.61 35 290 Tennessee Martin OVC 11-8 -9.98 99.5 271 109.5 292 70.8 46 +.098 34 -5.95 342 101.9 307 107.8 357 -1.99 242 291 Dartmouth Ivy 6-12 -10.04 94.9 337 104.9 203 69.3 101 -.040 264 -1.93 255 102.4 282 104.3 204 -3.42 285 292 Western Michigan MAC 6-11 -10.22 104.8 154 115.0 354 66.2 262 -.024 230 +1.13 141 104.3 161 103.2 133 +1.85 122 293 Louisiana Monroe SB 8-11 -10.28 97.9 298 108.2 266 67.3 206 +.003 165 -0.88 209 103.0 243 103.9 173 +1.27 141 294 South Dakota Sum 8-10 -10.30 102.1 218 112.4 335 66.6 249 +.087 41 -0.96 212 102.7 262 103.6 156 +2.66 96 295 Marist MAAC 7-9 -10.52 96.2 322 106.7 234 65.7 285 +.030 120 -7.07 354 99.5 356 106.5 330 -9.23 358 296 UC San Diego BW 6-11 -10.54 97.4 310 108.0 264 64.5 321 +.099 31 +1.68 128 105.7 77 104.0 181 +2.01 117 297 Denver Sum 11-9 -10.54 102.2 213 112.7 338 69.0 114 +.099 32 -7.07 355 101.5 316 108.6 362 -8.24 354 298 Cal St. Bakersfield BW 6-11 -10.69 93.6 345 104.3 187 62.4 359 -.021 223 -1.67 245 101.6 313 103.2 136 -1.19 214 299 Jacksonville St. ASun 8-11 -10.70 100.1 261 110.8 309 64.7 316 -.013 204 -2.08 259 102.8 252 104.9 241 +0.30 167 300 Nebraska Omaha Sum 7-12 -10.89 100.6 248 111.5 319 68.5 151 +.063 64 +1.77 125 105.1 98 103.4 143 +8.30 11 301 Tennessee Tech OVC 8-11 -11.02 99.6 269 110.6 308 65.8 277 -.033 253 -2.92 275 101.6 312 104.5 218 +2.73 92 302 Wagner NEC 8-7 -11.10 94.9 336 106.0 222 64.2 325 +.059 70 -8.02 356 98.4 359 106.4 320 -3.04 275 303 Chicago St. ind 4-16 -11.11 100.6 247 111.7 324 65.1 302 -.094 340 +2.35 104 105.2 93 102.9 121 +2.35 103 304 Jackson St. SWAC 4-13 -11.12 96.6 317 107.7 258 69.9 71 +.035 111 +4.34 56 105.3 91 101.0 44 +9.26 7 305 Tennessee St. OVC 10-9 -11.20 98.4 291 109.6 294 70.6 50 -.027 238 -8.77 360 99.8 354 108.5 361 -7.23 347 306 Texas Southern SWAC 4-14 -11.26 94.7 340 105.9 221 69.4 98 -.047 280 +2.90 88 104.4 151 101.5 56 +11.16 4 307 Fairleigh Dickinson NEC 11-8 -11.27 105.6 137 116.9 361 70.0 66 +.083 45 -8.39 357 98.3 361 106.7 336 -5.00 318 308 Texas A&M Commerce Slnd 7-12 -11.30 98.9 284 110.2 303 66.2 263 +.012 153 -3.39 288 102.2 293 105.6 287 +1.95 120 309 The Citadel SC 7-11 -11.37 98.0 295 109.4 289 69.1 112 +.037 108 -1.52 239 104.8 120 106.3 318 -0.92 205 310 Northern Illinois MAC 5-12 -11.39 96.2 324 107.5 254 68.9 121 -.038 260 +1.90 121 104.5 142 102.6 98 +2.93 89 311 Maine AE 6-11 -11.43 100.4 254 111.9 328 67.1 223 -.085 330 -2.12 261 100.7 341 102.8 113 -0.47 192 312 Valparaiso MVC 7-12 -11.44 96.2 321 107.7 255 68.2 165 +.056 74 -1.73 248 103.5 207 105.2 265 -4.76 313 313 Saint Peter's MAAC 7-11 -11.65 94.5 341 106.2 224 63.3 350 +.015 147 -5.10 330 100.2 347 105.3 269 -7.08 346 314 Stony Brook CAA 7-11 -11.74 96.8 316 108.6 277 64.1 329 +.044 92 -1.13 222 102.6 263 103.8 164 +1.42 136 315 Morehead St. OVC 10-9 -11.92 98.9 282 110.8 311 66.2 266 +.117 20 -2.98 278 103.0 246 105.9 301 +3.74 69 316 Coppin St. MEAC 6-14 -12.12 99.7 266 111.8 326 73.7 7 +.095 36 +2.18 109 104.9 113 102.7 109 +4.94 48 317 Binghamton AE 7-10 -12.43 98.7 288 111.2 316 67.2 216 +.041 101 -5.47 335 101.0 334 106.4 323 -5.28 320 318 Idaho BSky 6-12 -12.64 102.1 217 114.7 353 65.9 275 -.126 349 -5.23 333 101.2 328 106.5 327 -7.64 350 319 North Alabama ASun 9-10 -12.68 99.9 264 112.6 336 69.9 70 +.139 7 -0.44 186 103.8 187 104.2 193 -0.43 188 320 Manhattan MAAC 6-10 -12.82 97.1 313 109.9 300 67.7 186 +.024 127 -6.40 350 100.0 352 106.4 321 -5.00 317 Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 321 Arkansas St. SB 9-10 -12.83 96.2 323 109.0 286 63.5 344 +.025 126 -6.34 349 99.5 355 105.8 296 -9.98 361 322 Sacred Heart NEC 9-10 -12.92 97.6 304 110.5 307 70.9 45 +.045 89 -9.89 362 96.6 363 106.5 328 -7.30 348 323 UTSA CUSA 7-11 -12.93 99.9 263 112.9 339 68.0 173 +.055 75 -0.61 191 102.0 301 102.7 105 -6.96 345 324 NJIT AE 5-12 -13.27 95.6 330 108.9 285 66.1 269 -.054 293 -5.61 339 101.9 305 107.5 353 -3.38 281 325 Eastern Michigan MAC 4-13 -13.58 100.7 246 114.3 349 71.5 31 -.041 266 -1.66 243 103.9 178 105.6 285 -0.25 180 326 Albany AE 6-14 -13.70 99.4 275 113.1 340 67.7 185 -.027 241 -0.18 177 104.1 171 104.3 202 +1.78 125 327 Central Connecticut NEC 4-15 -13.81 96.5 319 110.3 306 64.8 313 -.131 350 -6.25 348 100.1 350 106.4 319 -2.00 243 328 North Dakota Sum 6-13 -13.84 96.4 320 110.3 304 65.4 292 -.059 305 -3.89 303 102.8 249 106.7 337 -1.94 240 329 Stonehill NEC 7-12 -14.06 96.0 326 110.1 302 68.7 136 +.086 42 -3.40 289 100.9 336 104.3 205 +1.32 139 330 St. Francis PA NEC 7-10 -14.06 100.5 251 114.6 352 68.8 126 +.010 157 -4.17 311 101.5 317 105.7 291 +1.72 128 331 Presbyterian BSth 5-14 -14.10 97.0 314 111.1 314 64.1 328 -.074 324 -3.92 305 103.1 234 107.0 346 -2.90 269 332 Alabama A&M SWAC 6-11 -14.18 94.3 343 108.5 276 71.0 44 +.001 172 -3.77 298 102.5 267 106.3 316 +0.61 158 333 Central Arkansas ASun 6-13 -14.26 98.3 292 112.6 337 73.1 14 +.064 62 -0.78 202 104.1 173 104.9 240 -2.20 248 334 New Orleans Slnd 6-10 -14.42 97.4 309 111.8 327 71.8 25 -.040 263 -4.96 327 102.4 286 107.3 350 +2.94 88 335 Cal St. Northridge BW 3-14 -14.63 95.7 329 110.3 305 64.3 323 -.017 218 -2.11 260 102.4 281 104.5 219 -3.37 279 336 VMI SC 5-14 -14.66 101.2 236 115.8 358 67.6 190 -.010 195 +0.84 149 105.1 99 104.3 197 -0.45 189 337 Loyola MD Pat 7-12 -14.80 95.0 335 109.8 297 65.0 310 +.042 99 -4.16 310 102.5 269 106.7 335 -3.29 277 338 Lindenwood OVC 7-12 -14.90 92.4 350 107.3 252 69.0 117 -.027 242 -2.62 267 102.4 284 105.0 248 +2.22 110 339 South Carolina St. MEAC 3-16 -15.14 98.9 283 114.0 347 72.3 22 -.023 227 +2.70 97 106.4 53 103.7 158 +3.98 64 340 Merrimack NEC 5-14 -15.39 86.0 363 101.4 116 65.2 298 -.047 282 -1.78 251 103.6 200 105.4 272 +3.13 83 341 McNeese St. Slnd 5-13 -15.58 100.0 262 115.6 357 67.0 227 -.019 221 -0.76 199 103.5 206 104.3 198 +7.08 18 342 Arkansas Pine Bluff SWAC 7-11 -15.71 91.6 353 107.3 250 71.0 43 -.001 174 +4.56 52 103.8 184 99.3 7 +14.61 1 343 Little Rock OVC 5-14 -15.97 97.5 307 113.5 342 70.4 56 -.034 255 -5.21 332 101.0 335 106.2 309 -1.11 211 344 Holy Cross Pat 6-13 -15.98 92.2 351 108.2 267 67.5 198 -.023 228 -5.75 341 99.9 353 105.6 286 -4.38 304 345 Alabama St. SWAC 4-13 -16.53 94.8 338 111.4 317 67.9 177 +.003 166 +2.00 116 104.8 121 102.8 115 +7.16 16 346 Evansville MVC 4-15 -16.65 92.2 352 108.9 284 69.2 108 +.029 121 -0.50 188 103.0 240 103.5 149 -1.41 222 347 Columbia Ivy 6-13 -17.07 89.9 356 107.0 245 68.6 146 +.015 148 -4.57 321 101.4 321 106.0 304 -6.71 343 348 Eastern Illinois OVC 7-12 -17.31 91.0 354 108.3 270 68.9 120 +.055 77 -6.20 346 101.1 330 107.3 352 -2.14 246 349 Elon CAA 2-16 -17.33 95.0 334 112.4 334 68.1 167 -.030 250 -0.94 211 102.8 253 103.7 160 -2.08 245 350 Houston Christian Slnd 6-12 -17.53 99.2 278 116.7 360 70.5 54 -.018 220 -4.86 325 103.4 215 108.2 358 -0.29 183 351 Bethune Cookman SWAC 6-11 -17.80 96.6 318 114.3 351 69.6 83 +.031 117 -4.49 319 102.4 279 106.9 343 -2.04 244 352 Hampton CAA 3-14 -18.53 95.8 328 114.3 350 69.4 94 -.014 208 -0.73 198 103.6 198 104.4 208 -1.75 234 353 St. Francis NY NEC 8-9 -19.30 92.5 349 111.8 325 66.9 237 +.076 50 -10.06 363 98.4 358 108.5 360 -8.17 353 354 Incarnate Word Slnd 6-12 -19.35 92.9 347 112.3 332 67.5 200 -.043 273 -5.96 343 100.3 346 106.2 312 -4.41 306 355 Monmouth CAA 1-17 -21.75 89.7 357 111.4 318 68.8 129 -.005 185 +4.94 48 106.9 35 102.0 76 +6.36 26 356 Mississippi Valley St. SWAC 2-17 -22.70 89.5 358 112.2 331 65.6 287 -.011 199 +2.65 98 104.7 128 102.1 80 +8.68 9 357 Delaware St. MEAC 1-15 -23.06 90.7 355 113.7 345 67.3 208 -.066 315 +2.76 96 104.7 127 102.0 74 +6.02 29 358 Florida A&M SWAC 2-13 -23.74 88.6 361 112.3 333 64.6 319 -.028 243 +6.97 19 106.9 36 99.9 16 +14.09 2 359 Lamar Slnd 5-13 -24.17 92.9 348 117.1 362 66.7 245 +.039 105 -5.14 331 101.1 331 106.3 313 -2.34 251 360 Green Bay Horz 2-17 -24.59 93.4 346 118.0 363 66.0 273 +.020 135 -1.15 223 103.7 197 104.8 236 +2.02 116 Strength of Schedule NCSOS Rk Team Conf W-L AdjEM AdjO AdjD AdjT Luck AdjEM OppO OppD AdjEM 361 LIU NEC 2-15 -26.44 88.7 360 115.2 355 73.2 12 -.027 236 -1.34 229 103.9 183 105.2 263 +5.92 31 362 Hartford ind 4-14 -26.75 87.4 362 114.2 348 66.8 240 -.041 267 -8.62 358 100.1 351 108.7 363 -8.62 356 363 IUPUI Horz 3-16 -27.40 88.8 359 116.1 359 67.0 230 -.049 287 -5.52 336 100.9 337 106.5 326 -6.06 335 © 1999-2022 The Forecast Factory LLC. All rights reserved. | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Stats provided by STATS LLC

#PMARSHONAU: Sunday reflections from Auburn and beyond Phillip Marshall Auburn basketball team knows how to win Auburn’s 69-63 victory over Mississippi State on Saturday night was a grind, like most games are going to be for this team. But as they have done in four of five SEC games, the Tigers had answers when it mattered most. Mississippi State is a tall, physical and athletic team. Auburn coach Bruce Pearl sounded the alarm on Thursday, saying the physicality would be a challenge his team would have to meet. You’d have to say the Bulldogs won the physical battle. On 2-point baskets and free throws, they outscored Auburn by 27. But there is no place on the scoreboard for that. Auburn won its 28th straight at Neville Arena, the second longest homecourt winning streak in Division I. Johni Broome, an overwhelming force in the first four SEC games, wasn’t overwhelming on Saturday. Mississippi State’s Tolu Smith got the best of him. Broome was in foul trouble much of the night and saw his streak of double-doubles end at four games. The Tigers won largely because they made 3-point shots – 11 of them – and Mississippi State made none, going 0-for-18 from 3-point range. “The closer you get to the basket against Mississippi State, the worse you look,” Pearl said when it was over. “We knew we were going to have to make some shots. And then there was hot-shooting Jaylin Williams, who scored 21 points and, according to Pearl, won his part of the physical battle. Point guard Wendell Green hit a back-breaking 3-pointer from very long distance, got a steal on the other end and scored again. He was 11-for-11 at the free throw line, thwarting Mississippi State’s comeback bid late. And there was oft-maligned Allen Flanigan, whose end-to-end dunk put State in a hole it could not climb out of. When it was over and done, Auburn was one game behind unbeaten Alabama and Texas A&M in the SEC race. And that really is what matters. These Tigers won’t often dominate, but they know how to win. A crazy day in the SEC South Carolina lost by 41 to Texas A&M at home on Saturday. It lost earlier at home by 43 to Tennessee. That’s two home losses by 40-plus points. Last Saturday, the Gamecocks beat Kentucky at Rupp Arena. Go figure. Meanwhile, after starting 1-3, Kentucky went to Knoxville, outrebounded Tennessee by 20 and shocked the Vols 63-56. Go figure. Remember when Arkansas was a top-10 team? The Razorbacks gave up 63 second-half points and lost 97-84 at Vanderbilt on Saturday. They are 1-4 in the SEC with three consecutive double-digit losses. Go figure. The bizarre days of NIL NIL freedom is going to drive coaches crazy and drive fans crazy. It even drives me a little crazy. But you are not going to hear any players complain. We all know money is flowing. Is it as much as “reports” say? Probably not, at least for most. What is almost comical is that one of the few rules in place is that NIL promises can’t be used as recruiting inducements. My favorite example is what Georgia coach Kirby Smart said at SEC Media Days. He said a Georgia defensive lineman was the highest paid in the country at his position. He said the same about a cornerback. He said 95 Georgia players had NIL deals. That means at least 10 were walk-ons. A recruiting pitch if I have ever heard one. After all that, Smart proclaimed that something had to be done to stop programs from using NIL deals as recruiting inducements. NCAA looks to Congress for help The NCAA’s top mission for 2023 is to convince Congress to provide some help in dealing with the dark clouds hanging over college athletics. According to The Athletic, here is what Baylor president Linda Livngstone, chair of the NCAA board of governors, said at the NCAA convention: “Several states are right now considering legislation that would mandate a vastly changed relationship between school and its students. Congress is really the only entity that can affirm student-athletes’ unique status. We have to ensure that Congress understands what’s at stake and motivate them to act. Second, we need a safe harbor for a certain degree of antitrust complaints. We’re not looking for nor do we actually need broad antitrust exemption; we do need the ability to make common-sense rules without limitless threats of litigation.” The situation, Livingstone said, has reached the point of serious urgency. She said state legislators will do whatever it takes to gain a competitive advantage over schools in neighboring states, which “is not sustainable and is destructive for everyone.” “We need a federal legal framework that’s clear, fair and stable for student-athletes nationwide so they can take advantage of legitimate NIL opportunities,” Livingstone said. “We need to formalize federal laws that supersede state level legislation. Educating Congress on the issues and motivating them to take action on these critical priorities is going to be a central activity for the NCAA in 2023. My greatest fear is that people won’t understand the severity of the threats we face until living with the consequences.” What I expected in the 2022 football season * I bought into Alabama coach Nick Saban telling friends that this would be his best Alabama team. I was wrong. * I thought Texas A&M was overrated. I was right. * I thought Auburn would win seven games. I was wrong. * I thought Tank Bigsby would have his best season. I was right, but not until after Bryan Harsin and Eric Kiesau left town. * I thought if Auburn won fewer than seven games that Harsin would probably lose his job. I was right, * I thought Tennessee was overrated based on a 7-6 finish in 2021. I was wrong. * I thought the combination of NIL and penalty-free transfers would create havoc. I was right. * I thought, after losing 15 draft picks, that Georgia would take a step or two back. I was wrong. What I expected in the 2022 football season * I bought into Alabama coach Nick Saban telling friends that this would be his best Alabama team. I was wrong. * I thought Texas A&M was overrated. I was right. * I thought Auburn would win seven games. I was wrong. * I thought Tank Bigsby would have his best season. I was right, but not until after Bryan Harsin and Eric Kiesau left town. * I thought if Auburn won fewer than seven games that Harsin would probably lose his job. I was right, * I thought Tennessee was overrated based on a 7-6 finish in 2021. I was wrong. * I thought the combination of NIL and penalty-free transfers would create havoc. I was right. * I thought, after losing 15 draft picks, that Georgia would take a step or two back. I was wrong. Holden Geriner still in the mix Just because a player hasn’t played doesn’t mean he can’t play. It doesn’t even mean he won’t be a star. Redshirted freshmen, in particular, seem to be all but forgotten. Last year, there was excitement when quarterback Holden Geriner signed. There were those who believed he could be the starter as a freshman. He played only a handful of snaps during the season. And now, he is rarely mentioned in speculation about Auburn quarterbacks. Geriner will have his chance to make some noise in the spring. Things I could do without * “Way to early” Top 25s. Way too early is right. Those things are clickbait without meaning. * Coaches don’t have coaching jobs talking on television about what coaches who do have jobs should have or should not have done. 23COMMENTS * Giving coaches credit for what players do. * Penalties for excessive celebration. If something has to be called, call delay or game. Assessing 15-yard penalties because players get excited is ridiculous. * People I don’t know who call me “buddy.” * Officials who call what they believe happened instead of what they saw happen. Until next time …

Athlon Sports shares biggest question surrounding Auburn football in 2023 Taylor Jones 2–3 minutes The offseason is now in full swing, which means that there are plenty of questions being asked ahead of next season. Athlon Sports is kicking off the offseason by revealing its 10 Offseason Questions That Will Shape the Conference for 2023. As one would assume, Auburn and new head coach Hugh Freeze were thrown into the mix. Buy Tigers Tickets Auburn football has regressed mightily over the last two seasons, both in recruiting and the on-field product. Tiger fans are desperately needing to see improvement, and believe that the recent recruiting success of Freeze will ultimately translate to success against SEC competition. The recent storyline surrounding Auburn football caused Athlon Sports to ask the question “is Auburn Poised for Significant Improvement in Hugh Freeze’s Debut?” Here’s what Steve Lassan of Athlon Sports is looking for out of the Tigers this season. With Alabama and LSU likely to be projected top-10 teams, along with Ole Miss, Mississippi State and Arkansas hovering around the Top 25, and an improved Texas A&M squad likely, finding wins in the SEC West won’t be easy for new Auburn coach Hugh Freeze. However, the roster isn’t completely devoid of talent, as Jarquez Hunter should emerge as the new No. 1 back with USF transfer Brian Battie sharing the load, and the defense returns enough to improve with Ron Roberts as the new coordinator. For the Tigers to push for six (or more victories), a handful of transfers must mesh along the line, and Robby Ashford needs to take a big step forward at quarterback. Freeze’s staff and work in the portal have this program pointed in the right direction. This offseason is the first look at a revamped roster. Auburn finished with a 5-7 record in 2022, and a sixth-place finish in the SEC West. Freeze will lead Auburn onto the field for the first time on Saturday, Sept. 2 against UMass at Jordan-Hare Stadium.

call me when joe starts flushing sensitive docs down the toilet like your boy trump. how anyone has the gall to bang on anyone after being a trump supporter is beyond me. they found out because trump came out of the bathroom with a top secret doc stuck to his shoe.............................but you go right ahead scooter................

ok scooter. let me put click bait by your name for wasting my time.............

i bet many of you have never heard this but it rocks. it is a beautiful song written for some very special people and those we lost. i hope you can take the time to listen.................

Rest in peace sir. YOU gave your life to better the country and you did it in the name of love....................

again very little news on the football front. mostly rehashes. Maybe this is the dead period?

Auburn gets 12th transfer with SEC linebacker Austin Keys Updated: Jan. 14, 2023, 11:42 p.m.|Published: Jan. 14, 2023, 7:59 p.m. 2–3 minutes Standing ovation for Hugh Freeze, head coach introduced at Auburn/Arkansas By Nick Alvarez | nalvarez@al.com Austin Keys became Auburn’s 12th transfer and second linebacker from a Southeastern Conference program. The three-star announced his decision on Instagram on Saturday night. Of the dozen players Hugh Freeze has pulled in via the portal, Keys is the sixth defender. After the Tigers’ new head coach claimed the roster was in need of an overhaul on signing day, the quick work of his new staff is creating a blueprint for the 2023 season. Keys entered the portal on Jan. 6. and will be a redshirt junior next season. He’s listed at 6-foot-2, 245 pounds and was a four-star out of Seminary (Miss.) High. In 23 games with Ole Miss, Keys has recorded 51 tackles, two sacks, one forced fumble and a recovery. Against Auburn on Oct. 15, he made three stops. With LSU transfer DeMario Tolan, Auburn will have 10 scholarship linebackers and depth to help the unit improve from the 29.5 points per game the defense allowed. Edge rusher Elijah McAllister also transferred in from Vanderbilt. Freeze was active in his last few weeks ahead of the December high school signing period. The Tigers pulled in key flips on the defensive side of the ball like Keldric Faulk from Florida State and Kayin Lee from Ohio State. The new staff overhauled the offensive line with three additions from other colleges. The Tigers 2023 recruiting class is listed at 18th overall on the 247Sports Composite team rankings. The transfer group is ranked fourth in the country. MORE Tigers football: Hugh Freeze adds Group of 5 assistant to Auburn support staff Alabama, Auburn prep for class of 2024 with weekend junior visits Nick Alvarez is a reporter for Alabama Media Group. Follow him on Twitter @nick_a_alvarez or email him at NAlvarez@al.com.

if top secret stuff was given to you when i served from 73 to 77 you better have those docs or a signature or you azz was grass. i am not kidding. this is why i was asking go and jj about it because i had tons of classified docs i had to take back and sort to different groups of people,etc. and they sat me down and in no uncertain terms they told me what would happen if i got careless or lost classified docs. this is why trump and biden both aggravate me over this stuff. back then neither would have lived long enough to see outside of a prison again at both of their ages. it is just not fair but i understand why people get upset.