Yellow Number 4 Brett Favre T-Shirt
 
 

 

The Only Original and Unaltered
BCS Computer Rankings...

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

Alabama Wins the National Championship

  • Alabama posts the 2nd-highest rating of the BCS era (.843), behind only Texas's .849 in 2005-06
  • Sugar Bowl-champion Florida is the national runner-up
  • Undefeated Boise State posts a top-3 finish for the second time in 4 years (the undefeated Broncos finished #2 in 2006-07)
  • The Texas Longhorns, who fought valiantly in the National Championship Game in the Rose Bowl, finish #4
More College
Football Links

The Jeff Anderson & Chris Hester
College Football Computer Rankings, 2009-10

Final Pre-Bowl Rankings
Nov. 29 Rankings
Nov. 22 Rankings
Nov. 15 Rankings
Nov. 8 Rankings
Nov. 1 Rankings
Oct. 25 Rankings
Oct. 18 Rankings
Oct. 11 Rankings
Oct. 4 Rankings

Final 2008-09 Rankings
2008 Pre-Bowl Rankings


 

Rating
 W 
 L 
Sched.
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
vs. Current
Top-10
vs. Current
#11-25
Other 
Losses
1.
Alabama
.843
14
0
.573
5
2-0
4-0
0
2.
Florida
.804
13
1
.568
9
1-1
3-0
0
3.
Boise State
.797
14
0
.495
68
2-0
0-0
0
4.
Texas
.786
13
1
.540
35
0-1
2-0
0
5.
Cincinnati
.785
12
1
.543
30
0-1
2-0
0
6.
TCU
.763
12
1
.513
53
0-1
2-0
0
7.
Iowa
.750
11
2
.554
17
1-1
2-0
1
8.
Ohio State
.743
11
2
.545
28
3-0
1-1
1
9.
Oregon
.721
10
3
.569
7
0-2
2-0
1
10.
Penn State
.716
11
2
.510
54
0-2
1-0
0
Rank Team 
Rating
 W 
 L 
Sched. 
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
Conference
Rankings
Rating
W*
 L*
Sched.
Strength*
11. BYU
.710
11
2
.502
60
  Southeastern
.635
48
10
.431
12. Georgia Tech
.707
11
3
.541
33
  Big East
.605
36
10
.430
13. Virginia Tech
.703
10
3
.547
25
  Pac-10
.594
23
14
.522
14. LSU
.690
9
4
.581
2
  Big Ten
.562
36
15
.436
15. Pittsburgh
.688
10
3
.530
44
  Big 12
.558
39
17
.438
16. Wisconsin
.678
10
3
.519
47
  Atlantic Coast
.549
33
22
.489
17. Utah
.662
10
3
.501
61
  Mountain West
.524
25
16
.458
18. USC
.658
9
4
.546
27
  WAC
.468
21
22
.475
19. Nebraska
.656
10
4
.530
45
  Conference USA
.431
21
33
.497
20. West Virginia
.655
9
4
.542
32
  Sun Belt
.362
9
29
.522
21. Miami, Fla.
.653
9
4
.541
34
  Mid-American
.357
17
40
.476
22. Oklahoma State
.645
9
4
.532
41
  *non-conference play
23. Georgia
.642
8
5
.575
3
 
24. Arkansas
.640
8
5
.574
4
 
25. Mississippi
.632
9
4
.517
50
 
RANK Team Rating Win Lose Schedule Strength Schedule Strength BCS Football Rankings RANK Team Rating Win Lose Schedule Strength Schedule Strength
Rank Team 
Rating
W
L
Sched. 
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
  Rank Team 
Rating
W
L
Sched. 
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
26.
Auburn
.628
8
5
.561
12
 
74.
Bowling Green
.454
7
6
.432
96
27.
Oklahoma
.620
8
5
.553
18
 
75.
UNLV
.452
5
7
.503
58
28.
Arizona
.619
8
5
.552
19
 
76.
Baylor
.450
4
8
.551
20
29.
Texas Tech
.618
9
4
.502
59
 
77.
Michigan
.448
5
7
.498
66
30.
Clemson
.616
9
5
.531
43
 
78.
Louisville
.447
4
8
.548
23
31.
Connecticut
.615
8
5
.548
24
 
79.
N.C. State
.444
5
7
.494
70
32.
Oregon State
.615
8
5
.547
26
 
80.
Southern Miss
.436
7
6
.414
104
33.
Central Michigan
.610
12
2
.385
116
 
81.
Hawaii
.433
6
7
.456
85
34.
Stanford
.602
8
5
.534
39
 
82.
Arizona State
.433
4
8
.534
38
35.
South Carolina
.593
7
6
.570
6
 
83.
Northern Illinois
.411
7
6
.389
112
36.
Rutgers
.590
9
4
.473
80
 
84.
Duke
.406
5
7
.455
87
37.
Navy
.589
10
4
.458
84
 
85.
LA Lafayette
.402
6
6
.402
110
38.
California
.587
8
5
.518
49
 
86.
Indiana
.400
4
8
.500
65
39.
Tennessee
.586
7
6
.564
11
 
87.
Colorado
.398
3
9
.551
21
40.
North Carolina
.583
8
5
.515
51
 
88.
LA Monroe
.398
6
6
.398
111
41.
Missouri
.583
8
5
.514
52
 
89.
Illinois
.396
3
9
.549
22
42.
Florida State
.581
7
6
.559
16
 
90.
UAB
.392
5
7
.441
93
43.
South Florida
.569
8
5
.500
63
 
91.
Louisiana Tech
.390
4
8
.490
73
44.
Kentucky
.566
7
6
.544
29
 
92.
San Diego State
.389
4
8
.489
74
45.
Houston
.566
10
4
.435
95
 
93.
Utah State
.387
4
8
.486
75
46.
Boston College
.562
8
5
.493
71
 
94.
Virginia
.374
3
9
.526
46
47.
Air Force
.561
8
5
.492
72
 
95.
Tulsa
.370
5
7
.418
100
48.
UCLA
.561
7
6
.538
36
 
96.
Florida Atlantic
.368
5
7
.416
101
49.
Northwestern
.553
8
5
.484
77
 
97.
Buffalo
.356
5
7
.403
107
50.
Mississippi State
.553
5
7
.602
1
 
98.
Toledo
.355
5
7
.402
109
51.
East Carolina
.549
9
5
.463
83
 
99.
Vanderbilt
.353
2
10
.560
13
52.
Fresno State
.546
8
5
.477
79
 
100.
Colorado State
.350
3
9
.500
62
53.
Notre Dame
.542
6
6
.542
31
 
101.
Army
.342
5
7
.388
113
54.
Troy
.542
9
4
.425
98
 
102.
Kent State
.327
5
7
.373
118
55.
Mid. Tenn. St.
.538
10
3
.374
117
 
103.
UTEP
.320
4
8
.414
103
56.
Minnesota
.537
6
7
.559
14
 
104.
Arkansas State
.318
4
8
.412
106
57.
Nevada
.535
8
5
.465
82
 
105.
Fla. International
.310
3
9
.455
88
58.
Wyoming
.523
7
6
.500
64
 
106.
Western Michigan
.308
5
7
.352
120
59.
Iowa State
.520
7
6
.497
67
 
107.
Maryland
.303
2
10
.504
57
60.
Washington
.519
5
7
.569
8
 
108.
Washington State
.301
1
11
.564
10
61.
Central Florida
.514
8
5
.444
90
 
109.
Tulane
.300
3
9
.443
92
62.
Texas A&M
.513
6
7
.536
37
 
110.
San Jose State
.296
2
10
.495
69
63.
Idaho
.512
8
5
.443
91
 
111.
New Mexico State
.291
3
10
.445
89
64.
Michigan State
.509
6
7
.532
42
 
112.
Akron
.280
3
9
.419
99
65.
SMU
.494
8
5
.425
97
 
113.
Rice
.277
2
10
.472
81
66.
Kansas State
.485
6
6
.485
76
 
114.
Memphis
.264
2
10
.456
86
67.
Temple
.483
9
4
.369
119
 
115.
New Mexico
.264
1
11
.518
48
68.
Purdue
.483
5
7
.533
40
 
116.
Miami, Ohio
.235
1
11
.480
78
69.
Ohio
.472
9
5
.388
114
 
117.
North Texas
.224
2
10
.403
108
70.
Marshall
.460
7
6
.437
94
 
118.
Ball State
.212
2
10
.385
115
71.
Wake Forest
.459
5
7
.510
55
 
119.
Western Kentucky
.151
0
12
.415
102
72.
Syracuse
.458
4
8
.559
15
 
120.
Eastern Michigan
.150
0
12
.413
105
73.
Kansas
.458
5
7
.508
56
     

 
The Anderson & Hester Rankings are distinct in four ways: 

1. Unlike the polls, these rankings do not reward teams for running up scores.  Teams are rewarded for beating quality opponents, which is the object of the game.  Margin of victory, which is not the object of the game, is not considered. 

2. Unlike the polls, these rankings do not prejudge teams.  These rankings first appear after the season's fifth week, and each team's ranking reflects its actual accomplishments on the field, not its perceived potential. 

3. These rankings compute the most accurate strength of schedule ratings.  Each team's opponents and opponents' opponents are judged not only by their won-lost records but also, uniquely, by their conferences' strength (see #4). 

4. These rankings provide the most accurate conference ratings.  Each conference is rated according to its non-conference won-lost record and the difficulty of its non-conference schedule. 


Contact AndersonSports

 Copyright 2010 by AndersonSports, all rights reserved