Yellow Number 4 Brett Favre T-Shirt
 
 

 

The Only Original and Unaltered
BCS Computer Rankings...

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

The SEC Takes the Top Two Spots

  • Florida remains #1, and Alabama rises to #2
  • At this point, there are actually fewer 1-loss teams (5) than undefeated teams (6)
  • With half of its membership in the current top-25, the Pac-10 is the top conference
  • The BCS is a major reason why college football has by far the most meaningful regular season in all of sports, and next week will feature four more top-25 matchups: #8 Iowa at #12 Ohio St., #20 Utah at #5 TCU, #23 West Virginia at #3 Cincinnati, and #25 Stanford at #11 USC
More College
Football Links

The Jeff Anderson & Chris Hester
College Football Computer Rankings, as of Nov. 8

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.
Florida
.827
9
0
.543
29
1-0
0-0
0
2.
Alabama
.821
9
0
.534
36
1-0
1-0
0
3.
Cincinnati
.814
9
0
.522
44
0-0
1-0
0
4.
Texas
.812
9
0
.519
48
0-0
1-0
0
5.
TCU
.808
9
0
.512
52
0-0
1-0
0
6.
Boise State
.769
9
0
.453
91
1-0
0-0
0
7.
Georgia Tech
.765
9
1
.533
38
0-0
1-1
0
8.
Iowa
.763
9
1
.531
40
0-0
3-0
1
9.
LSU
.746
7
2
.594
6
0-2
0-0
0
10.
Oregon
.740
7
2
.587
8
0-1
2-1
0
Rank Team 
Rating
 W 
 L 
Sched. 
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
Conference
Rankings
Rating
W*
 L*
Sched.
Strength*
11. USC
.738
7
2
.584
10
  Pac-10
.632
20
9
.519
12. Ohio State
.723
8
2
.551
22
  Southeastern
.608
35
6
.385
13. Pittsburgh
.721
8
1
.484
67
  Big East
.592
29
7
.402
14. Wisconsin
.709
7
2
.549
25
  Big Ten
.577
30
10
.423
15. Miami, Fla.
.706
7
2
.546
26
  Big 12
.552
35
13
.412
16. Houston
.699
8
1
.458
86
  Atlantic Coast
.543
29
15
.446
17. Virginia Tech
.698
6
3
.606
3
  Mountain West
.499
21
15
.449
18. Penn State
.693
8
2
.515
49
  WAC
.461
17
18
.470
19. Arizona
.690
6
2
.545
27
  Conference USA
.432
19
29
.494
20. Utah
.688
8
1
.445
98
  Mid-American
.369
16
36
.484
21. Oklahoma State
.685
7
2
.521
45
  Sun Belt
.366
8
25
.522
22. Oregon State
.670
6
3
.575
15
  *non-conference play
23. West Virginia
.660
7
2
.493
59
 
24. BYU
.658
7
2
.491
62
 
25. Stanford
.655
6
3
.558
18
 
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.
Notre Dame
.647
6
3
.550
24
 
74.
Syracuse
.474
3
6
.575
14
27.
Auburn
.643
7
3
.524
43
 
75.
Central Florida
.466
5
4
.433
102
28.
Clemson
.642
6
3
.544
28
 
76.
Southern Miss
.465
5
4
.432
103
29.
South Florida
.632
6
2
.480
69
 
77.
LA Monroe
.463
5
4
.430
105
30.
California
.630
6
3
.531
39
 
78.
Ohio
.459
6
3
.361
120
31.
Boston College
.618
6
3
.519
47
 
79.
Duke
.459
5
4
.426
108
32.
Georgia
.618
5
4
.586
9
 
80.
Louisville
.452
3
6
.553
21
33.
Navy
.614
7
3
.493
58
 
81.
Wyoming
.446
4
5
.479
70
34.
Nebraska
.607
6
3
.508
53
 
82.
Indiana
.443
4
6
.503
55
35.
Arkansas
.606
5
4
.574
16
 
83.
Colorado
.441
3
6
.542
30
36.
Tennessee
.602
5
4
.570
17
 
84.
San Diego State
.441
4
5
.474
75
37.
South Carolina
.593
6
4
.534
37
 
85.
Illinois
.440
3
6
.541
31
38.
Minnesota
.592
5
5
.592
7
 
86.
N.C. State
.439
4
5
.472
77
39.
Rutgers
.591
6
2
.437
100
 
87.
UNLV
.434
4
6
.494
57
40.
North Carolina
.590
6
3
.490
63
 
88.
Bowling Green
.426
4
5
.459
85
41.
Kentucky
.588
5
4
.556
20
 
89.
Virginia
.424
3
6
.525
42
42.
Fresno State
.583
6
3
.483
68
 
90.
LA Lafayette
.419
5
4
.386
116
43.
UCLA
.582
4
5
.614
2
 
91.
UAB
.406
4
5
.438
99
44.
Texas Tech
.580
6
3
.479
71
 
92.
Colorado State
.405
3
7
.527
41
45.
Troy
.579
7
2
.407
112
 
93.
Toledo
.399
4
5
.432
104
46.
Central Michigan
.579
7
2
.407
113
 
94.
Tulsa
.394
4
5
.426
107
47.
Mississippi
.577
6
3
.476
72
 
95.
Kent State
.386
5
5
.386
117
48.
Oklahoma
.573
5
4
.540
34
 
96.
Tulane
.376
3
6
.475
73
49.
Idaho
.568
7
3
.447
96
 
97.
Louisiana Tech
.373
3
6
.472
76
50.
Mississippi State
.563
4
5
.596
5
 
98.
Vanderbilt
.371
2
8
.556
19
51.
Missouri
.554
5
4
.521
46
 
99.
UTEP
.362
3
6
.459
84
52.
Washington
.550
3
6
.647
1
 
100.
Hawaii
.358
3
6
.455
89
53.
Northwestern
.547
6
4
.487
65
 
101.
San Jose State
.355
1
6
.579
12
54.
Florida State
.544
4
5
.577
13
 
102.
Western Michigan
.353
4
6
.410
111
55.
Nevada
.538
5
3
.463
83
 
103.
Washington State
.350
1
8
.597
4
56.
Michigan State
.537
5
5
.537
35
 
104.
Buffalo
.340
3
6
.436
101
57.
Air Force
.535
6
4
.474
74
 
105.
Army
.332
3
6
.427
106
58.
Temple
.531
7
2
.362
119
 
106.
New Mexico State
.329
3
6
.424
109
59.
Kansas State
.528
6
4
.468
81
 
107.
Maryland
.323
2
7
.489
64
60.
Texas A&M
.525
5
4
.492
60
 
108.
Arkansas State
.323
2
6
.470
80
61.
Purdue
.520
4
6
.580
11
 
109.
Florida Atlantic
.311
2
6
.456
88
62.
Connecticut
.516
4
5
.550
23
 
110.
Utah State
.308
2
7
.471
78
63.
Arizona State
.507
4
5
.540
32
 
111.
Fla. International
.301
2
7
.463
82
64.
Iowa State
.507
5
5
.507
54
 
112.
Memphis
.291
2
7
.451
92
65.
Kansas
.504
5
4
.471
79
 
113.
Akron
.287
2
7
.446
97
66.
Northern Illinois
.493
6
3
.393
114
 
114.
Miami, Ohio
.270
1
9
.513
51
67.
Michigan
.491
5
5
.491
61
 
115.
North Texas
.269
2
7
.424
110
68.
Mid. Tenn. St.
.490
6
3
.390
115
 
116.
Rice
.198
0
9
.497
56
69.
SMU
.487
5
4
.454
90
 
117.
New Mexico
.191
0
9
.487
66
70.
East Carolina
.483
5
4
.449
93
 
118.
Ball State
.184
1
8
.383
118
71.
Marshall
.482
5
4
.449
95
 
119.
Eastern Michigan
.174
0
9
.457
87
72.
Baylor
.481
4
5
.514
50
 
120.
Western Kentucky
.169
0
9
.449
94
73.
Wake Forest
.480
4
6
.540
33
     

 
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 2009 by AndersonSports, all rights reserved