The Only Original and Unaltered* 
BCS Computer Rankings...

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

The Top 2 Are in Their Own League
  • #1 Texas edges #2 USC by only .003
  • A canyon separates the top 2 from the rest of the field:  the gap between #2 USC and #3 Penn State (.034) is bigger than the gap between #4 Miami and #10 UCLA (.029)
  • The gap between #2 and #4 is even more striking:  #25 Louisville is actually closer to #11 Notre Dame (.051 behind) than #4 Miami is to #2 USC (.056 behind) 
  • #3 Penn State is well ahead of #4 Miami:  the Nittany Lions have posted twice as many wins (4 to 2) vs. current-top-25 teams as the Hurricanes have (with each team having beaten 1 current-top-10 foe—Penn State vs. #6 Ohio State and Miami at #5 Virginia Tech), and the Nittany Lions' loss was at current-#12 Michigan, while the Hurricanes' loss was at current-#29 Florida State 
  • #8 LSU, the other team ahead of Penn State in the polls, has had a fine season and posted a great win at current-#9 Alabama on Saturday, but LSU has only 3 other wins vs. above-average teams and lost to current-#42 Tennessee—at home
  • (1-9) Kent State lost to previously winless Buffalo on Saturday, enabling the Golden Flashes to claim the bottom spot (#119)
More College
Football Links
The Anderson & Hester College Football 
Computer Rankings, as of Nov. 14 
•Nov. 7 Rankings
•Oct. 31 Rankings
•Oct. 24 Rankings
•Oct. 17 Rankings
•Oct. 10 Rankings
•Oct. 3 Rankings

•Final 2004-05 Rankings

•Final 2003-04 Rankings

 
    Rating  W  L Sched.
Strength*		 Sched. 
Rank*		 vs. Current
Top-10		 vs. Current
#11-25		 Other 
Losses
1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10.
Texas
USC
Penn State
Miami, Fla.
Virginia Tech
Ohio State
Oregon
LSU
Alabama
UCLA
.846
.843
.809
.787
.786
.776
.768
.762
.761
.758
10
10
9
8
8
8
9
8
9
9
0
0
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
.578
.573
.597
.573
.571
.619
.538
.537
.527
.523
*to date
29
33
13
34
36
6
50
52
57
59
1-0
1-0
1-0
1-0
0-1
0-2
0-1
1-0
0-1
0-0
2-0
1-0
3-1
1-0
2-0
2-0
0-0
2-0
2-0
1-0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
Rank Team  Rating W L Sched. 
Strength		 Sched. 
Rank		   Conference
Rankings		 Rating W*  L* Sched.
Strength*
11. 
12. 
13. 
14. 
15. 
16. 
17. 
18. 
19. 
20. 
21. 
22. 
23. 
24. 
25.
Notre Dame
Michigan
TCU
Oklahoma
Minnesota
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Colorado
Georgia
Auburn
Boston College
South Carolina
Florida
Northwestern
Louisville
.739
.728
.725
.725
.720
.719
.718
.711
.710
.704
.694
.692
.691
.689
.688
7
7
10
6
7
8
8
7
7
8
7
7
7
6
7
2
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
4
2
.585
.622
.474
.637
.611
.482
.592
.601
.550
.528
.582
.579
.578
.635
.525
18
5
77
2
9
75
15
10
45
55
24
26
30
3
58
  Big Ten
Atlantic Coast
Big 12
Pac-10
Southeastern
Big East
Mountain West
Conference USA
Mid-American
WAC
Sun Belt
*non-conference play
.666
.630
.620
.592
.564
.529
.484
.441
.414
.366
.313
27
25
31
22
25
19
13
15
13
8
5
6
7
5
7
8
12
14
21
23
20
24
.471
.457
.392
.433
.406
.460
.495
.491
.497
.494
.511
Rank Team  Rating W L Sched. 
Strength		 Sched. 
Rank		   Rank Team  Rating  W L Sched.
Strength		 Sched.
Rank
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
Georgia Tech
Texas Tech
Iowa State
Florida State
Iowa
Missouri
Clemson
Nebraska
Maryland
UTEP
North Carolina
Virginia
South Florida
Arizona State
Fresno State
Stanford
Tennessee
Michigan State
Kansas
California
Central Florida
Texas A&M
BYU
N.C. State
Purdue
New Mexico
Colorado State
Southern Miss
Oregon State
Toledo
Tulsa
Oklahoma State
Baylor
Indiana
Boise State
Rutgers
Wake Forest
Kansas State
Pittsburgh
Utah
Miami, Ohio
Navy
Western Michigan
Vanderbilt
Arkansas
Louisiana Tech
San Diego State
.676
.674
.664
.648
.642
.640
.633
.625
.624
.620
.618
.618
.617
.615
.614
.605
.586
.585
.577
.575
.569
.566
.565
.565
.565
.557
.548
.539
.538
.537
.531
.529
.526
.520
.519
.513
.508
.503
.499
.482
.480
.473
.471
.469
.469
.467
.467
6
8
7
7
6
6
6
6
5
8
4
6
5
5
8
5
4
5
5
6
7
5
6
4
4
6
5
5
5
7
6
4
4
4
7
6
4
4
5
5
6
5
7
4
3
6
4

3
2
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
1
5
3
3
5
1
4
5
5
5
4
3
5
4
5
6
4
5
3
5
2
4
5
6
6
3
4
7
6
5
5
3
4
3
6
6
3
6
.582
.494
.548
.530
.585
.583
.576
.567
.592
.372
.649
.519
.543
.615
.366
.573
.618
.585
.577
.515
.447
.566
.505
.597
.623
.497
.548
.464
.538
.367
.471
.562
.585
.579
.398
.453
.590
.563
.499
.482
.381
.440
.353
.530
.570
.369
.527
23
70
47
54
20
22
32
39
16
110
1
60
48
8
116
35
7
21
31
62
89
40
65
12
4
67
46
80
51
115
78
43
19
25
102
86
17
42
66
74
108
92
118
53
38
112
56
  73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
Nevada
Houston
Central Michigan
Arizona
Northern Illinois
Cincinnati
Washington State
Kentucky
Wyoming
Marshall
Ohio
Ball State
Bowling Green
Memphis
Illinois
Washington
Mississippi
Connecticut
Army
Mississippi State
Arkansas State
Hawaii
UAB
East Carolina
Akron
LA Lafayette
Air Force
SMU
LA Monroe
Eastern Michigan
Mid. Tenn. St.
Duke
Troy
UNLV
Syracuse
Utah State
Florida Atlantic
Rice
Tulane
North Texas
Temple
Idaho
Florida International
San Jose State
New Mexico State
Buffalo
Kent State
.466
.462
.460
.457
.455
.454
.442
.437
.436
.425
.425
.424
.419
.414
.413
.410
.409
.408
.392
.388
.383
.377
.377
.372
.371
.365
.361
.351
.341
.324
.319
.318
.314
.282
.282
.275
.271
.264
.262
.256
.255
.245
.242
.209
.205
.184
.180
6
4
5
3
5
4
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
4
2
2
3
4
3
2
5
4
4
3
4
5
3
3
4
3
3
1
4
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
0
2
2
1
0
1
1
3
4
5
7
4
5
7
6
6
5
5
6
4
5
8
8
6
5
6
7
4
6
5
6
5
5
7
6
5
7
5
9
6
8
8
7
8
8
7
7
10
7
6
8
10
9
9
.368
.462
.460
.579
.422
.487
.563
.538
.496
.458
.457
.484
.387
.447
.599
.597
.509
.440
.492
.559
.352
.435
.409
.470
.403
.365
.479
.448
.371
.439
.388
.571
.368
.456
.519
.431
.441
.496
.416
.407
.578
.394
.372
.422
.507
.391
.384
114
81
82
27
96
72
41
49
69
83
84
73
106
88
11
14
63
91
71
44
119
94
99
79
101
117
76
87
111
93
105
37
113
85
61
95
90
68
98
100
28
103
109
97
64
104
107
*These rankings have benefited from some minor improvements from year-to-year, but their basic formula has remained unaltered throughout the duration of their involvement with the BCS.
 
The Anderson & Hester Rankings are distinct in four ways: 

1. 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 A.P. and coaches' 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 2005 by Jeff Anderson and Chris Hester, all rights reserved