The Only Original and Unaltered 
BCS Computer Rankings...

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

Ohio St. to Tempe, Miami 2 Wins Away
  • There's a huge gap between #2 Miami and #3 Oklahoma (40 points), and another between #7 USC and #8 Michigan (32 points).
  • Unheralded (11-1) Boise St. and (9-2) South Florida both crack the top-25.
  • While #17 Kansas St. has played well of late, the Wildcats have beaten only 1 current top-40 team, and they have lost twice (so they have a losing record vs. the top-40).  Sixteen teams have accomplished more on the season.
  • The Pac-10 is the top conference, with 8 teams among the nation's top-45.
  • #7 USC hosts #4 Notre Dame on Saturday, in the most appealing edition of college football's greatest inter-sectional rivalry in many years.
  • #2 Miami travels to #80 Syracuse before hosting #30 Virginia Tech the following week.
More College
Football Links
The Anderson & Hester College Football 
Computer Rankings, as of Nov. 24
•Nov. 17 Rankings
•Nov. 10 Rankings
•Nov. 3 Rankings
•Oct. 27 Rankings
•Oct. 20 Rankings
•Oct. 13 Rankings
•Oct. 6 Rankings

•Final 2001-02 Rankings

•Final 2001-02 Pre-Bowl Rankings
 
    Rating W  L Sched. 
Strength*		 Sched. 
Rank*		 vs. the 
Top-10		 vs. 
#11-20		 Other 
Losses
1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10.
Ohio State
Miami, Fla.
Oklahoma
Notre Dame
Georgia
Iowa
USC
Michigan
Washington State
Texas
.827
.823
.783
.778
.774
.773
.772
.740
.727
.724
13
10
10
10
10
11
9
9
9
9
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
2
.545
.538
.551
.545
.539
.532
.602
.605
.544
.540
*to date
31
39
27
30
37
45
4
3
32
35
2-0
0-0
1-0
1-0
0-0
1-0
0-1
0-3
1-1
0-1
1-0
2-0
2-0
2-0
1-1
1-0
2-1
1-0
0-0
1-0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
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.
Colorado
Penn State
Alabama
Colorado State
Florida
Florida State
Kansas State
Arkansas
Maryland
UCLA
LSU
Virginia
Pittsburgh
Boise State
South Florida
.716
.714
.709
.707
.707
.700
.691
.681
.669
.668
.668
.668
.666
.659
.656
8
9
9
10
8
8
10
8
9
7
8
8
8
11
9
3
3
3
2
3
4
2
3
3
4
3
4
3
1
2
.590
.573
.568
.508
.579
.608
.489
.549
.521
.591
.534
.572
.533
.391
.460
6
12
17
59
11
2
66
28
52
5
41
13
44
113
79
  Pac-10
Southeastern
Big Ten
Atlantic Coast
Big 12
Big East
Mountain West
Conference USA
Mid-American
WAC
Sun Belt

*non-conference play

.617
.599
.599
.595
.581
.561
.469
.420
.403
.395
.343
29
35
33
25
36
26
18
15
22
13
10
10
11
13
12
15
14
23
24
33
27
32
.469
.439
.467
.489
.456
.471
.505
.489
.462
.500
.501
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.
N.C. State
Auburn
Texas Tech
West Virginia
Virginia Tech
Oregon State
Tennessee
California
Washington
Boston College
Clemson
Georgia Tech
Wisconsin
TCU
Kentucky
Iowa State
Arizona State
Bowling Green
Oregon
Hawaii
Minnesota
Toledo
Nebraska
Louisville
Wake Forest
Purdue
Texas A&M
Air Force
Marshall
Northern Illinois
South Carolina
Mississippi
Fresno State
Oklahoma State
Miami, Ohio
Missouri
Illinois
North Texas
Cincinnati
Southern Miss
New Mexico St.
New Mexico
Arizona
Michigan State
Central Florida
Utah
.653
.649
.648
.647
.637
.630
.620
.619
.618
.615
.612
.612
.608
.601
.600
.591
.591
.584
.581
.576
.567
.566
.564
.559
.557
.553
.550
.548
.545
.545
.539
.535
.527
.519
.518
.510
.506
.492
.491
.487
.471
.469
.469
.466
.452
.447
10
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
7
7
7
9
7
9
7
8
7
7
6
6
6
8
8
8
5
5
7
6
7
5
5
7
5
6
7
6
4
4
6
5
3
4
5
3
3
4
4
5
5
4
5
4
6
2
4
6
5
2
5
2
5
3
5
4
5
6
5
4
2
4
7
6
5
5
5
7
7
5
6
5
5
6
7
8
5
6
.491
.552
.582
.512
.500
.531
.539
.570
.570
.534
.564
.531
.586
.415
.518
.569
.542
.385
.532
.377
.517
.427
.514
.477
.530
.553
.523
.447
.360
.444
.589
.562
.477
.492
.468
.560
.556
.442
.518
.460
.422
.469
.551
.567
.425
.474
65
25
10
57
60
47
36
14
15
42
19
48
9
108
54
16
34
114
46
115
55
96
56
69
49
24
51
84
117
87
7
20
70
64
74
21
23
88
53
80
103
73
26
18
100
71
  72.
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.
Tulane
Ball State
San Jose State
North Carolina
Stanford
Connecticut
Temple
BYU
Syracuse
Nevada
East Carolina
UAB
Utah State
San Diego State
Mississippi State
Indiana
Baylor
UNLV
Northwestern
Louisiana Tech
Houston
Western Michigan
Vanderbilt
Arkansas State
Ohio
Duke
Akron
Central Michigan
Troy State
Rice
LA Lafayette
Memphis
Mid. Tenn. St.
Kansas
Wyoming
Kent State
LA Monroe
SMU
Eastern Michigan
Rutgers
Idaho
UTEP
Navy
Tulsa
Army
Buffalo
.445
.441
.436
.433
.432
.432
.432
.418
.414
.413
.412
.409
.403
.400
.400
.390
.383
.381
.376
.367
.362
.360
.353
.352
.348
.341
.338
.331
.322
.317
.305
.304
.295
.295
.292
.286
.284
.282
.279
.262
.256
.248
.243
.200
.196
.178
7
6
6
3
2
6
4
5
4
5
4
5
4
4
3
3
3
4
3
4
4
4
2
6
4
2
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
5
5
7
9
9
6
8
7
7
7
6
6
6
8
8
9
9
7
9
7
7
8
10
7
7
10
8
8
8
7
9
8
8
10
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
11
10
11
.396
.415
.459
.587
.630
.432
.533
.467
.496
.462
.472
.436
.462
.500
.538
.543
.535
.461
.528
.447
.441
.458
.560
.373
.426
.547
.434
.426
.416
.392
.449
.433
.423
.494
.480
.427
.424
.422
.418
.510
.445
.435
.485
.429
.416
.394
110
109
81
8
1
94
43
75
62
77
72
90
76
61
38
33
40
78
50
85
89
82
22
116
98
29
92
99
106
112
83
93
102
63
68
97
101
104
105
58
86
91
67
95
107
111
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 2002 by Jeff Anderson and Chris Hester, all rights reserved