Give Promo They Actually Want

Part of the BCS Throughout Its Entire 16-Year Run...

Showing Which Teams Have the Best Win-Loss Records Considering Their Schedules—to Date

Huskies’ Regular Season Is the Best Since ’98

  • Washington has played the hardest regular-season schedule of any unbeaten team in the 26 years since the start of the BCS era (in 1998) and therefore has posted the highest rating (surpassing Ohio State’s .847 in 2019) (*note: Ohio State posted an .854 rating going into the bowls in 2019, but that was after the conference championship games, rather than at the end of the regular season)
  • In the past half-century, only 7 Pac-12 (or Pac-10) teams have gone undefeated in the regular season: USC in 1979 (with a tie); Washington in 1991; Arizona State in 1996; USC in 2004 and 2005; Oregon in 2010; and now Washington in 2023
  • The #1 Huskies have won twice as many games versus the current top-25 (4) as any other top-10 team (6 are tied with 2 wins apiece)
  • With its victory over current-#5 Ohio State, Michigan is now the clear #2 team based on accomplishments to date
  • The 12 toughest schedules in the nation have all been played by Pac-12 (9) or Big Ten (3) teams
More College
Football Links

The Jeff Anderson & Chris Hester
College Football Computer Rankings, as of Nov. 26

Nov. 20 Rankings
Nov. 13 Rankings
Nov. 6 Rankings
Oct. 30 Rankings
Oct. 23 Rankings

Final 2022-23 Rankings
Final ’22 Pre-Bowl Rankings

Rating
 W 
 L 
Sched.
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
vs. Current
Top-10
vs. Current
#11-25
Other 
Losses
1.
Washington
.851
12
0
.587
12
1-0
3-0
0
2.
Michigan
.834
12
0
.556
36
2-0
0-0
0
3.
Georgia
.813
12
0
.520
64
1-0
1-0
0
4.
Florida State
.810
12
0
.516
66
0-0
1-0
0
5.
Ohio State
.800
11
1
.572
20
1-1
1-0
0
6.
Texas
.796
11
1
.565
24
1-0
0-1
0
7.
Oregon
.796
11
1
.565
25
0-1
2-0
0
8.
Alabama
.784
11
1
.548
43
1-1
1-0
0
9.
Penn State
.758
10
2
.573
19
0-2
1-0
0
10.
Mississippi
.750
10
2
.563
27
0-2
2-0
0

Rank Team 
Rating
 W 
 L 
Sched. 
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
Conference
Rankings
Rating
W*
 L*
Sched.
Strength*
11.
Iowa
.749
10
2
.561
30
  Big Ten
.607
33
9
.430
12.
Oklahoma
.742
10
2
.552
39
  Pac-12
.606
29
7
.416
13.
Missouri
.735
10
2
.543
48
  Southeastern
.606
45
11
.417
14.
Liberty
.734
12
0
.408
124
  Atlantic Coast
.577
39
17
.457
15.
James Madison
.727
11
1
.470
85
  Big 12
.569
30
12
.438
16.
Louisville
.716
10
2
.519
65
  Sun Belt
.501
34
22
.437
17.
LSU
.715
9
3
.575
17
  Mountain West
.471
25
24
.465
18.
Arizona
.704
9
3
.562
29
  Conference USA
.431
18
19
.439
19.
Utah
.693
8
4
.600
7
  American Athletic
.420
24
31
.458
20.
Oregon State
.683
8
4
.590
11
  Mid-American
.395
20
28
.444
21.
Tulane
.682
11
1
.416
121
  *non-conference play
22.
Notre Dame
.677
9
3
.530
57
 
23.
N.C. State
.672
9
3
.524
61
 
24.
Toledo
.672
11
1
.405
125
 
25.
Oklahoma State
.672
9
3
.524
62
 
n/a n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a


 

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.
Troy
.664
10
2
.458
95
 
81.
Georgia State
.492
6
6
.492
75
27.
USC
.663
7
5
.616
3
 
82.
Marshall
.492
6
6
.492
76
28.
Kansas State
.657
8
4
.561
31
 
83.
BYU
.490
5
7
.540
51
29.
Clemson
.641
8
4
.544
47
 
84.
South Alabama
.480
6
6
.480
80
30.
Tennessee
.639
8
4
.541
50
 
85.
Arizona State
.475
3
9
.627
1
31.
Kansas
.637
8
4
.539
53
 
86.
Texas State
.474
7
5
.424
116
32.
North Carolina
.621
8
4
.522
63
 
87.
Arkansas State
.469
6
6
.469
87
33.
Iowa State
.611
7
5
.562
28
 
88.
Georgia Southern
.468
6
6
.468
89
34.
Wisconsin
.607
7
5
.558
33
 
89.
Stanford
.464
3
9
.616
2
35.
West Virginia
.606
8
4
.507
67
 
90.
Utah State
.460
6
6
.460
93
36.
UCLA
.605
7
5
.557
35
 
91.
Wake Forest
.441
4
8
.542
49
37.
Northwestern
.602
7
5
.553
38
 
92.
Arkansas
.436
4
8
.537
56
38.
SMU
.600
10
2
.391
128
 
93.
Louisiana 
.433
6
6
.433
108
39.
Miami, Fla.
.598
7
5
.549
42
 
94.
Army
.432
5
6
.459
94
40.
Maryland
.597
7
5
.548
45
 
95.
Rice
.429
6
6
.429
112
41.
UNLV
.596
9
3
.443
103
 
96.
Houston
.428
4
8
.529
58
42.
Miami, Ohio
.595
10
2
.386
130
 
97.
Virginia
.427
3
9
.580
15
43.
Duke
.594
7
5
.545
46
 
98.
Indiana
.425
3
9
.579
16
44.
California
.594
6
6
.594
8
 
99.
South Florida
.417
6
6
.417
120
45.
Memphis
.592
9
3
.438
106
 
100.
Colorado State
.401
5
7
.450
100
46.
Texas A&M
.589
7
5
.539
52
 
101.
Hawaii
.399
5
8
.467
90
47.
Kentucky
.587
7
5
.538
55
 
102.
Pittsburgh
.395
3
9
.548
44
48.
Rutgers
.581
6
6
.581
14
 
103.
Baylor
.386
3
9
.538
54
49.
Wyoming
.574
8
4
.473
82
 
104.
Navy
.385
5
6
.411
123
50.
New Mexico St.
.571
10
3
.405
126
 
105.
North Texas
.381
5
7
.430
111
51.
Auburn
.564
6
6
.564
26
 
106.
Northern Illinois
.380
6
6
.380
131
52.
Appalachian St.
.562
8
4
.461
92
 
107.
Mid. Tenn. St.
.374
4
8
.472
83
53.
Georgia Tech
.558
6
6
.558
32
 
108.
Cincinnati
.373
3
9
.525
60
54.
Texas Tech
.552
6
6
.552
40
 
109.
Eastern Michigan
.372
6
6
.372
132
55.
Virginia Tech
.549
6
6
.549
41
 
110.
San Diego State
.372
4
8
.471
84
56.
San Jose State
.547
7
5
.497
72
 
111.
Central Michigan
.370
5
7
.418
119
57.
Minnesota
.544
5
7
.593
9
 
112.
Western Michigan
.370
4
8
.468
88
58.
Coastal Carolina
.543
7
5
.493
74
 
113.
New Mexico
.368
4
8
.466
91
59.
Washington State
.541
5
7
.591
10
 
114.
Vanderbilt
.361
2
10
.568
21
60.
Boise State
.541
7
5
.491
77
 
115.
Ball State
.355
4
8
.453
98
61.
Illinois
.535
5
7
.584
13
 
116.
UAB
.354
4
8
.452
99
62.
Air Force
.532
8
4
.431
110
 
117.
Southern Miss
.354
3
9
.504
68
63.
Fresno State
.529
8
4
.428
115
 
118.
Tulsa
.352
4
8
.449
102
64.
Old Dominion
.525
6
6
.525
59
 
119.
Massachusetts
.350
3
9
.500
71
65.
Florida
.524
5
7
.574
18
 
120.
Florida Atlantic
.334
4
8
.429
113
66.
UTSA
.523
8
4
.422
117
 
121.
Connecticut
.333
3
9
.481
79
67.
Jacksonville St.
.521
8
4
.420
118
 
122.
UTEP
.327
3
9
.475
81
68.
Ohio
.519
9
3
.368
133
 
123.
Fla. International
.320
4
8
.413
122
69.
South Carolina
.517
5
7
.566
22
 
124.
Louisiana Tech
.299
3
9
.442
104
70.
Nebraska
.516
5
7
.565
23
 
125.
Buffalo
.297
3
9
.439
105
71.
Michigan State
.509
4
8
.609
4
 
126.
Sam Houston St.
.296
3
9
.438
107
72.
Mississippi State
.508
5
7
.558
34
 
127.
Temple
.290
3
9
.431
109
73.
Western Kentucky
.506
7
5
.456
96
 
128.
LA Monroe
.288
2
10
.485
78
74.
Bowling Green
.506
7
5
.456
97
 
129.
Charlotte
.288
3
9
.429
114
75.
Colorado
.505
4
8
.605
5
 
130.
Nevada
.275
2
10
.469
86
76.
Purdue
.504
4
8
.603
6
 
131.
East Carolina
.259
2
10
.449
101
77.
TCU
.503
5
7
.553
37
 
132.
Akron
.214
2
10
.388
129
78.
Syracuse
.503
6
6
.503
69
 
133.
Kent State
.184
1
11
.403
127
79.
UCF
.503
6
6
.503
70
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
80.
Boston College
.493
6
6
.493
73
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
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.  Posting large margins 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 ninth week, and each team’s ranking reflects its actual accomplishments — on the field, to date — 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 2023 by AndersonSports, all rights reserved