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

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

USC Opens Up Where It Left Off:  At #1
  • The Big Ten has been the top conference so far this season, with 10 teams in the top-60
  • The SEC and ACC are very strong at the top, with a combined 9 teams in the top-15
  • #102 (0-3) Rice has played the toughest schedule to date (#8 Texas, #9 UCLA, and #42 UAB), while #27 (4-0) Texas Tech has played the easiest one (#49 Kansas, #107 Florida International, non-I-A Sam Houston State, and Larry Bird's alma mater, non-I-A Indiana State)
More College
Football Links
The Anderson & Hester College Football 
Computer Rankings, as of Oct. 3 
•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.
USC
Alabama
Florida State
Virginia Tech
Penn State
Wisconsin
Georgia
Texas
UCLA
Florida
.838
.826
.825
.822
.819
.816
.805
.803
.795
.771
4
5
4
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
.564
.543
.540
.535
.531
.525
.508
.505
.493
.613
*to date
20
30
32
36
42
45
54
55
62
8
0-0
1-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-1
1-0
0-0
1-0
2-0
1-0
0-0
0-0
1-0
0-0
1-0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
Miami, Fla.
Georgia Tech
Nebraska
Tennessee
LSU
Minnesota
Notre Dame
Michigan State
California
Ohio State
TCU
Colorado
West Virginia
Oregon
Auburn
.770
.768
.757
.750
.728
.713
.709
.708
.703
.689
.682
.680
.676
.670
.669
3
3
4
3
2
4
4
4
5
3
4
3
4
4
4
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
.643
.640
.438
.618
.641
.539
.534
.533
.371
.544
.502
.534
.496
.489
.488
3
5
94
7
4
33
37
41
114
29
56
38
60
65
66
  Big Ten
Atlantic Coast
Big 12
Southeastern
Pac-10
Big East
Mountain West
Conference USA
Mid-American
WAC
Sun Belt
*non-conference play
.660
.635
.625
.615
.577
.531
.495
.456
.406
.363
.313
27
19
31
19
21
17
12
13
11
6
5
6
6
5
6
7
12
11
16
21
19
21
.465
.477
.397
.456
.423
.480
.482
.487
.500
.521
.497
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.
Boston College
Texas Tech
Wyoming
North Carolina
Michigan
Arizona State
Indiana
Louisville
South Florida
Maryland
Vanderbilt
Iowa State
Virginia
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Texas A&M
UAB
Clemson
UTEP
Fresno State
Northwestern
Colorado State
Southern Miss
Kansas
Oregon State
Connecticut
Baylor
Iowa
Boise State
Utah
South Carolina
Oklahoma State
Purdue
Toledo
Wake Forest
Washington State
Eastern Michigan
New Mexico
Ohio
Miami, Ohio
Central Florida
Rutgers
Missouri
Tulane
Mississippi State
Cincinnati
Bowling Green
.669
.658
.655
.651
.645
.641
.636
.635
.629
.620
.617
.613
.611
.603
.584
.584
.581
.576
.572
.570
.564
.563
.560
.559
.557
.553
.551
.545
.545
.544
.534
.533
.533
.533
.520
.520
.518
.515
.510
.497
.495
.494
.491
.490
.482
.481
.481
4
4
4
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2

1
0
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
3
1
2
1
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
3
2
2
.487
.324
.472
.651
.588
.584
.485
.483
.571
.561
.431
.460
.459
.450
.584
.430
.428
.634
.418
.469
.564
.563
.459
.405
.497
.400
.397
.485
.545
.484
.593
.381
.533
.381
.580
.368
.457
.455
.510
.497
.495
.345
.491
.390
.542
.481
.481
67
119
77
2
10
13
68
71
18
23
96
81
83
88
12
97
98
6
103
79
21
22
82
106
59
107
108
69
28
70
9
112
40
113
14
115
84
86
53
58
61
118
64
110
31
72
73
  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.
Central Michigan
Houston
Air Force
N.C. State
Tulsa
Illinois
Akron
San Diego State
Arkansas
Mississippi
Western Michigan
Memphis
Syracuse
Louisiana Tech
Nevada
Marshall
Hawai'i
LA Monroe
Kentucky
East Carolina
Mid. Tenn. St.
Washington
North Texas
Arizona
Arkansas State
Navy
Pittsburgh
SMU
BYU
Rice
Stanford
LA Lafayette
Troy
Northern Illinois
Florida International
Duke
San Jose State
Kent State
Utah State
UNLV
New Mexico State
Temple
Army
Idaho
Ball State
Florida Atlantic
Buffalo
.476
.470
.467
.459
.454
.450
.444
.442
.434
.426
.422
.421
.418
.418
.416
.410
.403
.390
.379
.370
.369
.368
.365
.342
.337
.337
.337
.332
.331
.329
.328
.326
.310
.305
.303
.302
.285
.277
.267
.259
.250
.244
.232
.229
.226
.222
.170
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
3
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
2
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
2
3
3
2
4
4
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
4
3
4
2
4
5
5
4
4
4
5
4
.536
.470
.527
.560
.514
.510
.444
.502
.587
.579
.365
.421
.572
.519
.416
.410
.557
.448
.531
.522
.521
.553
.463
.491
.393
.432
.519
.514
.479
.663
.423
.473
.455
.449
.446
.479
.426
.448
.354
.426
.572
.564
.548
.387
.539
.534
.451
35
78
44
24
51
52
93
57
11
15
116
102
17
49
104
105
25
91
43
46
47
26
80
63
109
95
48
50
75
1
101
76
85
89
92
74
100
90
117
99
16
19
27
111
34
39
87
*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