Yellow Number 4 Brett Favre T-Shirt
 

One of the Original BCS Computer Rankings...

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most — to Date

With Win Over LSU, Florida Moves to #1

  • The #1 Gators — the only undefeated team to have posted 2 wins versus the current top-25 — have accomplished the most of any team so far this season
  • After beating Texas in Austin, West Virginia vaults from #12 to #2
  • Kentucky, Arizona, and Stanford have played the three toughest schedules to date
More College
Football Links

The Jeff Anderson & Chris Hester
College Football Computer Rankings, as of Oct. 7

Oct. 3 Rankings

Final 2011-12 Rankings
Final '11 Pre-Bowl Rankings


 

Rating
 W 
 L 
Sched.
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
vs. Current
Top-10
vs. Current
#11-25
Other 
Losses
1.
Florida
.834
5
0
.557
14
0-0
2-0
0
2.
West Virginia
.829
5
0
.548
16
0-0
1-0
0
3.
Notre Dame
.828
5
0
.546
17
0-0
1-0
0
4.
Oregon State
.820
4
0
.532
24
0-0
0-0
0
5.
Ohio State
.819
6
0
.531
25
0-0
1-0
0
6.
South Carolina
.818
6
0
.529
26
0-0
1-0
0
7.
Oregon
.795
6
0
.492
56
0-0
0-0
0
8.
Alabama
.794
5
0
.491
57
0-0
0-0
0
9.
Kansas State
.782
5
0
.473
69
0-0
0-0
0
10.
Mississippi State
.763
5
0
.446
88
0-0
0-0
0
Rank Team 
Rating
 W 
 L 
Sched. 
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
Conference
Rankings
Rating
W*
 L*
Sched.
Strength*
11. Stanford
.762
4
1
.601
3
  Big 12
.654
26
3
.402
12. Georgia
.744
5
1
.555
15
  Southeastern
.623
30
7
.430
13. Louisville
.729
5
0
.402
113
  Big Ten
.595
34
13
.458
14. Louisiana Tech
.727
5
0
.400
114
  Pac-12
.574
23
9
.440
15. Iowa State
.718
4
1
.545
18
  Big East
.524
20
10
.423
16. Cincinnati
.717
4
0
.388
117
  Atlantic Coast
.500
26
14
.410
17. Rutgers
.716
5
0
.387
119
  WAC
.463
20
14
.411
18. USC
.716
4
1
.543
19
  Sun Belt
.446
16
19
.472
19. Texas
.715
4
1
.542
20
  Mid-American
.435
21
23
.448
20. Ohio
.697
6
0
.365
122
  Mountain West
.406
17
23
.451
21. Texas Tech
.694
4
1
.516
35
  Conference USA
.375
11
34
.531
22. Texas A&M
.684
4
1
.505
41
  *non-conference play
23. Boise State
.683
4
1
.503
42
 
24. LSU
.677
5
1
.473
70
 
25. Michigan State
.658
4
2
.562
12
 
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.
Western Kentucky
.657
4
1
.474
68
 
76.
Temple
.466
2
2
.466
76
27.
Baylor
.652
3
1
.502
45
 
77.
Navy
.460
2
3
.521
33
28.
Tulsa
.651
5
1
.444
89
 
78.
Arkansas
.458
2
4
.559
13
29.
Arizona State
.649
4
1
.465
77
 
79.
Ball State
.454
3
3
.454
82
30.
Northwestern
.649
5
1
.442
92
 
80.
Virginia Tech
.452
3
3
.452
84
31.
Oklahoma
.647
3
1
.496
49
 
81.
Utah
.449
2
3
.509
37
32.
Duke
.644
5
1
.436
96
 
82.
East Carolina
.447
3
3
.447
87
33.
TCU
.638
4
1
.454
83
 
83.
Bowling Green
.440
3
3
.440
94
34.
Florida State
.638
5
1
.430
97
 
84.
San Diego State
.440
3
3
.440
95
35.
Toledo
.637
5
1
.430
98
 
85.
Syracuse
.433
2
3
.493
53
36.
Washington
.636
3
2
.579
8
 
86.
Illinois
.431
2
4
.532
23
37.
Clemson
.634
5
1
.426
102
 
87.
SMU
.430
2
3
.489
59
38.
Penn State
.630
4
2
.532
22
 
88.
Western Michigan
.429
3
3
.429
99
39.
Arizona
.630
3
3
.630
2
 
89.
Texas State
.425
2
3
.485
63
40.
San Jose State
.626
4
1
.441
93
 
90.
Virginia
.423
2
4
.523
29
41.
Miami, Fla.
.620
4
2
.521
32
 
91.
Houston
.419
2
3
.478
66
42.
Northern Illinois
.614
5
1
.405
112
 
92.
Auburn
.411
1
4
.597
4
43.
Minnesota
.604
4
1
.418
105
 
93.
South Florida
.409
2
4
.509
38
44.
Nevada
.596
5
1
.387
118
 
94.
UAB
.402
1
4
.589
6
45.
Nebraska
.595
4
2
.495
50
 
95.
Marshall
.402
2
4
.502
44
46.
N.C. State
.593
4
2
.493
54
 
96.
Mid. Tenn. St.
.401
3
2
.345
123
47.
UCLA
.593
4
2
.493
55
 
97.
North Texas
.398
2
4
.498
48
48.
Wisconsin
.590
4
2
.489
60
 
98.
Washington State
.394
2
4
.494
51
49.
Michigan
.588
3
2
.528
27
 
99.
Indiana
.390
2
3
.449
86
50.
Iowa
.583
3
2
.524
28
 
100.
Georgia Tech
.371
2
4
.469
73
51.
Tennessee
.582
3
2
.523
30
 
101.
Pittsburgh
.369
2
3
.426
101
52.
UTSA
.579
5
0
.255
124
 
102.
South Alabama
.336
1
4
.518
34
53.
LA Lafayette
.578
4
1
.392
116
 
103.
Buffalo
.325
1
4
.506
40
54.
Missouri
.575
3
3
.575
9
 
104.
Air Force
.325
2
3
.380
121
55.
Kent State
.566
4
1
.380
120
 
105.
Florida Atlantic
.322
1
4
.502
43
56.
Central Florida
.548
3
2
.488
61
 
106.
Kansas
.315
1
4
.494
52
57.
Troy
.547
3
2
.487
62
 
107.
Fla. International
.306
1
5
.507
39
58.
BYU
.543
4
2
.442
91
 
108.
Hawaii
.305
1
4
.483
65
59.
Vanderbilt
.535
2
3
.594
5
 
109.
Boston College
.295
1
4
.471
71
60.
Fresno State
.528
4
2
.427
100
 
110.
UTEP
.293
1
5
.491
58
61.
North Carolina
.525
4
2
.424
103
 
111.
Wyoming
.292
1
4
.467
74
62.
LA Monroe
.524
3
2
.464
78
 
112.
Rice
.268
1
5
.461
80
63.
Oklahoma State
.522
2
2
.522
31
 
113.
Southern Miss
.263
0
5
.588
7
64.
Purdue
.520
3
2
.460
81
 
114.
UNLV
.259
1
5
.450
85
65.
Utah State
.509
4
2
.409
109
 
115.
Akron
.253
1
5
.442
90
66.
New Mexico
.500
3
3
.500
46
 
116.
Army
.252
1
4
.417
106
67.
Mississippi
.500
3
3
.500
47
 
117.
Tulane
.246
0
5
.566
11
68.
Connecticut
.485
3
3
.485
64
 
118.
Colorado
.245
1
4
.408
110
69.
Maryland
.479
3
2
.419
104
 
119.
Memphis
.233
1
4
.393
115
70.
Miami, Ohio
.477
3
3
.477
67
 
120.
New Mexico State
.233
1
5
.415
107
71.
Central Michigan
.474
2
3
.534
21
 
121.
Idaho
.233
1
5
.415
108
72.
Kentucky
.473
1
5
.677
1
 
122.
Colorado State
.228
1
5
.408
111
73.
California
.471
2
4
.572
10
 
123.
Massachusetts
.207
0
6
.511
36
74.
Wake Forest
.470
3
3
.470
72
 
124.
Eastern Michigan
.177
0
5
.463
79
75.
Arkansas State
.466
3
3
.466
75
               

 
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 fifth 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 2012 by AndersonSports, all rights reserved