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

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

Following a Classic, the Trojans Are #1
  • In what was likely the best game since Miami-Ohio St. in the 2003 Fiesta Bowl, USC survives the Irish in South Bend to move to #1
  • The Trojans have beaten 3 current top-30 teams, all on the road
  • Texas rises to #2, largely on the strength of the Longhorns' win over Colorado and Ohio State's win over Michigan State
  • All but 2 Big Ten teams are in the current top-40
  • Arizona State has played the toughest schedule to date; Oklahoma has played the 2nd-toughest
  • About halfway through this season, only 7 undefeated teams remain, and 2 of them play each other next week (#8 Texas Tech at #2 Texas)
More College
Football Links
The Anderson & Hester College Football 
Computer Rankings, as of Oct. 17 
•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.
USC
Texas
Virginia Tech
Georgia
Alabama
UCLA
Penn State
Texas Tech
Wisconsin
LSU
.849
.835
.828
.821
.810
.791
.784
.776
.761
.753
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
.584
.557
.547
.535
.516
.486
.592
.464
.560
.589
*to date
14
29
32
39
51
70
10
84
28
11
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
2-0
1-0
1-0
1-0
1-0
0-0
3-1
1-0
2-1
1-1
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.
Boston College
Oregon
Miami, Fla.
Florida State
West Virginia
TCU
Nebraska
Ohio State
Florida
Minnesota
Northwestern
Auburn
Tennessee
Michigan
Notre Dame
.748
.736
.734
.724
.714
.712
.711
.709
.706
.697
.687
.686
.670
.663
.663
6
6
5
5
6
6
5
4
5
5
4
5
3
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
.543
.527
.542
.530
.499
.497
.513
.619
.586
.577
.594
.484
.615
.623
.567
33
44
34
43
61
62
53
6
13
17
9
71
7
4
22
  Big Ten
Atlantic Coast
Big 12
Southeastern
Pac-10
Big East
Mountain West
Conference USA
Mid-American
WAC
Sun Belt
*non-conference play
.653
.632
.616
.598
.584
.517
.493
.462
.412
.363
.313
27
22
31
21
22
18
13
13
12
7
5
6
7
5
6
7
12
12
17
22
19
22
.457
.474
.388
.427
.425
.457
.481
.502
.500
.502
.503
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.
Colorado
Maryland
Georgia Tech
Arizona State
Oklahoma
Michigan State
Iowa
Virginia
Louisville
Clemson
Oregon State
Kansas State
Missouri
Indiana
Texas A&M
UTEP
Fresno State
Toledo
California
Baylor
South Carolina
Vanderbilt
Boise State
New Mexico
Bowling Green
Wyoming
Tulsa
Colorado State
North Carolina
South Florida
Southern Miss
BYU
Stanford
N.C. State
Central Michigan
Iowa State
Rutgers
Navy
Wake Forest
Kansas
Mississippi State
East Carolina
Washington State
Nevada
Central Florida
Oklahoma State
Marshall
.660
.657
.650
.648
.635
.633
.631
.624
.620
.619
.613
.613
.612
.596
.595
.592
.588
.582
.574
.570
.569
.566
.555
.543
.539
.539
.537
.537
.537
.532
.528
.525
.524
.520
.516
.511
.510
.503
.499
.489
.478
.478
.477
.471
.469
.467
.467
4
4
4
3
3
4
5
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
2
3
3
3
3
2
4
3
4
3
2
3
2
3
3
4
3
3
3

2
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
5
3
4
3
3
2
3
3
3
.564
.561
.553
.648
.635
.535
.502
.525
.521
.619
.514
.513
.513
.496
.495
.406
.402
.374
.443
.469
.569
.524
.454
.500
.438
.496
.495
.537
.596
.532
.468
.525
.464
.580
.473
.511
.409
.443
.628
.489
.579
.478
.477
.372
.469
.467
.467
24
26
30
1
2
38
59
46
48
5
52
54
55
64
65
109
111
115
94
76
18
47
90
60
96
63
66
36
8
41
79
45
83
15
75
56
108
95
3
69
16
73
74
116
77
80
81
  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.
Connecticut
Pittsburgh
Arkansas
Purdue
Houston
Northern Illinois
Miami, Ohio
Cincinnati
San Diego State
Mississippi
Utah
Memphis
Air Force
Illinois
Ohio
Mid. Tenn. St.
Akron
UAB
LA Monroe
Eastern Michigan
Louisiana Tech
Western Michigan
Tulane
Hawaii
Arkansas State
SMU
North Texas
Washington
Kentucky
Duke
Ball State
Syracuse
Troy
UNLV
Utah State
Arizona
Florida International
Temple
Florida Atlantic
Army
Rice
Kent State
San Jose State
LA Lafayette
New Mexico State
Idaho
Buffalo
.466
.462
.461
.460
.459
.454
.453
.452
.451
.438
.436
.435
.420
.419
.417
.409
.402
.399
.394
.393
.385
.376
.373
.367
.366
.363
.362
.361
.351
.345
.345
.327
.324
.308
.308
.306
.286
.263
.252
.247
.245
.244
.238
.235
.222
.218
.148
4
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
2
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
3
3
3
4
3
5
3
5
4
6
5
5
4
5
3
5
4
7
6
6
5
5
5
5
7
5
6
.368
.505
.562
.561
.459
.454
.453
.452
.494
.539
.479
.435
.463
.519
.518
.468
.402
.399
.436
.434
.444
.376
.431
.465
.366
.491
.419
.569
.535
.569
.552
.531
.418
.430
.361
.508
.460
.588
.457
.568
.565
.429
.421
.417
.533
.395
.411
117
58
25
27
87
89
91
92
67
35
72
98
85
49
50
78
110
112
97
99
93
114
100
82
118
68
104
19
37
20
31
42
105
101
119
57
86
12
88
21
23
102
103
106
40
113
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