TodaysSports.com

 
 


Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

Sooners Head to the Orange, Huskies to the Rose

1985 Orange Bowl Rematch Should Be in the Works

Whose S.O.S. Ratings Are More Accurate—Ours or the BCS's?

Just How Good Has the Pac-10 Been This Season?

  • Oklahoma caps a perfects regular season 
  • Washington, which handed #4 Miami and #5 Oregon State their only defeats, accomplished more in the regular season than did #3 Florida State—regardless of who Las Vegas would favor if the 2 teams played
  • Florida State edges Miami on the basis of slightly better season-long results
  • Oregon State caps its amazing ascension with a Fiesta Bowl bid vs. the Irish
More College
Football Links
The 2000 Anderson & Hester/Seattle Times
 College Football Computer Rankings, as of Dec. 3
•Previous weeks:
Oct. 1            Oct. 8
Oct. 15          Oct. 22
Oct. 29          Nov. 5
Nov. 12         Nov. 19
Nov. 26

•BCS Standings & other BCS computer rankings (for comparisons)

•Did the BCS Rankings Work Last Season?

•Final 1999-2000 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.
Oklahoma
Washington
Florida State
Miami, Fla.
Oregon State
Virginia Tech
Florida
Oregon
Nebraska
Notre Dame
.836
.816
.809
.807
.790
.780
.759
.755
.750
.737
12
10
11
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2

.560
.602
.585
.588
.563
.547
.574
.580
.573
.557
*to date
26
7
14
13
24
37
19
17
20
30
1-0 
2-1 
1-1 
2-1 
1-1 
0-1 
0-1 
1-1
1-1 
0-1
3-0 
0-0 
2-0 
0-0 
0-0 
0-0
2-0 
0-0 
0-1 
1-0
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 
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.
Georgia Tech
Kansas State
Clemson
Auburn
Texas
Ohio State
Michigan
Purdue
Northwestern
TCU
Wisconsin
UCLA
Tennessee
Iowa State
Texas A&M
.713
.708
.705
.693
.689
.679
.667
.663
.659
.657
.656
.654
.654
.654
.653
9
10
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
10
8
6
8
8
7
2
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
1
4
5
3
3
4
.526
.553
.516
.548
.498
.547
.533
.530
.525
.396
.560
.629
.519
.519
.575
51
32
59
35
67
36
47
50
54
100
28
2
55
56
18
  Pac-10
Big East
Atlantic Coast
Big 12
Big Ten
Southeastern
Conference USA
Mountain West
WAC
Mid-American
Big West

*non-conference play

 .647
.596
.586
.573
.571
.564
.471
.440
.424
.374
.344
 

23
24
19
28
23
27
20
15
12
15
11
 

8
8
9
10
13
9
17
20
20
28
25
 

.501
.442
.478
.428
.487
.411
.447
.482
.499
.463
.457
 

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.
Louisville
Mississippi State
Georgia
LSU
West Virginia
South Carolina
Colorado State
Stanford
Arizona State
Pittsburgh
Toledo
Mississippi
UTEP
Arizona
Syracuse
N.C. State
East Carolina
Virginia
North Carolina
Arkansas
Texas Tech
Southern Miss
Cincinnati
USC
Boston College
Michigan State
Air Force
Western Michigan
Fresno State
Boise State
UAB
Minnesota
Maryland
Washington State
BYU
San Jose State
Illinois
Penn State
Kansas
Colorado
UNLV
California
Central Florida
Alabama
Tulane
.645
.639
.625
.624
.624
.620
.610
.609
.607
.607
.604
.599
.594
.591
.587
.583
.581
.576
.568
.567
.565
.563
.560
.560
.557
.554
.547
.545
.544
.543
.531
.529
.527
.516
.503
.502
.498
.491
.483
.480
.479
.477
.468
.458
.455
9
7
7
7
6
7
9
5
6
7
10
7
8
5
6
7
7
6
6
6
7
7
7
5
6
5
8
9
7
9
7
6
5
4
6
7
5
5
4
3
7
3
7
3
6

2
4
4
4
5
4
2
6
5
4
1
4
3
6
5
4
4
5
5
5
5
4
4
7
5
6
3
3
4
2
4
5
6
7
6
5
6
7
7
8
5
8
4
8
5
.448
.560
.545
.544
.598
.540
.411
.635
.581
.526
.342
.518
.455
.618
.560
.501
.499
.549
.541
.540
.515
.480
.477
.608
.530
.581
.409
.392
.462
.347
.449
.502
.554
.598
.503
.452
.525
.541
.565
.618
.430
.615
.388
.597
.428
83
25
38
39
8
43
97
1
16
52
115
57
80
4
27
65
66
34
40
44
60
70
71
6
48
15
98
104
77
113
82
64
31
9
63
81
53
41
23
3
87
5
106
10
89
  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.
Temple
Northern Illinois
Marshall
Iowa
Ohio
Missouri
Mid. Tenn. St.
Indiana
Idaho
New Mexico
Miami, Ohio
Rutgers
Vanderbilt
Oklahoma State
Akron
Ball State
Utah
Memphis
San Diego State
Kentucky
Tulsa
Utah State
Houston
Baylor
Rice
Wake Forest
SMU
New Mexico State
Hawaii
Eastern Michigan
Louisiana Tech
North Texas
Nevada
Navy
Duke
Central Michigan
Bowling Green
Army
Wyoming
Arkansas State
Connecticut
Buffalo
Kent
LA Monroe
LA Lafayette

.448
.447
.444
.440
.440
.427
.421
.419
.417
.410
.408
.402
.397
.397
.393
.390
.386
.379
.375
.373
.370
.363
.355
.353
.347
.323
.304
.301
.289
.287
.282
.276
.272
.266
.264
.244
.243
.235
.233
.230
.229
.211
.180
.173
.170
4
6
7
3
7
3
6
3
5
5
6
3
3
3
6
5
4
4
3
2
5
5
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
0
2
2
1
1
1
3
2
1
1
1

7
5
5
9
4
8
5
8
6
7
5
8
8
8
5
6
7
7
8
9
7
6
8
9
8
9
9
8
9
8
9
8
10
10
11
9
9
10
10
10
8
9
10
10
10

.530
.420
.395
.594
.361
.566
.395
.558
.444
.459
.382
.540
.535
.535
.368
.416
.466
.459
.512
.571
.418
.389
.490
.550
.482
.516
.448
.429
.430
.413
.422
.400
.466
.514
.589
.419
.418
.474
.471
.467
.342
.374
.392
.380
.374

49
91
101
11
112
22
102
29
85
79
107
42
45
46
111
95
75
78
62
21
93
105
68
33
69
58
84
88
86
96
90
99
76
61
12
92
94
72
73
74
114
109
103
108
110
 

The Anderson & Hester/Seattle Times Rankings are distinct in four ways: 

1. Alone among the BCS computer rankings, 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. 

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 2000  by Jeff Anderson and Chris Hester, all rights reserved