Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

Nebraska vs. Miami:  the Right Matchup
  • Nebraska deserves the Rose Bowl bid because, over the course of the season, on the field, the (11-1) Cornhuskers amassed the best won-lost record considering their schedule of any team aside from (11-0) Miami.  Quite simply, it is harder to go 11-1 versus Nebraska's schedule than to go 10-1 versus Oregon's slightly easier schedule, or to go 10-2 versus Colorado's or Tennessee's more difficult—but not dramatically more difficult—schedules. 
  • For those who think Colorado should be going to the Rose Bowl instead of Nebraska on the basis of head-to-head play, why should Colorado go ahead of Oregon?  The Buffs are 2-2 versus current top-20 teams (.500); the Ducks are 2-1 (.667).  If the Ducks were to have played 1 more top-20 team and lost, then they still would have matched Colorado's 2-2 won-lost record versus the top-20.  Colorado has played #2, #8 (twice), and #19 (average rank of #9); Oregon has played #6, #12, and #16 (average rank of #11).  If Oregon had played a top-4 team and lost, then both Oregon and Colorado would have gone 2-2 versus four teams whose average ranking is #9.
  • To argue that only conference champions should be eligible for the national championship game is to completely and unreasonably overlook the results of non-conference play (see Colorado versus Fresno State).  Aside from Miami, Oregon is the conference champion most deserving of a Rose Bowl bid, but why should the Rose not be able to select the slightly more deserving Cornhuskers?
  • Once again, college football's regular season proves to be the most exciting in all of sports (in large part because its season doesn't end with yet another generic playoff, making every regular-season game crucial), before giving way to the unique color and pageantry of the bowls. 
  • The BCS got it just right:  #3 vs. #4 in the Fiesta Bowl; #1 vs. #2 in the Rose.
More College
Football Links
The Anderson & Hester College Football 
Computer Rankings, end of regular season
•Dec. 2 Rankings
•Nov. 25 Rankings
•Nov. 18 Rankings
•Nov. 11 Rankings
•Nov. 4 Rankings
•Oct. 28 Rankings
•Oct. 21 Rankings
•Oct. 14 Rankings
•Oct. 7 Rankings
•Sept. 30 Rankings

•Final 2000-01 Rankings

•Final 2000-01 Pre-Bowl 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.
Miami, Fla.
Nebraska
Oregon
Colorado
Tennessee
Stanford
Illinois
Texas
Florida
Oklahoma
.825
.801
.795
.784
.780
.770
.768
.766
.756
.755
11
11
10
10
10
9
10
10
9
10
0
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2

.541
.573
.570
.608
.603
.600
.530
.584
.581
.569
*to date
46
26
31
8
11
13
49
21
23
32
0-0
1-1
0-1
2-1
1-0
1-0
0-0
1-2
0-1
1-1
2-0 
0-0
2-0
0-1
3-1
1-2
0-1
0-0
2-0
0-0
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1
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.
LSU
Washington State
Washington
Maryland
Syracuse
UCLA
BYU
Michigan
Fresno State
South Carolina
Georgia
Auburn
Arkansas
Texas A&M
Kansas State
.738
.732
.729
.729
.708
.708
.705
.699
.698
.696
.684
.683
.665
.658
.657
9
9
8
10
9
7
12
8
11
8
8
7
7
7
6
3
2
3
1
3
4
1
3
2
3
3
4
4
4
5
.602
.550
.606
.478
.566
.635
.438
.570
.488
.566
.552
.607
.588
.580
.632
12
41
10
73
35
2
89
30
67
34
40
9
20
24
3
  Pac-10
Big 12
Southeastern
Big Ten
Big East
Atlantic Coast
Mountain West
WAC
Conference USA
Mid-American
Sun Belt

*non-conference play

 .654
.648
.631
.580
.560
.556
.488
.480
.412
.393
.284
 

24
33
29
22
22
19
18
16
17
18
5
 

6
5
7
12
11
11
17
20
25
25
31
 
 

.471
.416
.442
.491
.459
.476
.479
.514
.469
.441
.501
 

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.
Texas Tech
Florida State
USC
Louisville
Virginia Tech
Iowa State
Ohio State
Alabama
Marshall
Mississippi
Boston College
North Carolina
Toledo
N.C. State
Purdue
Hawaii
Utah
Notre Dame
Bowling Green
Iowa
Penn State
Georgia Tech
Louisiana Tech
Oregon State
Boise State
Michigan State
Colorado State
Clemson
Pittsburgh
Indiana
Arizona
Wake Forest
Wisconsin
Troy State
Rice
Mid. Tenn. St.
Missouri
Oklahoma State
Miami, Ohio
Arizona State
South Florida
Mississippi State
Kansas
New Mexico
East Carolina
Virginia
.651
.646
.638
.633
.633
.628
.626
.624
.609
.603
.602
.602
.581
.577
.576
.576
.575
.571
.571
.565
.563
.558
.557
.554
.553
.553
.543
.542
.542
.537
.534
.528
.528
.525
.518
.514
.512
.510
.507
.506
.496
.490
.487
.483
.482
.478
7
7
6
10
8
7
7
6
10
7
7
7
9
7
6
9
7
5
8
6
5
7
7
5
8
6
6
6
6
5
5
6
5
7
8
8
4
4
7
4
8
3
3
6
6
5		 4
4
5
2
3
4
4
5
2
4
4
5
2
4
5
3
4
6
3
5
6
5
4
6
4
5
5
5
5
6
6
5
7
4
4
3
7
7
5
7
3
8
8
5
5
7
.573
.567
.613
.425
.496
.548
.546
.598
.400
.522
.521
.553
.383
.495
.549
.422
.493
.598
.432
.538
.590
.508
.475
.581
.452
.525
.516
.515
.515
.564
.561
.501
.577
.442
.417
.377
.594
.591
.457
.588
.360
.627
.624
.456
.454
.528
27
33
7
97
64
43
44
14
105
54
55
39
111
65
42
98
66
15
94
47
18
60
74
22
82
51
56
57
58
36
37
61
25
87
99
112
16
17
79
19
117
4
5
80
81
50
  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.
116.
117.
Southern Miss
Cincinnati
Northern Illinois
Central Florida
Northwestern
TCU
Minnesota
Air Force
Kent State
Baylor
Temple
UAB
Memphis
Western Michigan
Kentucky
West Virginia
UNLV
Utah State
California
North Texas
SMU
Ball State
New Mexico St.
Vanderbilt
San Jose State
Nevada
Akron
San Diego State
Tulane
Rutgers
Wyoming
Central Michigan
Army
UTEP
LA Lafayette
Buffalo
Tulsa
Ohio
Duke
LA Monroe
Connecticut
Arkansas State
Eastern Michigan
Idaho
Houston
Navy
 
 

.472
.471
.463
.463
.448
.443
.442
.440
.438
.432
.431
.429
.419
.416
.415
.415
.406
.406
.400
.391
.383
.378
.378
.375
.372
.361
.359
.345
.304
.296
.292
.276
.262
.258
.247
.243
.233
.230
.229
.225
.223
.211
.209
.205
.200
.175
6
7
6
6
4
6
4
6
6
3
4
6
5
5
2
3
4
4
1
5
4
5
5
2
3
3
4
3
3
2
2
3
3
2
3
3
1
1
0
2
2
2
2
1
0
0

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

.445
.390
.436
.436
.531
.417
.524
.440
.411
.571
.513
.403
.446
.443
.613
.554
.488
.488
.661
.417
.463
.404
.426
.572
.524
.497
.438
.480
.448
.484
.480
.400
.383
.437
.365
.360
.471
.467
.543
.393
.391
.375
.371
.430
.501
.460

85
109
92
93
48
101
52
88
102
29
59
104
84
86
6
38
68
69
1
100
77
103
96
28
53
63
90
72
83
70
71
106
110
91
115
116
75
76
45
107
108
113
114
95
62
78
 

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 2001  by Jeff Anderson and Chris Hester, all rights reserved