The Only Original and Unaltered 
BCS Computer Rankings...

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

Oklahoma and TCU Are #1 and #2
  • Oklahoma has been far and away #1
  • (9-0) TCU deserves the #2 ranking based on its accomplishments to date (not based on its perceived potential)
  • TCU's .766 rating is closer to that of #12 Florida St. than to that of #1 Oklahoma
  • In each of the past 3 seasons, the #2 team in the final pre-bowl Anderson & Hester Rankings has posted a rating above .800, so normally TCU's .766 rating would not be close to landing the Horned Frogs in the #2 spot, but none of this season's 1-loss teams have particularly distinguished themselves to date:  #3 Ohio St. has not beaten a current top-20 team and lost to #37 Wisconsin; #4 USC has beaten only 1 team (#9 Washington St.) currently ranked as high as the top team TCU has beaten (#38 Louisville), and the Trojans lost to #62 (5-6) Cal; #5 LSU is only 1-1 vs. the current top-35 and has beaten only 4 teams in the current top-80 (1 less than TCU has beaten)
More College
Football Links
The Anderson & Hester College Football 
Computer Rankings, as of Nov. 9
•Nov. 2 Rankings
•Oct. 26 Rankings
•Oct. 19 Rankings
•Oct. 12 Rankings
•Oct. 5 Rankings
•Sept. 28 Rankings

•Final 2002-03 Rankings

•Final 2001-02 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.
Oklahoma
TCU
Ohio State
USC
LSU
Tennessee
Miami, Ohio
Texas
Washington State
Purdue
.823
.766
.759
.756
.741
.728
.727
.717
.712
.712
10
9
9
8
8
7
8
8
8
8
0
0
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
.537
.450
.526
.529
.509
.572
.491
.544
.538
.537
*to date
27
88
44
40
56
10
66
20
25
28
1-0
0-0
0-0
1-0
0-0
0-0
0-0
0-1
0-1
0-0
2-0
0-0
2-0
0-0
1-1
2-1
0-1
1-1
0-0
1-1
0
0
1
1
0
1
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.
Michigan
Florida State
Nebraska
Georgia
Miami, Fla.
Mississippi
Pittsburgh
Utah
Arkansas
Virginia Tech
Northern Illinois
Florida
Michigan State
Minnesota
Iowa
.710
.710
.707
.706
.703
.693
.692
.689
.680
.677
.665
.665
.662
.661
.659
8
8
8
7
7
8
7
7
6
7
9
7
7
9
7
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
1
3
3
2
3
.535
.535
.532
.545
.542
.515
.529
.525
.587
.512
.411
.549
.545
.466
.542
30
31
35
19
22
53
39
47
6
55
107
17
18
86
23
  Big 12
Big Ten
Southeastern
Pac-10
Atlantic Coast
Big East
Mountain West
Conference USA
Mid-American
WAC
Sun Belt
*non-conference play
.604
.595
.580
.580
.549
.541
.540
.472
.422
.414
.297
37
30
30
25
19
24
23
22
24
15
7
12
14
14
14
12
14
15
19
31
25
36
.448
.485
.470
.495
.481
.462
.476
.450
.460
.488
.500
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
Oklahoma State
Bowling Green
N.C. State
Boise State
Southern Miss
Kansas State
Missouri
UCLA
Air Force
Oregon
Wisconsin
Louisville
Auburn
Northwestern
Oregon State
Maryland
Alabama
Georgia Tech
Clemson
Syracuse
Stanford
South Carolina
Connecticut
Texas A&M
Colorado
Notre Dame
New Mexico
North Texas
South Florida
Memphis
Marshall
Virginia
West Virginia
Fresno State
Colorado State
California
UNLV
Hawaii
Boston College
Kansas
Washington
Toledo
Wake Forest
Houston
BYU
.647
.644
.635
.628
.628
.617
.611
.606
.603
.596
.596
.593
.592
.581
.573
.572
.568
.567
.564
.562
.562
.557
.557
.556
.554
.551
.549
.547
.542
.542
.540
.539
.539
.539
.537
.535
.534
.533
.531
.527
.527
.526
.522
.519
.519
.502
7
7
7
7
8
6
8
6
6
7
6
6
7
6
5
6
6
4
5
6
5
4
5
8
4
4
3
6
7
6
6
6
5
5
6
5
5
5
6
5
5
5
6
5
5
4

3
3
2
3
1
3
3
3
4
3
4
4
2
4
5
3
3
6
4
4
3
4
5
3
6
6
6
4
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
6
5
3
5
5
5
3
5
4
6
.529
.526
.465
.509
.380
.518
.473
.506
.544
.474
.536
.534
.420
.521
.573
.471
.467
.625
.531
.502
.487
.557
.557
.417
.612
.610
.646
.487
.421
.441
.439
.438
.506
.505
.477
.535
.561
.533
.430
.527
.527
.526
.421
.519
.486
.562
38
45
87
57
115
51
79
59
21
76
29
33
101
48
9
83
85
2
37
63
69
14
16
102
3
4
1
68
99
92
93
94
60
61
75
32
13
34
96
41
42
46
98
49
70
12
  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.
Louisiana Tech
Navy
San Diego State
Tulsa
Cincinnati
Wyoming
Arizona State
UAB
Kentucky
Rutgers
Ball State
Tulane
Nevada
Akron
Troy State
Iowa State
Duke
Western Michigan
Arizona
Penn State
Kent State
Baylor
Arkansas State
Indiana
Mississippi State
North Carolina
Utah State
San Jose State
Rice
Central Michigan
LA Lafayette
Illinois
Vanderbilt
Mid. Tenn. St.
Central Florida
East Carolina
New Mexico St.
Ohio
Temple
Eastern Michigan
Buffalo
UTEP
Army
LA Monroe
Idaho
SMU
.480
.475
.474
.473
.464
.458
.457
.454
.449
.446
.435
.430
.420
.415
.413
.412
.410
.408
.404
.394
.390
.388
.368
.357
.357
.354
.329
.317
.315
.313
.312
.310
.307
.293
.283
.263
.262
.260
.245
.238
.235
.232
.212
.199
.187
.182
5
6
5
6
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
6
4
2
3
4
2
2
4
3
5
2
2
2
3
3
2
3
3
1
1
3
3
1
3
2
1
2
1
2
0
1
1
0
5
4
5
4
4
5
6
6
5
5
6
6
5
5
6
7
7
6
8
8
6
7
5
8
7
8
7
6
7
7
8
10
9
7
7
9
7
7
8
8
10
8
10
9
9
10
.480
.415
.474
.413
.431
.492
.517
.514
.483
.479
.495
.489
.420
.388
.473
.584
.532
.467
.590
.580
.448
.508
.368
.542
.527
.538
.445
.410
.479
.427
.442
.568
.557
.404
.391
.504
.367
.412
.472
.399
.474
.391
.519
.414
.396
.472
72
103
77
105
95
65
52
54
71
74
64
67
100
114
80
7
36
84
5
8
89
58
116
24
43
26
90
108
73
97
91
11
15
109
113
62
117
106
82
110
78
112
50
104
111
81
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 2003 by Jeff Anderson and Chris Hester, all rights reserved