The Only Original and Unaltered 
BCS Computer Rankings...

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

Oklahoma Remains #1
  • The Sooners edge #2 USC, while #3 Auburn moves closer to the top 
  • Undefeated Utah, which has beaten #14 Texas A&M, sits comfortably in 4th
  • There may be good reasons for sportswriters or coaches to vote for Auburn ahead of Oklahoma or USC, but (contrary to assertions made on ESPN) relative conference strength is not one of them.  While the SEC is arguably the strongest conference in the country in general, it is not so this year.  With all due respect to the SEC, this year it ranks 5th among the conferences, far behind the Big 12 and Pac-10.  Compared to the top-ranked Big 12, the SEC has played a notably easier non-conference schedule while posting 2 more losses and 5 fewer wins in non-conference play.
  • #100 Temple's win over Syracuse moves the Owls out of the cellar among BCS conference teams.  That leaves #103 Washington in that less-than-enviable spot, with only the Apple Cup remaining as a chance to salvage some redemption.
More College
Football Links
The Anderson & Hester College Football 
Computer Rankings, as of Nov. 15 
•Nov. 8 Rankings
•Nov. 1 Rankings
•Oct. 25 Rankings
•Oct. 18 Rankings
•Oct. 11 Rankings
•Oct. 4 Rankings

•Final 2003-04 Rankings

•Final 2003-04 Pre-Bowl 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
USC
Auburn
Utah
California
Texas
Arizona State
Michigan
Boise State
Iowa
.844
.840
.827
.805
.786
.785
.776
.773
.760
.744
10
10
10
10
8
9
8
9
9
8
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
1
0
2
.575
.568
.545
.507
.572
.562
.619
.545
.442
.577
*to date
20
27
41
66
25
31
3
42
90
19
1-0
2-0
0-0
0-0
1-1
0-1
1-2
1-0
0-0
0-2
2-0
1-0
3-0
1-0
0-0
1-0
2-0
1-1
1-0
1-0
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.
Miami, Fla.
Florida State
Tennessee
Texas A&M
Wisconsin
Georgia
Louisville
Virginia
LSU
Oklahoma State
Virginia Tech
UTEP
Purdue
Notre Dame
Georgia Tech
.743
.742
.741
.733
.733
.722
.714
.710
.707
.700
.673
.648
.648
.641
.640
7
8
7
7
9
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
2
2
2
3
1
2
1
2
2
3
2
2
4
4
3
.591
.575
.589
.627
.490
.550
.486
.551
.547
.588
.508
.480
.591
.584
.542
9
21
11
1
70
38
74
36
40
12
65
75
8
15
46
  Big 12
Pac-10
Atlantic Coast
Big Ten
Southeastern
Mountain West
Big East
Conference USA
WAC
Sun Belt
Mid-American
*non-conference play
.623
.617
.608
.582
.541
.524
.508
.503
.432
.373
.328
28
18
22
24
23
16
20
14
14
12
10
8
11
8
9
10
16
12
15
17
27
31
.452
.546
.466
.443
.421
.524
.433
.513
.461
.487
.480
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.
Boston College
Texas Tech
Colorado
Ohio State
West Virginia
North Carolina
Oregon State
South Carolina
Northwestern
UCLA
Iowa State
UAB
Florida
Clemson
New Mexico
Michigan State
Minnesota
Pittsburgh
Arkansas
Alabama
Memphis
Fresno State
Southern Miss
BYU
Oregon
Navy
Nebraska
Bowling Green
N.C. State
Wyoming
Syracuse
Maryland
Cincinnati
Louisiana Tech
Washington State
Connecticut
Stanford
Wake Forest
Missouri
Kansas State
Kansas
TCU
Colorado State
Toledo
Northern Illinois
South Florida
.639
.639
.636
.628
.626
.621
.612
.602
.600
.597
.592
.591
.586
.585
.575
.573
.569
.568
.567
.567
.562
.555
.545
.544
.543
.543
.537
.532
.531
.531
.528
.528
.522
.521
.514
.509
.505
.499
.490
.488
.477
.475
.474
.471
.471
.469
7
6
6
6
8
5
5
6
5
6
5
6
6
5
6
5
6
6
4
6
6
6
5
5
5
7
5
8
4
6
5
4
5
5
4
5
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
7
7
4

2
4
4
4
2
5
5
4
5
4
4
3
4
5
4
5
5
3
5
4
3
3
3
5
5
2
5
2
6
4
5
5
4
5
6
4
6
5
5
6
7
5
6
3
3
4
.470
.581
.579
.570
.441
.621
.612
.543
.600
.538
.559
.491
.527
.585
.515
.573
.542
.467
.600
.507
.461
.454
.470
.544
.543
.373
.537
.348
.591
.471
.528
.561
.488
.521
.573
.475
.565
.532
.523
.548
.598
.508
.534
.353
.353
.469
78
16
18
26
91
2
4
45
5
48
33
69
55
14
60
22
47
82
6
67
85
87
79
43
44
105
49
113
10
77
54
32
72
58
23
76
29
52
56
39
7
64
50
110
111
80
  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.
North Texas
Troy
Mississippi
Miami, Ohio
Baylor
New Mexico St.
Penn State
Rutgers
Illinois
Air Force
Mississippi State
Indiana
Akron
Marshall
Hawaii
Arizona
Tulane
Houston
San Diego State
Duke
Kentucky
SMU
Mid. Tenn. St.
UNLV
LA Monroe
Nevada
Rice
Vanderbilt
Temple
East Carolina
LA Lafayette
Washington
Arkansas State
Kent State
Army
Tulsa
Ohio
Idaho
Utah State
San Jose State
Eastern Michigan
Central Michigan
Ball State
Buffalo
Western Michigan
Central Florida
.469
.467
.466
.462
.459
.452
.437
.433
.429
.428
.421
.412
.409
.406
.403
.399
.398
.394
.393
.378
.371
.370
.362
.348
.345
.341
.341
.337
.330
.326
.322
.320
.312
.307
.304
.292
.291
.288
.277
.272
.271
.253
.253
.190
.187
.154
6
6
3
7
3
5
3
4
3
4
3
3
6
5
4
2
4
3
3
2
2
3
5
2
4
5
3
2
2
2
4
1
3
4
2
2
4
3
2
2
4
3
2
2
1
0
4
4
6
3
7
5
7
5
7
6
6
7
4
5
5
8
5
7
7
8
8
7
5
8
6
5
7
8
8
7
6
9
7
6
7
8
7
8
8
7
6
7
8
8
9
10
.410
.407
.567
.345
.580
.452
.559
.466
.550
.488
.522
.533
.352
.406
.436
.585
.431
.515
.513
.563
.556
.489
.362
.532
.401
.341
.458
.519
.511
.492
.377
.572
.425
.360
.467
.467
.363
.414
.448
.427
.322
.356
.418
.332
.395
.422
99
100
28
114
17
88
34
84
37
73
57
51
112
101
92
13
93
61
62
30
35
71
107
53
102
115
86
59
63
68
104
24
95
108
83
81
106
98
89
94
117
109
97
116
103
96
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 2004 by Jeff Anderson and Chris Hester, all rights reserved