The Only Original and Unaltered 
BCS Computer Rankings...

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

Ohio St., Miami, Then a 30-Point Gap
  • (12-0) Ohio St. and (9-0) Miami are far ahead of the field.
  • There's a logjam from #4-7, as 4 teams are within .004 of each other.
  • #3 Notre Dame wasn't very impressive in its loss to Boston College or in its near-escape vs. Navy, but the (9-1) Irish lead all teams with 4 wins versus current-top-20 teams, which is no small feat.  Notre Dame has beaten #9 Michigan, #11 Florida St., #17 Maryland, and #18 Pitt.
  • 8th-ranked USC has played 9 of its 10 games vs. current-top-50 teams, and not one of the Trojans' games has been against a team currently ranked outside of the top-70 (in comparison, almost half (4 of 9) of Miami's games have been against teams not currently ranked in the top-70). 
  • #13 Colorado has played 6 of its 11 games vs. the current top-25 (going 3-3).
More College
Football Links
The Anderson & Hester College Football 
Computer Rankings, as of Nov. 17
•Nov. 10 Rankings
•Nov. 3 Rankings
•Oct. 27 Rankings
•Oct. 20 Rankings
•Oct. 13 Rankings
•Oct. 6 Rankings

•Final 2001-02 Rankings

•Final 2001-02 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.
Ohio State
Miami, Fla.
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Washington State
Georgia
Iowa
USC
Michigan
Alabama
.827
.820
.790
.782
.781
.780
.778
.761
.754
.748
12
9
9
9
9
10
11
8
9
9
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
.545
.532
.570
.557
.557
.547
.538
.600
.578
.571
*to date
35
44
16
24
25
32
42
4
11
14
1-0
0-0
1-0
1-0
1-1
1-0
1-0
0-1
0-2
0-2
1-0
2-0
3-0
2-0
0-0
0-1
1-0
1-1
1-0
1-0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
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.
Florida State
Texas
Colorado
Florida
Penn State
Colorado State
Maryland
Pittsburgh
Arkansas
Kansas State
UCLA
Virginia Tech
TCU
LSU
Texas Tech
.726
.724
.717
.712
.701
.698
.692
.690
.683
.678
.675
.670
.668
.664
.664
8
9
8
8
8
9
9
8
7
9
7
8
8
7
8
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
1
3
4
.602
.540
.591
.585
.573
.508
.501
.512
.569
.485
.560
.488
.422
.548
.568

3
38
5
7
12
56
57
54
17
66
20
65
104
31
18
  Pac-10
Southeastern
Big Ten
Big 12
Atlantic Coast
Big East
Mountain West
Conference USA
Mid-American
WAC
Sun Belt

*non-conference play

.614
.609
.603
.590
.587
.563
.466
.431
.402
.385
.348
29
35
33
36
23
26
18
15
22
12
10
10
10
13
14
12
13
23
22
33
27
32
.465
.438
.471
.456
.492
.462
.502
.487
.461
.500
.506
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.
South Florida
Boise State
Virginia
Iowa State
Tennessee
N.C. State
Auburn
West Virginia
California
Kentucky
Georgia Tech
Boston College
Oregon State
Oregon
Air Force
Minnesota
Bowling Green
Clemson
Arizona State
Wisconsin
Washington
Northern Illinois
Nebraska
South Carolina
Texas A&M
Louisville
Miami, Ohio
Mississippi
Hawaii
Purdue
Wake Forest
Toledo
Marshall
Southern Miss
Missouri
Cincinnati
Oklahoma State
Fresno State
North Texas
Illinois
New Mexico
Michigan State
New Mexico St.
Arizona
Stanford
San Jose State
.654
.648
.636
.632
.622
.622
.619
.615
.611
.607
.606
.605
.605
.604
.598
.592
.590
.585
.583
.583
.583
.575
.563
.563
.557
.556
.555
.553
.550
.543
.543
.543
.540
.536
.526
.524
.500
.496
.492
.489
.478
.475
.471
.467
.450
.446
8
10
7
7
6
9
7
7
6
7
7
6
7
7
8
7
8
6
7
6
6
8
7
5
6
6
7
5
8
5
5
7
7
6
5
5
5
6
6
4
6
4
6
4
2
6
2
1
4
5
4
3
4
3
5
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
2
5
5
6
5
3
5
6
5
4
4
5
2
6
5
3
2
4
6
5
5
5
5
7
5
7
5
7
8
6
.471
.386
.557
.584
.564
.469
.539
.495
.584
.526
.525
.546
.524
.523
.459
.510
.404
.558
.534
.583
.556
.436
.514
.590
.530
.496
.473
.553
.365
.570
.543
.421
.369
.476
.554
.524
.500
.469
.465
.571
.451
.558
.444
.550
.635
.446
73
113
26
9
19
75
41
62
8
47
48
34
51
52
82
55
110
21
43
10
27
94
53
6
45
60
71
29
117
15
36
105
116
70
28
49
58
76
78
13
85
23
90
30
1
87
  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.
Temple
BYU
Ball State
UAB
Utah
Tulane
Nevada
Central Florida
Syracuse
Mississippi State
North Carolina
Utah State
Northwestern
Indiana
Baylor
Connecticut
UNLV
Houston
Ohio
Vanderbilt
East Carolina
San Diego State
Arkansas State
Central Michigan
Duke
Louisiana Tech
LA Lafayette
Western Michigan
Troy State
Akron
Mid. Tenn. St.
Rice
Kent State
Kansas
Wyoming
Memphis
Eastern Michigan
Idaho
SMU
UTEP
LA Monroe
Rutgers
Navy
Army
Tulsa
Buffalo
.442
.439
.434
.429
.421
.417
.417
.412
.412
.407
.406
.402
.402
.401
.401
.394
.376
.370
.363
.361
.360
.359
.358
.353
.350
.342
.338
.336
.328
.319
.311
.310
.306
.299
.292
.290
.282
.263
.261
.258
.254
.252
.243
.214
.210
.178
4
5
5
5
4
6
5
5
4
3
2
4
3
3
3
5
4
4
4
2
3
3
6
4
2
3
3
3
4
3
3
4
3
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
7
6
5
5
6
5
6
5
7
7
9
6
8
8
8
6
7
6
6
9
6
8
7
7
9
7
8
8
8
8
7
7
8
10
9
8
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
.524
.466
.434
.429
.481
.391
.444
.412
.493
.528
.605
.462
.541
.540
.539
.420
.456
.428
.421
.558
.458
.496
.379
.432
.547
.459
.472
.469
.422
.450
.424
.385
.435
.498
.479
.465
.407
.444
.441
.437
.432
.490
.478
.436
.438
.388
50
77
97
100
67
111
89
108
63
46
2
80
37
39
40
107
84
101
106
22
83
61
115
99
33
81
72
74
103
86
102
114
96
59
68
79
109
88
91
93
98
64
69
95
92
112
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 2002 by Jeff Anderson and Chris Hester, all rights reserved