Yellow Number 4 Brett Favre T-Shirt
 

Part of the BCS Throughout Its Entire 16-Year Run...

Showing Which Teams Have the Best Win-Loss Records Considering Their Schedules—to Date

Alabama Edges Ohio St. to Retain Top Spot

Vindicating the BCS

Bowl Championship Splendor

Poll on Fans’ View of BCS Standings vs. the Committee

  • Seven of the top 10 teams are from the Big Ten (4) or Pac-12 (3), as are 9 of the top 15 teams (5 Big Ten, 4 Pac-12)
  • The Big Ten takes over as the top conference, bumping the SEC to #2, with the Pac-12 #3, ACC #4, and American Athletic #5 (ahead of the #6 Big 12)
  • In the battle for the #1 spot, undefeated Alabama narrowly edges Ohio State, which barely survived Michigan but has only 1 loss versus the nation’s toughest schedule to date
  • Clemson is the clear #3 team, based on accomplishments thus far
  • #4 Michigan, #5 Wisconsin, #6 Penn State, and #7 Washington are separated by just .008
  • Of all the top-10 teams playing in conference championship games this coming weekend, 1-loss Washington stands to benefit the most from a win—as teams with fewer losses gain more in the rankings from big wins, and the Huskies play #8 Colorado while undefeated Alabama plays #17 Florida, undefeated Western Mighigan plays #67 Ohio, and 1-loss Clemson plays #22 Virginia Tech
  • East Coast Heisman voters may not have noticed, but Christian McCaffrey once again leads the nation in all-purpose yards, and #15 Stanford is ranked above #20 Louisville
More College
Football Links

The Jeff Anderson & Chris Hester
College Football Computer Rankings, as of Nov. 28

•Nov. 21 Rankings
•Nov. 14 Rankings
•Nov. 7 Rankings
•Oct. 31 Rankings
•Oct. 24 Rankings
•Oct. 17 Rankings
•Oct. 10 Rankings

•Final 2015-16 Rankings
•Final ’15 Pre-Bowl Rankings


 
Rating
 W 
 L 
Sched.
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
vs. Current
Top-10
vs. Current
#11-25
Other 
Losses
1.
 Alabama
.829
12
0
.548
36
1-0
2-0
0
2.
 Ohio State
.826
11
1
.612
1
2-1
2-0
0
3.
 Clemson
.790
11
1
.556
32
0-0
3-0
1
4.
 Michigan
.772
10
2
.592
5
3-1
0-0
1
5.
 Wisconsin
.765
10
2
.582
8
0-2
2-0
0
6.
 Penn State
.764
10
2
.581
9
1-1
1-0
1
7.
 Washington
.764
11
1
.519
55
0-1
1-0
0
8.
 Colorado
.746
10
2
.557
30
0-2
1-0
0
9.
 W. Michigan
.738
12
0
.413
110
0-0
0-0
0
10.
 USC
.720
9
3
.581
10
2-1
0-1
1

Rank Team 
Rating
 W 
 L 
Sched. 
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
 Conference
Rankings
Rating
W*
 L*
Sched.
Strength*
11. Nebraska
.719
9
3
.580
11
   Big Ten
.610
32
10
.449
12. Florida State
.719
9
3
.580
12
   Southeastern
.604
42
12
.433
13. Oklahoma
.705
9
2
.516
58
   Pac-12
.587
26
10
.451
14. South Florida
.698
10
2
.497
69
   Atlantic Coast
.575
42
14
.422
15. Stanford
.693
9
3
.548
35
   American Athletic
.519
31
16
.422
16. Navy
.692
9
2
.501
65
   Big 12
.506
19
11
.425
17. Florida
.689
8
3
.559
27
   Mountain West
.458
26
23
.440
18. Boise State
.687
10
2
.485
75
   Sun Belt
.426
18
26
.480
19. West Virginia
.676
9
2
.482
76
   Mid-American
.412
23
25
.424
20. Louisville
.675
9
3
.528
49
   Conference USA
.381
20
32
.449
21. Tennessee
.673
8
4
.578
15
   *non-conference play
22. Virginia Tech
.665
9
3
.516
57
  
23. Oklahoma State
.664
9
2
.469
82
  
24. Auburn
.659
8
4
.563
25
  
25. Minnesota
.656
8
4
.559
26
  
n/a n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

RANK Team Rating Win Lose Schedule Strength Schedule Strength BCS Football Rankings RANK Team Rating Win Lose Schedule Strength Schedule Strength
Rank Team 
Rating
W
L
Sched. 
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
   Rank Team 
Rating
W
L
Sched. 
Strength
Sched. 
Rank
26.
 LSU
.655
7
4
.577
17
  
78.
 SMU
.472
5
7
.522
52
27.
 Iowa
.655
8
4
.558
29
  
79.
 Missouri
.467
4
8
.568
22
28.
 Pittsburgh
.650
8
4
.554
33
  
80.
 Central Michigan
.452
6
6
.452
92
29.
 Houston
.649
9
3
.499
68
  
81.
 Texas
.451
5
7
.502
64
30.
 Georgia Tech
.640
8
4
.542
40
  
82.
 Notre Dame
.445
4
8
.546
38
31.
 Washington State
.639
8
4
.541
43
  
83.
 Duke
.443
4
8
.544
39
32.
 Texas A&M
.638
8
4
.540
45
  
84.
 Illinois
.442
3
9
.595
3
33.
 Tulsa
.637
9
3
.486
74
  
85.
 Texas Tech
.442
5
7
.492
71
34.
 Utah
.622
8
4
.523
50
  
86.
 Michigan State
.440
3
9
.593
4
35.
 Miami, Fla.
.621
8
4
.522
53
  
87.
 Arkansas State
.434
6
5
.407
112
36.
 Temple
.619
9
3
.467
86
  
88.
 Hawaii
.428
6
7
.451
93
37.
 North Carolina
.618
8
4
.519
56
  
89.
 Northern Illinois
.419
5
7
.468
83
38.
 Georgia
.605
7
5
.556
31
  
90.
 Miami, Ohio
.419
6
6
.419
108
39.
 Memphis
.605
8
4
.505
63
  
91.
 Purdue
.416
3
9
.570
20
40.
 Troy
.604
9
2
.406
113
  
92.
 Arizona
.416
3
9
.569
21
41.
 Appalachian St.
.598
9
3
.444
96
  
93.
 Army
.411
6
5
.385
124
42.
 Air Force
.596
9
3
.443
98
  
94.
 Cincinnati
.411
4
8
.511
60
43.
 Kentucky
.596
7
5
.547
37
  
95.
 Southern Miss
.404
6
6
.404
115
44.
 Arkansas
.590
7
5
.541
44
  
96.
 UTSA
.403
6
6
.403
118
45.
 Northwestern
.587
6
6
.587
6
  
97.
 LA Lafayette
.403
5
6
.429
105
46.
 Toledo
.586
9
3
.433
103
  
98.
 Rutgers
.400
2
10
.609
2
47.
 Wyoming
.580
8
4
.480
78
  
99.
 Akron
.400
5
7
.449
95
48.
 BYU
.577
8
4
.476
80
  
100.
 Tulane
.400
4
8
.500
66
49.
 Indiana
.572
6
6
.572
19
  
101.
 East Carolina
.382
3
9
.534
48
50.
 Maryland
.564
6
6
.564
24
  
102.
 South Alabama
.373
5
6
.399
119
51.
 Western Kentucky
.561
9
3
.407
111
  
103.
 LA Monroe
.364
4
7
.443
97
52.
 Kansas State
.559
7
4
.477
79
  
104.
 Bowling Green
.364
4
8
.462
87
53.
 Vanderbilt
.559
6
6
.559
28
  
105.
 Georgia Southern
.363
4
7
.443
99
54.
 N.C. State
.553
6
6
.553
34
  
106.
 San Jose State
.360
4
8
.458
88
55.
 San Diego State
.544
9
3
.391
122
  
107.
 Iowa State
.356
3
9
.507
62
56.
 South Carolina
.542
6
6
.542
42
  
108.
 North Texas
.356
5
7
.403
116
57.
 Colorado State
.537
7
5
.486
73
  
109.
 UNLV
.352
4
8
.449
94
58.
 New Mexico
.535
8
4
.434
102
  
110.
 Connecticut
.350
3
9
.500
67
59.
 Mississippi
.534
5
7
.583
7
  
111.
 Nevada
.349
5
7
.396
120
60.
 Boston College
.522
6
6
.522
51
  
112.
 Utah State
.345
3
9
.494
70
61.
 Wake Forest
.521
6
6
.521
54
  
113.
 Ball State
.334
4
8
.430
104
62.
 Idaho
.519
7
4
.437
101
  
114.
 Virginia
.334
2
10
.539
46
63.
 TCU
.518
6
5
.490
72
  
115.
 New Mexico State
.334
3
8
.467
85
64.
 Old Dominion
.517
9
3
.366
127
  
116.
 Fla. International
.323
4
8
.417
109
65.
 California
.516
5
7
.566
23
  
117.
 Kent State
.321
3
9
.468
84
66.
 Central Florida
.508
6
6
.508
61
  
118.
 Kansas
.313
2
10
.516
59
67.
 Ohio
.503
8
4
.403
117
  
119.
 Charlotte
.312
4
8
.405
114
68.
 Eastern Michigan
.502
7
5
.452
91
  
120.
 Georgia State
.309
3
8
.439
100
69.
 Mississippi State
.492
5
7
.542
41
  
121.
 Massachusetts
.285
2
10
.482
77
70.
 Arizona State
.488
5
7
.538
47
  
122.
 Marshall
.283
3
9
.423
106
71.
 Baylor
.481
6
5
.454
90
  
123.
 Texas State
.273
2
9
.457
89
72.
 Syracuse
.478
4
8
.579
13
  
124.
 UTEP
.273
4
8
.360
128
73.
 Oregon
.478
4
8
.579
14
  
125.
 Rice
.260
3
9
.395
121
74.
 Oregon State
.477
4
8
.578
16
  
126.
 Florida Atlantic
.254
3
9
.387
123
75.
 Louisiana Tech
.476
8
4
.377
125
  
127.
 Buffalo
.236
2
10
.419
107
76.
 Mid. Tenn. St.
.476
8
4
.377
126
  
128.
 Fresno State
.229
1
11
.472
81
77.
 UCLA
.473
4
8
.573
18
  
 

 
The Anderson & Hester Rankings are distinct in four ways: 

1. Unlike the polls, these rankings do not reward teams for running up scores.  Teams are rewarded for beating quality opponents, which is the object of the game.  Posting large margins of victory, which is not the object of the game, is not considered. 

2. Unlike the polls, these rankings do not prejudge teams.  These rankings first appear after the season's sixth week, and each team's ranking reflects its actual accomplishments — on the field, to date — 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 2016 by AndersonSports, all rights reserved