Skip to main content

My Unbiased College Football Power Rankings

As I'm tired of the bias which comes along with being a sports analyst and "the eye-test," I decided to create a computerized ranking system, which takes bias out of the equation. It combines the three most integral parts of grading a team's quality, in my opinion, and in descending order of importance: record, strength of schedule, and level of domination. The formula is: win % x 100 x 1.75 + opponent win % x 100 x 1.50 + average margin of victory x 1.25. For example, if a team went 6-6, the win % is .500. Multiply that by 100 and you get 50.0. Multiply that by 1.75 and the product is 87.5. The same goes for opponent win %, except you'd multiply 50.0 by 1.5 and get 75.0. Lastly, if this team averages to win each game by 5.5, after multiplying that number by 1.25, you'd wind up with 6.875. Add 87.5, 50.0, and 6.875, and the final power number for this hypothetical team would be 169.375. I should note, for every FCS opponent a team played, their record formula is: wins = actual number of wins, losses = actual number of losses + games played. For example, if an FCS team went 12-0, their record will be 12-12. If they went 6-6, their record will be 6-12. Here now are the unbiased final regular season rankings and power numbers for each and every FBS team in college football.

1. Georgia (12-1): 280.056

2. Cincinnati (13-0): 273.317

3. Alabama (12-1): 271.830

4. Michigan (12-1): 268.305

5. Ohio State (10-2): 257.727

6. Notre Dame (11-1): 256.667

7. Oklahoma State (11-2): 247.614

8. Baylor (11-2): 245.844

9. UTSA (12-1): 243.884

10. Louisiana (12-1): 242.357

11. Pittsburgh (11-2): 242.285

12. Mississippi (10-2): 238.561

13. Utah (10-3): 237.548

14. Oklahoma (10-2): 232.700

15. Appalachian State (10-3): 232.264

16. Houston (11-2): 229.782

17. Michigan State (10-2): 229.156

18. BYU (10-2): 228.824

19. Wake Forest (10-3): 228.393

20. San Diego State (11-2): 226.435

21. Clemson (9-3): 226.042

22. Coastal Carolina (10-2): 223.043

23. North Carolina State (9-3): 221.021

24. Wisconsin (8-4): 218.438

25. Fresno State (9-3): 217.849

26. Air Force (9-3): 217.036

27. Oregon (10-3): 216.756

28. Kentucky (9-3): 215.842

29. Iowa (10-3): 215.577

30. Utah State (10-3): 215.082

31. Army (8-3): 214.710

32. Texas A&M (8-4): 213.372

33. Boise State (7-5): 213.168

34. Arkansas (8-4): 209.599

35. Purdue (8-4): 205.898

36. Western Kentucky (8-5): 204.202

37. Tennessee (7-5): 202.827

38. Nevada (8-4): 200.815

39. Penn State (7-5): 200.497

40. UCLA (8-4): 200.283

41. SMU (8-4): 199.636

42. UAB (8-4): 197.896

43. Minnesota (8-4): 197.838

44. Iowa State (7-5): 196.808

45. Northern Illinois (9-4): 196.541

46. Central Michigan (8-4): 194.099

47. Miami (Florida) (7-5): 194.035

48. Arizona State (8-4): 192.777

49. Mississippi State (7-5): 192.689

50. Liberty (7-5): 190.715

51. Auburn (6-6): 187.771

52. Central Florida (8-4): 187.486

53. Kansas State (7-5): 186.990

54. Western Michigan (7-5): 186.896

55. Marshall (7-5): 186.676

56. Toledo (7-5): 185.542

57. Washington State (7-5): 185.526

58. Oregon State (7-5): 183.174

59. East Carolina (7-5): 182.368

60. Louisville (6-6): 181.063

61. LSU (6-6): 180.904

62. North Caroina (6-6): 175.733

63. Virginia (6-6): 175.375

64. Georgia State (7-5): 174.816

65. Eastern Michigan (7-5): 174.498

66. West Virginia (6-6): 171.237

67. South Carolina (6-6): 170.794

68. Florida (6-6): 170.573

69. Texas (5-7): 169.341

70. Miami (Ohio) (6-6): 168.545

71. Texas Tech (6-6): 167.154

72. Maryland (6-6): 166.612

73. Kent State (7-6): 166.154

74. Virginia Tech (6-6): 165.896

75. UTEP (7-5): 165.275

76. Missouri (6-6): 164.358

77. Memphis (6-6): 163.542

78. Tulsa (6-6): 162.781

79. Wyoming (6-6): 161.918

80. Ball State (6-6): 160.938

81. North Texas (6-6): 160.331

82. Middle Tennessee (6-6): 159.501

83. Boston College (6-6): 159.081

84. Florida State (5-7): 156.821

85. Old Dominion (6-6): 156.646

86. Illinois (5-7): 153.948

87. Syracuse (5-7): 153.820

88. Hawaii (6-7): 149.722

89. TCU (5-7): 149.541

90. California (5-7): 144.469

91. Rutgers (5-7): 144.323

92. Florida Atlantic (5-7): 144.023

93. Troy (5-7): 143.941

94. Nebraska (3-9): 143.690

95. South Alabama (5-7): 140.578

96. USC (4-8): 136.203

97. Navy (3-8): 135.763

98. San Jose State (5-7): 135.200

99. Washington (4-8): 130.913

100. Louisiana-Monroe (4-8): 126.681

101. Colorado (4-8): 125.465

102. Charlotte (5-7): 124.172

103. Georgia Tech (3-9): 123.750

104. Buffalo (4-8): 122.672

105. Rice (4-8): 120.000

106. Texas State (4-8): 119.504

107. Louisiana Tech (3-9): 117.540

108. Bowling Green (4-8): 117.301

109. Colorado State (3-9): 116.818

110. Stanford (3-9): 114.024

111. Tulane (2-10): 114.003

112. Georgia Southern (3-9): 112.238

113. Indiana (2-10): 109.498

114. Northwestern (3-9): 107.229

115. UNLV (2-10): 106.875

116. Ohio (3-9): 105.719

117. Southern Mississippi (3-9): 104.427

118. South Florida (2-10): 103.824

119. New Mexico (3-9): 99.989

120. Duke (3-9): 92.604

121. Temple (3-9): 88.671

122. Kansas (2-10): 88.670

123. New Mexico State (2-10): 88.248

124. Arkansas State (2-10): 87.997

125. Vanderbilt (2-10): 82.959

126. Arizona (1-11): 82.201

127. Akron (2-10): 75.113

128. Connecticut (1-11): 59.924

129. Florida International (1-11): 58.693

130. Massachusetts (1-11): 56.146

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more