2015 College Football Ratings Summary |
College |
Conference |
W |
L |
P-Rank |
P-Rating |
R-Rank |
R-Rating |
CFP Rank |
AP Rank |
North Carolina-Charlotte | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 128 | -25.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Eastern Michigan | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 127 | -23.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Georgia State | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 126 | -23.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
New Mexico State | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 125 | -21.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Idaho | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 124 | -19.6 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Troy | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 123 | -17.6 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Nevada-Las Vegas | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 122 | -16.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Massachusetts | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 121 | -16.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Old Dominion | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 120 | -16.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Kent State | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 119 | -16.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Southern Methodist | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 118 | -15.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Army | Independent | 0 | 0 | 117 | -15.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Akron | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 116 | -15.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Buffalo | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 115 | -15.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
North Texas | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 114 | -14.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Miami (Ohio) | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 113 | -14.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Texas-San Antonio | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 112 | -13.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Texas-El Paso | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 111 | -13.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Louisiana-Monroe | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 110 | -13.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
South Alabama | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 109 | -13.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Appalachian State | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 108 | -13.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Ohio U. | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 107 | -13.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Connecticut | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 106 | -12.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
New Mexico | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 105 | -12.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Wyoming | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 104 | -12.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Hawaii | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 103 | -12.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Southern Mississippi | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 102 | -12.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
San Jose State | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 101 | -11.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Tulsa | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 100 | -11.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Florida International | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 99 | -11.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Ball State | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 98 | -10.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Bowling Green State | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 97 | -10.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Tulane | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 96 | -10.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Central Michigan | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 95 | -10.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Georgia Southern | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 94 | -9.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Texas State | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 93 | -9.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Florida Atlantic | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 92 | -9.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Air Force | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 91 | -9.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Middle Tennessee State | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 90 | -8.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Rice | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 89 | -7.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Louisiana-Lafayette | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 88 | -7.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Northern Illinois | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 87 | -7.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Fresno State | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 86 | -7.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Utah State | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 85 | -7.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Navy | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 84 | -6.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Arkansas State | Sun Belt | 0 | 0 | 83 | -6.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Nevada | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 82 | -6.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Western Michigan | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 81 | -6.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Western Kentucky | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 80 | -5.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Toledo | Mid-American | 0 | 0 | 79 | -4.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Colorado State | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 78 | -4.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
San Diego State | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 77 | -4.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
South Florida | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 76 | -3.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Wake Forest | ACC | 0 | 0 | 75 | -3.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
East Carolina | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 74 | -3.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Temple | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 73 | -3.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Purdue | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 72 | -3.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Kansas | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 71 | -2.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Iowa State | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 70 | -2.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Colorado | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 69 | -1.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Syracuse | ACC | 0 | 0 | 68 | -1.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Houston | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 67 | -1.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Illinois | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 66 | -0.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Central Florida | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 65 | -0.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Memphis | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 64 | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Vanderbilt | SEC | 0 | 0 | 63 | 0.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Louisiana Tech | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 62 | 0.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Indiana | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 61 | 0.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Northwestern | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 60 | 1.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Washington State | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 59 | 1.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Brigham Young | Independent | 0 | 0 | 58 | 1.6 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Cincinnati | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 57 | 1.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Oregon State | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 56 | 2.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Rutgers | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 55 | 2.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Texas Tech | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 54 | 2.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Boston College | ACC | 0 | 0 | 53 | 3.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Iowa | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 52 | 3.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Maryland | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 51 | 3.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Pittsburgh | ACC | 0 | 0 | 50 | 4.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Duke | ACC | 0 | 0 | 49 | 4.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
North Carolina State | ACC | 0 | 0 | 48 | 4.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
North Carolina | ACC | 0 | 0 | 47 | 4.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Minnesota | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 46 | 4.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Boise State | Mountain West | 0 | 0 | 45 | 4.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | 23 |
Kentucky | SEC | 0 | 0 | 44 | 5.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Marshall | Conference USA | 0 | 0 | 43 | 6.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
California | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 42 | 6.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Virginia | ACC | 0 | 0 | 41 | 6.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Penn State | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 40 | 6.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Oklahoma State | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 39 | 7.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Michigan | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 38 | 8.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Utah | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 37 | 8.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Georgia Tech | ACC | 0 | 0 | 36 | 9.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | 16 |
Louisville | ACC | 0 | 0 | 35 | 9.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
West Virginia | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 34 | 9.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Virginia Tech | ACC | 0 | 0 | 33 | 10.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Kansas State | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 32 | 10.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Wisconsin | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 31 | 10.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | 20 |
Texas | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 10.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Arizona | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 10.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | 22 |
Washington | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 11.6 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Missouri | SEC | 0 | 0 | 27 | 11.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | 24 |
Miami (Fla.) | ACC | 0 | 0 | 26 | 12.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
South Carolina | SEC | 0 | 0 | 25 | 12.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Nebraska | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 24 | 13.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Notre Dame | Independent | 0 | 0 | 23 | 13.6 | 1 | 0.0 | | 11 |
Arizona State | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 13.6 | 1 | 0.0 | | 15 |
Tennessee | SEC | 0 | 0 | 21 | 13.6 | 1 | 0.0 | | 25 |
Stanford | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 13.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | 21 |
Arkansas | SEC | 0 | 0 | 19 | 14.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | 18 |
Texas A&M | SEC | 0 | 0 | 18 | 14.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Florida | SEC | 0 | 0 | 17 | 14.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Mississippi State | SEC | 0 | 0 | 16 | 15.6 | 1 | 0.0 | | |
Baylor | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 16.0 | 1 | 0.0 | | 4 |
Clemson | ACC | 0 | 0 | 14 | 16.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | 12 |
Michigan State | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 13 | 16.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | 5 |
Oklahoma | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 16.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | 19 |
UCLA | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 16.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | 13 |
LSU | SEC | 0 | 0 | 10 | 16.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | 14 |
Mississippi | SEC | 0 | 0 | 9 | 17.3 | 1 | 0.0 | | 17 |
Florida State | ACC | 0 | 0 | 8 | 17.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | 10 |
USC | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 17.8 | 1 | 0.0 | | 8 |
Texas Christian | Big 12 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 18.4 | 1 | 0.0 | | 2 |
Auburn | SEC | 0 | 0 | 5 | 19.5 | 1 | 0.0 | | 6 |
Georgia | SEC | 0 | 0 | 4 | 20.9 | 1 | 0.0 | | 9 |
Oregon | Pac 12 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 21.2 | 1 | 0.0 | | 7 |
Ohio State | Big Ten | 0 | 0 | 2 | 23.1 | 1 | 0.0 | | 1 |
Alabama | SEC | 0 | 0 | 1 | 23.7 | 1 | 0.0 | | 3 |
College sports ratings use a somewhat less sophisticated version of the NFL model that does not use individual play data. Final scores and game location are the only data used. Unlike BCS computer ratings, point difference is factored rather than simply the outcome of the game. Instead of adjusting ratings for repeatability, both teams in each game are given equal responsibility for the result. Each team is assigned a normal probability distribution for quality such that the most likely scenario considering all games at once is optimized. In doing so, home field advantage is factored where applicable and strength of schedule is automatically accounted for. After 1 game, a team's rating will simply be their net points divided by 2. Past the first game, relative strength of opponents and how far a result is from the expected result begin to factor in. Like the NFL ratings, the first few weeks' ratings are unreliable but quickly become increasingly accurate thereafter. Subtracting one team's rating from another's will give an expected point spread should they play at a neutral site.