2015 College Football Ratings Summary |
College |
Conference |
W |
L |
P-Rank |
P-Rating |
R-Rank |
R-Rating |
CFP Rank |
AP Rank |
New Mexico State | Sun Belt | 0 | 2 | 128 | -25.6 | 127 | -10.1 | | |
Georgia State | Sun Belt | 1 | 1 | 127 | -23.7 | 66 | -0.4 | | |
Kent State | Mid-American | 0 | 1 | 126 | -23.1 | 84 | -4.5 | | |
North Carolina-Charlotte | Conference USA | 1 | 0 | 125 | -22.8 | 12 | 8.5 | | |
Miami (Ohio) | Mid-American | 0 | 1 | 124 | -22.2 | 102 | -6.1 | | |
Idaho | Sun Belt | 0 | 2 | 123 | -21.6 | 111 | -7.3 | | |
Massachusetts | Mid-American | 0 | 1 | 122 | -21.2 | 108 | -6.5 | | |
Texas-El Paso | Conference USA | 0 | 2 | 121 | -21.1 | 123 | -8.9 | | |
Wyoming | Mountain West | 0 | 1 | 120 | -20.9 | 119 | -8.7 | | |
Tulane | American Athletic | 0 | 2 | 119 | -19.9 | 122 | -8.8 | | |
North Texas | Conference USA | 0 | 1 | 118 | -18.8 | 109 | -6.6 | | |
New Mexico | Mountain West | 0 | 1 | 117 | -18.2 | 99 | -5.8 | | |
Troy | Sun Belt | 0 | 1 | 116 | -18.0 | 84 | -4.5 | | |
Eastern Michigan | Mid-American | 1 | 1 | 115 | -16.8 | 62 | 0.0 | | |
South Alabama | Sun Belt | 0 | 1 | 114 | -16.7 | 103 | -6.3 | | |
Nevada-Las Vegas | Mountain West | 0 | 2 | 113 | -16.2 | 116 | -8.3 | | |
Akron | Mid-American | 0 | 2 | 112 | -15.4 | 113 | -7.5 | | |
San Jose State | Mountain West | 0 | 1 | 111 | -15.3 | 86 | -4.5 | | |
Army | Independent | 0 | 1 | 110 | -15.0 | 86 | -4.5 | | |
Old Dominion | Conference USA | 1 | 0 | 109 | -14.1 | 9 | 8.7 | | |
Southern Methodist | American Athletic | 1 | 1 | 108 | -13.8 | 72 | -1.5 | | |
Louisiana-Monroe | Sun Belt | 0 | 1 | 107 | -13.3 | 78 | -3.6 | | |
Buffalo | Mid-American | 0 | 1 | 106 | -13.1 | 96 | -5.7 | | |
Connecticut | American Athletic | 1 | 0 | 105 | -13.0 | 39 | 4.5 | | |
Texas State | Sun Belt | 0 | 1 | 104 | -12.9 | 81 | -3.7 | | |
Appalachian State | Sun Belt | 0 | 1 | 103 | -12.7 | 86 | -4.5 | | |
Fresno State | Mountain West | 0 | 1 | 102 | -12.7 | 86 | -4.5 | | |
Western Michigan | Mid-American | 0 | 2 | 101 | -10.8 | 124 | -9.1 | | |
Texas-San Antonio | Conference USA | 0 | 2 | 100 | -10.7 | 114 | -7.9 | | |
Southern Mississippi | Conference USA | 0 | 1 | 99 | -10.6 | 121 | -8.7 | | |
Kansas | Big 12 | 0 | 1 | 98 | -10.5 | 105 | -6.3 | | |
Ball State | Mid-American | 0 | 1 | 97 | -10.5 | 77 | -3.5 | | |
Nevada | Mountain West | 0 | 1 | 96 | -10.2 | 99 | -5.8 | | |
Florida Atlantic | Conference USA | 0 | 2 | 95 | -9.7 | 114 | -7.9 | | |
Central Michigan | Mid-American | 0 | 1 | 94 | -9.1 | 104 | -6.3 | | |
Arkansas State | Sun Belt | 0 | 2 | 93 | -8.9 | 117 | -8.3 | | |
Northern Illinois | Mid-American | 1 | 0 | 92 | -8.5 | 48 | 3.5 | | |
Florida International | Conference USA | 1 | 1 | 91 | -8.3 | 58 | 0.6 | | |
Georgia Southern | Sun Belt | 1 | 1 | 90 | -7.9 | 68 | -0.8 | | |
Hawaii | Mountain West | 1 | 1 | 89 | -7.6 | 51 | 2.4 | | |
Tulsa | American Athletic | 2 | 0 | 88 | -7.5 | 18 | 7.9 | | |
San Diego State | Mountain West | 0 | 1 | 87 | -7.5 | 86 | -4.5 | | |
Rice | Conference USA | 0 | 1 | 86 | -7.4 | 97 | -5.8 | | |
Navy | American Athletic | 0 | 0 | 85 | -6.7 | 60 | 0.0 | | |
Maryland | Big Ten | 0 | 1 | 84 | -6.3 | 125 | -9.2 | | |
Central Florida | American Athletic | 0 | 2 | 83 | -5.5 | 128 | -11.1 | | |
Air Force | Mountain West | 1 | 0 | 82 | -5.4 | 39 | 4.5 | | |
Iowa State | Big 12 | 0 | 1 | 81 | -5.3 | 105 | -6.3 | | |
Middle Tennessee State | Conference USA | 0 | 1 | 80 | -5.3 | 75 | -3.2 | | |
Wake Forest | ACC | 0 | 1 | 79 | -5.1 | 86 | -4.5 | | |
Ohio U. | Mid-American | 2 | 0 | 78 | -5.0 | 8 | 9.2 | | |
Bowling Green State | Mid-American | 1 | 1 | 77 | -4.3 | 70 | -1.2 | | |
Louisiana-Lafayette | Sun Belt | 0 | 1 | 76 | -4.1 | 74 | -2.9 | | |
Utah State | Mountain West | 0 | 1 | 75 | -4.1 | 76 | -3.4 | | |
Purdue | Big Ten | 0 | 1 | 74 | -3.7 | 98 | -5.8 | | |
Colorado State | Mountain West | 0 | 1 | 73 | -3.3 | 119 | -8.7 | | |
Oregon State | Pac 12 | 0 | 1 | 72 | -2.3 | 101 | -5.8 | | |
Western Kentucky | Conference USA | 2 | 0 | 71 | -1.7 | 17 | 7.9 | | |
South Florida | American Athletic | 0 | 1 | 70 | -1.7 | 82 | -3.7 | | |
Vanderbilt | SEC | 0 | 2 | 69 | -1.6 | 118 | -8.7 | | |
Colorado | Pac 12 | 1 | 1 | 68 | -1.3 | 69 | -1.1 | | |
Cincinnati | American Athletic | 0 | 1 | 67 | -1.1 | 94 | -5.1 | | |
Louisiana Tech | Conference USA | 0 | 1 | 66 | 0.2 | 79 | -3.6 | | |
Penn State | Big Ten | 1 | 1 | 65 | 0.5 | 54 | 1.0 | | |
Syracuse | ACC | 1 | 0 | 64 | 0.6 | 39 | 4.5 | | |
East Carolina | American Athletic | 0 | 1 | 63 | 0.8 | 83 | -4.1 | | |
Marshall | Conference USA | 1 | 1 | 62 | 0.9 | 56 | 0.9 | | |
Rutgers | Big Ten | 0 | 1 | 61 | 1.0 | 105 | -6.3 | | |
Indiana | Big Ten | 1 | 0 | 60 | 1.4 | 28 | 6.3 | | |
Toledo | Mid-American | 1 | 0 | 59 | 2.1 | 20 | 7.9 | | |
Boston College | ACC | 0 | 0 | 58 | 3.3 | 60 | 0.0 | | |
Washington State | Pac 12 | 1 | 0 | 57 | 3.4 | 24 | 6.3 | | |
Houston | American Athletic | 1 | 0 | 56 | 3.6 | 38 | 5.3 | | |
Texas | Big 12 | 1 | 1 | 55 | 3.7 | 55 | 0.9 | | |
Temple | American Athletic | 2 | 0 | 54 | 4.2 | 5 | 9.8 | | |
Pittsburgh | ACC | 1 | 0 | 53 | 4.5 | 30 | 5.9 | | |
North Carolina | ACC | 0 | 1 | 52 | 4.5 | 112 | -7.4 | | |
North Carolina State | ACC | 1 | 0 | 51 | 5.2 | 45 | 4.5 | | |
Boise State | Mountain West | 1 | 1 | 50 | 5.2 | 53 | 1.3 | | |
Minnesota | Big Ten | 1 | 1 | 49 | 5.3 | 62 | 0.0 | | |
Northwestern | Big Ten | 1 | 0 | 48 | 6.2 | 36 | 5.6 | | 23 |
Kentucky | SEC | 2 | 0 | 47 | 6.4 | 2 | 10.4 | | |
Iowa | Big Ten | 1 | 0 | 46 | 6.5 | 24 | 6.3 | | |
Virginia | ACC | 0 | 2 | 45 | 6.7 | 110 | -7.0 | | |
Louisville | ACC | 0 | 2 | 44 | 6.9 | 126 | -9.4 | | |
Illinois | Big Ten | 1 | 0 | 43 | 6.9 | 45 | 4.5 | | |
Oklahoma State | Big 12 | 1 | 0 | 42 | 7.0 | 27 | 6.3 | | 25 |
Duke | ACC | 1 | 0 | 41 | 7.1 | 37 | 5.5 | | |
Memphis | American Athletic | 1 | 0 | 40 | 8.0 | 24 | 6.3 | | |
South Carolina | SEC | 1 | 1 | 39 | 8.1 | 65 | -0.1 | | |
Virginia Tech | ACC | 0 | 1 | 38 | 8.4 | 93 | -5.0 | | |
Utah | Pac 12 | 2 | 0 | 37 | 8.7 | 13 | 8.5 | | 21 |
Arkansas | SEC | 1 | 1 | 36 | 8.7 | 73 | -2.2 | | |
Missouri | SEC | 1 | 0 | 35 | 8.7 | 35 | 5.6 | | 22 |
Brigham Young | Independent | 2 | 0 | 34 | 8.7 | 1 | 11.1 | | 19 |
Arizona State | Pac 12 | 0 | 1 | 33 | 8.9 | 92 | -4.6 | | |
Arizona | Pac 12 | 2 | 0 | 32 | 8.9 | 18 | 7.9 | | 20 |
Texas Tech | Big 12 | 1 | 0 | 31 | 9.8 | 50 | 3.3 | | |
California | Pac 12 | 1 | 0 | 30 | 9.8 | 39 | 4.5 | | |
Washington | Pac 12 | 0 | 1 | 29 | 9.8 | 95 | -5.6 | | |
Stanford | Pac 12 | 1 | 1 | 28 | 10.7 | 71 | -1.3 | | |
Michigan | Big Ten | 1 | 1 | 27 | 10.8 | 57 | 0.7 | | |
Nebraska | Big Ten | 1 | 1 | 26 | 11.4 | 67 | -0.6 | | |
Florida | SEC | 2 | 0 | 25 | 13.3 | 29 | 6.1 | | |
Kansas State | Big 12 | 1 | 0 | 24 | 13.4 | 32 | 5.8 | | |
Mississippi State | SEC | 1 | 1 | 23 | 13.7 | 59 | 0.0 | | |
Miami (Fla.) | ACC | 1 | 0 | 22 | 13.9 | 32 | 5.8 | | |
Michigan State | Big Ten | 2 | 0 | 21 | 14.4 | 21 | 7.8 | | 4 |
Wisconsin | Big Ten | 1 | 1 | 20 | 15.0 | 64 | -0.1 | | 24 |
Tennessee | SEC | 1 | 1 | 19 | 15.2 | 52 | 1.6 | | |
Clemson | ACC | 1 | 0 | 18 | 15.8 | 39 | 4.5 | | 11 |
Georgia Tech | ACC | 1 | 0 | 17 | 16.3 | 49 | 3.3 | | 14 |
West Virginia | Big 12 | 1 | 0 | 16 | 17.2 | 31 | 5.8 | | |
Texas Christian | Big 12 | 1 | 0 | 15 | 17.4 | 9 | 8.7 | | 3 |
LSU | SEC | 1 | 0 | 14 | 17.7 | 11 | 8.7 | | 13 |
Auburn | SEC | 1 | 0 | 13 | 17.8 | 47 | 4.1 | | 18 |
Baylor | Big 12 | 1 | 0 | 12 | 18.9 | 14 | 8.1 | | 5 |
UCLA | Pac 12 | 2 | 0 | 11 | 19.0 | 23 | 7.3 | | 10 |
Florida State | ACC | 2 | 0 | 10 | 19.2 | 22 | 7.4 | | 9 |
Oregon | Pac 12 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 19.3 | 80 | -3.6 | | 12 |
Texas A&M | SEC | 2 | 0 | 8 | 19.4 | 15 | 8.1 | | 17 |
Oklahoma | Big 12 | 2 | 0 | 7 | 19.4 | 3 | 10.3 | | 16 |
Notre Dame | Independent | 2 | 0 | 6 | 19.7 | 7 | 9.3 | | 8 |
Georgia | SEC | 2 | 0 | 5 | 20.3 | 16 | 7.9 | | 7 |
Mississippi | SEC | 1 | 0 | 4 | 23.2 | 39 | 4.5 | | 15 |
USC | Pac 12 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 24.1 | 34 | 5.6 | | 6 |
Alabama | SEC | 2 | 0 | 2 | 24.7 | 6 | 9.3 | | 2 |
Ohio State | Big Ten | 2 | 0 | 1 | 25.7 | 4 | 10.2 | | 1 |
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.