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 | 1 | 1 | 128 | -30.0 | 61 | 0.6 | | |
New Mexico State | Sun Belt | 0 | 3 | 127 | -26.0 | 128 | -15.8 | | |
Georgia State | Sun Belt | 1 | 2 | 126 | -23.3 | 96 | -6.6 | | |
Idaho | Sun Belt | 0 | 2 | 125 | -22.9 | 109 | -8.8 | | |
Texas-El Paso | Conference USA | 1 | 2 | 124 | -20.7 | 88 | -4.7 | | |
Tulane | American Athletic | 0 | 2 | 123 | -20.6 | 121 | -10.8 | | |
Miami (Ohio) | Mid-American | 0 | 2 | 122 | -20.1 | 119 | -10.7 | | |
Wyoming | Mountain West | 0 | 2 | 121 | -19.5 | 126 | -12.2 | | |
North Texas | Conference USA | 0 | 2 | 120 | -19.4 | 127 | -12.5 | | |
Kent State | Mid-American | 0 | 2 | 119 | -18.9 | 115 | -9.6 | | |
Eastern Michigan | Mid-American | 1 | 2 | 118 | -18.2 | 97 | -6.6 | | |
Massachusetts | Mid-American | 0 | 2 | 117 | -17.0 | 101 | -7.4 | | |
Texas-San Antonio | Conference USA | 0 | 3 | 116 | -16.5 | 107 | -8.7 | | |
New Mexico | Mountain West | 0 | 2 | 115 | -16.5 | 116 | -10.1 | | |
Akron | Mid-American | 0 | 2 | 114 | -16.0 | 106 | -8.5 | | |
Old Dominion | Conference USA | 1 | 1 | 113 | -15.9 | 56 | 1.0 | | |
Troy | Sun Belt | 0 | 2 | 112 | -15.0 | 100 | -7.1 | | |
Texas State | Sun Belt | 0 | 2 | 111 | -14.4 | 118 | -10.4 | | |
San Jose State | Mountain West | 0 | 2 | 110 | -14.4 | 113 | -9.3 | | |
Nevada-Las Vegas | Mountain West | 0 | 3 | 109 | -13.5 | 114 | -9.5 | | |
Army | Independent | 0 | 2 | 108 | -13.3 | 120 | -10.8 | | |
Florida Atlantic | Conference USA | 0 | 3 | 107 | -13.1 | 124 | -12.0 | | |
Appalachian State | Sun Belt | 0 | 1 | 106 | -13.0 | 85 | -3.8 | | |
Fresno State | Mountain West | 0 | 2 | 105 | -12.8 | 93 | -5.8 | | |
South Alabama | Sun Belt | 1 | 1 | 104 | -12.5 | 74 | -1.5 | | |
Louisiana-Monroe | Sun Belt | 0 | 1 | 103 | -12.3 | 82 | -3.0 | | |
Southern Methodist | American Athletic | 1 | 2 | 102 | -11.6 | 86 | -4.4 | | |
San Diego State | Mountain West | 0 | 2 | 101 | -11.5 | 117 | -10.1 | | |
Western Michigan | Mid-American | 0 | 2 | 100 | -11.4 | 105 | -8.4 | | |
Arkansas State | Sun Belt | 0 | 2 | 99 | -11.2 | 108 | -8.8 | | |
Kansas | Big 12 | 0 | 1 | 98 | -10.9 | 89 | -4.8 | | |
Ball State | Mid-American | 1 | 1 | 97 | -9.5 | 45 | 3.1 | | |
Southern Mississippi | Conference USA | 1 | 1 | 96 | -8.9 | 79 | -2.2 | | |
Hawaii | Mountain West | 1 | 1 | 95 | -8.5 | 43 | 3.9 | | |
Connecticut | American Athletic | 1 | 1 | 94 | -8.4 | 68 | -0.5 | | |
Florida International | Conference USA | 1 | 1 | 93 | -8.2 | 48 | 2.2 | | |
Georgia Southern | Sun Belt | 1 | 1 | 92 | -8.0 | 71 | -0.6 | | |
Purdue | Big Ten | 0 | 2 | 91 | -7.8 | 122 | -10.9 | | |
Nevada | Mountain West | 0 | 2 | 90 | -7.2 | 99 | -6.9 | | |
Buffalo | Mid-American | 1 | 1 | 89 | -7.0 | 66 | 0.0 | | |
Rice | Conference USA | 1 | 1 | 88 | -6.0 | 77 | -1.9 | | |
Wake Forest | ACC | 1 | 1 | 87 | -5.9 | 55 | 1.1 | | |
Ohio U. | Mid-American | 2 | 0 | 86 | -5.6 | 24 | 8.5 | | |
South Florida | American Athletic | 0 | 2 | 85 | -5.5 | 110 | -9.1 | | |
Central Michigan | Mid-American | 0 | 2 | 84 | -5.2 | 102 | -7.5 | | |
Tulsa | American Athletic | 2 | 1 | 83 | -5.2 | 44 | 3.5 | | |
Colorado State | Mountain West | 0 | 2 | 82 | -4.9 | 123 | -11.0 | | |
Iowa State | Big 12 | 0 | 2 | 81 | -4.8 | 98 | -6.7 | | |
Cincinnati | American Athletic | 1 | 1 | 80 | -4.5 | 59 | 0.8 | | |
East Carolina | American Athletic | 0 | 2 | 79 | -4.4 | 92 | -5.8 | | |
Louisiana-Lafayette | Sun Belt | 0 | 1 | 78 | -4.3 | 87 | -4.5 | | |
Central Florida | American Athletic | 0 | 2 | 77 | -4.2 | 111 | -9.2 | | |
Rutgers | Big Ten | 0 | 2 | 76 | -4.2 | 104 | -8.2 | | |
Air Force | Mountain West | 1 | 1 | 75 | -3.5 | 63 | 0.4 | | |
Utah State | Mountain West | 0 | 2 | 74 | -3.2 | 103 | -7.6 | | |
Oregon State | Pac 12 | 1 | 1 | 73 | -3.0 | 73 | -1.4 | | |
Bowling Green State | Mid-American | 1 | 2 | 72 | -2.7 | 80 | -2.4 | | |
Maryland | Big Ten | 1 | 1 | 71 | -2.3 | 90 | -5.4 | | |
Northern Illinois | Mid-American | 1 | 1 | 70 | -1.5 | 57 | 0.9 | | |
Syracuse | ACC | 2 | 0 | 69 | -1.1 | 25 | 7.9 | | |
Colorado | Pac 12 | 2 | 1 | 68 | -0.7 | 53 | 1.3 | | |
Minnesota | Big Ten | 2 | 1 | 67 | -0.7 | 51 | 1.6 | | |
Western Kentucky | Conference USA | 2 | 1 | 66 | -0.6 | 41 | 4.0 | | |
Vanderbilt | SEC | 0 | 2 | 65 | -0.5 | 112 | -9.3 | | |
Marshall | Conference USA | 1 | 1 | 64 | -0.2 | 70 | -0.6 | | |
Washington State | Pac 12 | 2 | 0 | 63 | -0.1 | 33 | 6.6 | | |
Navy | American Athletic | 1 | 0 | 62 | 0.5 | 40 | 4.2 | | |
Toledo | Mid-American | 2 | 0 | 61 | 0.8 | 21 | 8.7 | | |
Indiana | Big Ten | 2 | 0 | 60 | 0.8 | 15 | 10.6 | | |
Temple | American Athletic | 3 | 0 | 59 | 1.3 | 1 | 13.6 | | |
Illinois | Big Ten | 1 | 1 | 58 | 1.5 | 83 | -3.3 | | |
Middle Tennessee State | Conference USA | 1 | 1 | 57 | 2.0 | 50 | 1.8 | | |
Louisiana Tech | Conference USA | 0 | 2 | 56 | 2.2 | 95 | -6.6 | | |
Boston College | ACC | 0 | 1 | 55 | 2.5 | 91 | -5.5 | | |
Houston | American Athletic | 1 | 0 | 54 | 3.5 | 39 | 4.4 | | |
Missouri | SEC | 2 | 0 | 53 | 3.9 | 23 | 8.6 | | 25 |
Texas | Big 12 | 1 | 2 | 52 | 4.0 | 72 | -1.4 | | |
Penn State | Big Ten | 2 | 1 | 51 | 4.3 | 37 | 4.9 | | |
Duke | ACC | 1 | 1 | 50 | 4.7 | 62 | 0.5 | | |
Pittsburgh | ACC | 1 | 1 | 49 | 4.9 | 47 | 2.2 | | |
Kentucky | SEC | 2 | 1 | 48 | 5.5 | 38 | 4.8 | | |
Boise State | Mountain West | 1 | 1 | 47 | 5.7 | 52 | 1.5 | | |
Iowa | Big Ten | 2 | 0 | 46 | 6.1 | 18 | 9.7 | | |
Louisville | ACC | 0 | 3 | 45 | 6.4 | 125 | -12.1 | | |
Virginia | ACC | 0 | 2 | 44 | 6.4 | 94 | -5.9 | | |
Arkansas | SEC | 1 | 2 | 43 | 6.4 | 84 | -3.6 | | |
South Carolina | SEC | 1 | 2 | 42 | 6.7 | 76 | -1.8 | | |
Memphis | American Athletic | 2 | 0 | 41 | 6.9 | 13 | 10.8 | | |
Arizona State | Pac 12 | 1 | 1 | 40 | 7.1 | 69 | -0.5 | | |
North Carolina State | ACC | 2 | 0 | 39 | 7.4 | 16 | 10.2 | | |
Arizona | Pac 12 | 2 | 0 | 38 | 8.2 | 27 | 7.4 | | 16 |
California | Pac 12 | 2 | 0 | 37 | 8.5 | 20 | 9.0 | | |
Utah | Pac 12 | 3 | 0 | 36 | 9.1 | 11 | 11.1 | | 18 |
Washington | Pac 12 | 1 | 1 | 35 | 9.3 | 75 | -1.6 | | |
Michigan | Big Ten | 2 | 1 | 34 | 9.4 | 42 | 3.9 | | |
Kansas State | Big 12 | 2 | 0 | 33 | 9.9 | 29 | 7.3 | | |
Northwestern | Big Ten | 2 | 0 | 32 | 10.1 | 4 | 12.6 | | 17 |
North Carolina | ACC | 1 | 1 | 31 | 10.7 | 81 | -2.6 | | |
Virginia Tech | ACC | 1 | 1 | 30 | 10.8 | 60 | 0.7 | | |
Brigham Young | Independent | 2 | 1 | 29 | 11.3 | 28 | 7.3 | | 22 |
Michigan State | Big Ten | 3 | 0 | 28 | 12.1 | 10 | 11.1 | | 2 |
Florida | SEC | 3 | 0 | 27 | 12.3 | 7 | 11.8 | | |
Texas Tech | Big 12 | 2 | 0 | 26 | 12.6 | 19 | 9.0 | | |
Texas Christian | Big 12 | 2 | 0 | 25 | 12.7 | 14 | 10.7 | | 4 |
Miami (Fla.) | ACC | 2 | 0 | 24 | 12.8 | 26 | 7.5 | | |
Nebraska | Big Ten | 1 | 2 | 23 | 13.1 | 78 | -2.2 | | |
Wisconsin | Big Ten | 2 | 1 | 22 | 13.7 | 64 | 0.4 | | 22 |
Auburn | SEC | 1 | 1 | 21 | 13.8 | 58 | 0.8 | | |
Oklahoma State | Big 12 | 2 | 0 | 20 | 14.7 | 30 | 7.3 | | 24 |
Tennessee | SEC | 1 | 1 | 19 | 14.9 | 49 | 1.9 | | |
Clemson | ACC | 2 | 0 | 18 | 15.1 | 31 | 7.1 | | 11 |
Mississippi State | SEC | 1 | 1 | 17 | 15.2 | 46 | 2.9 | | |
Oregon | Pac 12 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 15.6 | 54 | 1.1 | | 13 |
Georgia Tech | ACC | 1 | 1 | 15 | 15.9 | 65 | 0.1 | | 20 |
Stanford | Pac 12 | 2 | 1 | 14 | 16.0 | 34 | 6.3 | | 21 |
Oklahoma | Big 12 | 3 | 0 | 13 | 16.5 | 3 | 12.8 | | 15 |
Texas A&M | SEC | 3 | 0 | 12 | 16.7 | 9 | 11.3 | | 14 |
West Virginia | Big 12 | 1 | 0 | 11 | 17.1 | 35 | 5.8 | | |
UCLA | Pac 12 | 3 | 0 | 10 | 17.4 | 8 | 11.5 | | 9 |
Florida State | ACC | 3 | 0 | 9 | 18.4 | 22 | 8.6 | | 10 |
USC | Pac 12 | 2 | 1 | 8 | 19.2 | 67 | -0.4 | | 19 |
Baylor | Big 12 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 19.5 | 32 | 7.0 | | 5 |
Notre Dame | Independent | 3 | 0 | 6 | 19.8 | 12 | 11.1 | | 6 |
Ohio State | Big Ten | 3 | 0 | 5 | 21.4 | 2 | 13.6 | | 1 |
LSU | SEC | 2 | 0 | 4 | 22.0 | 5 | 12.0 | | 8 |
Georgia | SEC | 3 | 0 | 3 | 23.6 | 17 | 9.8 | | 7 |
Alabama | SEC | 2 | 1 | 2 | 24.2 | 36 | 5.6 | | 12 |
Mississippi | SEC | 2 | 0 | 1 | 25.7 | 6 | 12.0 | | 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.