J-Train College Football Computer Rankings, 2017 Week 9

More information on this system can be found here. Conference rankings are listed at the bottom. Thanks to Ken Massey for the data. These rankings are included on Massey’s ranking composite page.

This week’s full rankings:

Rk Team Record SOS Rating % Bhnd % Bhnd 1st Prev
1 Notre Dame 7-1 8 73.65 3
2 Penn St 7-1 6 72.92 1.5% 1.0% 2
3 Alabama 8-0 52 72.39 1.0% 1.7% 1
4 Georgia 8-0 43 71.92 0.9% 2.3% 5
5 Ohio St 7-1 16 71.23 1.4% 3.3% 8
6 Clemson 7-1 14 70.75 1.0% 3.9% 7
7 Wisconsin 8-0 53 70.18 1.1% 4.7% 6
8 UCF 7-0 93 69.52 1.3% 5.6% 4
9 TCU 7-1 60 65.90 7.2% 10.5% 9
10 Washington 7-1 85 65.50 0.8% 11.1% 11
11 Oklahoma 7-1 50 65.10 0.8% 11.6% 16
12 Oklahoma St 7-1 56 65.06 0.1% 11.7% 12
13 Miami FL 7-0 74 64.65 0.8% 12.2% 10
14 Michigan 6-2 18 63.78 1.7% 13.4% 15
15 USC 7-2 17 63.77 0.0% 13.4% 17
16 Virginia Tech 7-1 92 63.45 0.6% 13.9% 18
17 Mississippi St 6-2 34 63.29 0.3% 14.1% 23
18 Iowa St 6-2 37 62.47 1.6% 15.2% 25
19 Auburn 6-2 75 62.18 0.6% 15.6% 21
20 Michigan St 6-2 7 62.06 0.2% 15.7% 13
21 Iowa 5-3 5 62.01 0.1% 15.8% 24
22 NC State 6-2 29 61.57 0.9% 16.4% 14
23 Boise St 6-2 57 60.11 2.9% 18.4% 27
24 Stanford 6-2 51 60.09 0.0% 18.4% 19
25 Memphis 7-1 72 59.91 0.4% 18.7% 29
26 Washington St 7-2 63 59.21 1.4% 19.6% 20
27 Navy 5-2 28 59.11 0.2% 19.7% 28
28 South Carolina 6-2 41 58.87 0.5% 20.1% 30
29 Northwestern 5-3 13 58.43 0.9% 20.7% 39
30 South Florida 7-1 123 58.11 0.6% 21.1% 22
31 Georgia Tech 4-3 40 58.07 0.1% 21.1% 26
32 LSU 6-2 59 58.07 0.0% 21.2% 33
33 Toledo 7-1 111 58.04 0.1% 21.2% 32
34 Arizona 6-2 84 57.96 0.2% 21.3% 45
35 San Diego St 7-2 69 57.23 1.5% 22.3% 36
36 Boston College 5-4 2 57.14 0.2% 22.4% 48
37 Wake Forest 5-3 38 56.99 0.3% 22.6% 41
38 Texas 4-4 25 56.37 1.2% 23.5% 47
39 SMU 6-2 90 56.10 0.5% 23.8% 37
40 Texas A&M 5-3 39 55.21 1.7% 25.0% 34
41 Kentucky 6-2 64 55.15 0.1% 25.1% 50
42 Houston 5-3 46 54.79 0.7% 25.6% 58
43 FL Atlantic 5-3 88 54.59 0.4% 25.9% 56
44 N Illinois 6-2 107 54.40 0.4% 26.1% 52
45 West Virginia 5-3 79 54.31 0.2% 26.3% 38
46 Purdue 3-5 15 54.18 0.3% 26.4% 43
47 Oregon 5-4 45 54.14 0.1% 26.5% 60
48 Fresno St 5-3 82 53.74 0.8% 27.0% 31
49 Marshall 6-2 113 53.73 0.0% 27.0% 35
50 Nebraska 4-4 9 53.67 0.1% 27.1% 65
51 UCLA 4-4 12 53.53 0.3% 27.3% 49
52 Louisville 5-4 44 53.45 0.2% 27.4% 42
53 Florida 3-4 3 53.42 0.1% 27.5% 46
54 Arizona St 4-4 11 53.31 0.2% 27.6% 40
55 Syracuse 4-4 31 53.23 0.2% 27.7% 57
56 Maryland 4-4 4 53.22 0.0% 27.7% 66
57 Minnesota 4-4 54 52.76 0.9% 28.4% 53
58 Texas Tech 4-4 32 52.27 1.0% 29.0% 54
59 Troy 6-2 112 52.20 0.1% 29.1% 59
60 Army 6-2 114 51.71 1.0% 29.8% 63
61 Colorado 5-4 76 51.31 0.8% 30.3% 75
62 Florida St 2-5 1 51.25 0.1% 30.4% 44
63 W Michigan 5-3 95 51.15 0.2% 30.6% 68
64 Colorado St 6-3 105 50.97 0.3% 30.8% 51
65 Ohio 6-2 126 50.82 0.3% 31.0% 69
66 Arkansas St 5-2 128 50.78 0.1% 31.1% 73
67 Indiana 3-5 23 50.67 0.2% 31.2% 62
68 Wyoming 5-3 100 50.39 0.5% 31.6% 85
69 Virginia 5-3 87 50.38 0.0% 31.6% 55
70 California 4-5 33 49.93 0.9% 32.2% 64
71 Utah 4-4 77 49.66 0.5% 32.6% 61
72 Pittsburgh 4-5 30 49.44 0.4% 32.9% 84
73 North Texas 5-3 81 49.25 0.4% 33.1% 78
74 UT San Antonio 5-2 130 49.16 0.2% 33.2% 74
75 Air Force 4-4 78 49.08 0.2% 33.4% 90
76 Duke 4-5 62 49.05 0.1% 33.4% 70
77 Akron 5-4 70 48.73 0.6% 33.8% 82
78 Kansas St 4-4 99 48.69 0.1% 33.9% 79
79 Tennessee 3-5 19 48.41 0.5% 34.3% 76
80 Florida Intl 5-2 110 47.86 1.1% 35.0% 93
81 Southern Miss 5-3 116 47.83 0.1% 35.1% 67
82 Tulane 3-5 36 47.78 0.1% 35.1% 72
83 Rutgers 3-5 26 47.64 0.3% 35.3% 80
84 Appalachian St 5-3 119 47.60 0.1% 35.4% 71
85 Louisiana Tech 4-4 101 47.56 0.1% 35.4% 86
86 Vanderbilt 3-5 27 47.26 0.6% 35.8% 81
87 Mississippi 3-5 48 47.17 0.2% 35.9% 77
88 Missouri 3-5 47 47.00 0.3% 36.2% 95
89 Arkansas 3-5 22 46.95 0.1% 36.3% 87
90 Utah St 4-5 80 46.62 0.7% 36.7% 83
91 E Michigan 2-6 55 45.66 1.9% 38.0% 89
92 Buffalo 3-6 89 44.98 1.3% 38.9% 91
93 UAB 5-3 127 44.46 1.0% 39.6% 105
94 Tulsa 2-7 42 44.03 0.9% 40.2% 94
95 WKU 5-3 129 43.62 0.8% 40.8% 92
96 C Michigan 4-4 102 43.55 0.1% 40.9% 98
97 UNLV 3-5 91 43.50 0.1% 40.9% 109
98 Miami OH 3-5 106 43.32 0.3% 41.2% 96
99 Georgia St 4-3 118 43.28 0.1% 41.2% 103
100 MTSU 3-5 71 43.19 0.2% 41.4% 99
101 New Mexico 3-5 83 43.18 0.0% 41.4% 88
102 Cincinnati 2-6 20 42.93 0.5% 41.7% 97
103 Temple 3-5 86 42.78 0.3% 41.9% 101
104 North Carolina 1-8 10 42.08 1.4% 42.9% 104
105 Illinois 2-6 24 41.96 0.2% 43.0% 106
106 South Alabama 3-5 103 41.31 1.3% 43.9% 100
107 New Mexico St 3-5 109 40.43 1.7% 45.1% 102
108 ULM 3-5 121 38.43 4.0% 47.8% 108
109 Nevada 1-7 61 38.25 0.4% 48.1% 110
110 Connecticut 3-5 98 38.22 0.1% 48.1% 107
111 Idaho 3-5 117 38.17 0.1% 48.2% 119
112 BYU 2-7 67 38.06 0.2% 48.3% 115
113 Oregon St 1-7 21 37.89 0.3% 48.6% 116
114 Hawaii 3-5 115 37.38 1.0% 49.2% 111
115 ULL 3-4 122 36.37 2.0% 50.6% 113
116 Old Dominion 2-6 94 36.17 0.4% 50.9% 114
117 Kent 2-6 58 36.11 0.1% 51.0% 112
118 East Carolina 2-6 65 35.48 1.2% 51.8% 117
119 Baylor 0-8 35 35.30 0.3% 52.1% 118
120 Massachusetts 2-6 125 35.17 0.3% 52.3% 124
121 Ball St 2-6 104 34.87 0.6% 52.7% 121
122 Kansas 1-7 49 34.73 0.3% 52.8% 120
123 Bowling Green 1-7 73 33.48 2.5% 54.5% 122
124 Rice 1-7 66 33.37 0.2% 54.7% 123
125 Texas St 2-6 120 31.30 4.1% 57.5% 129
126 Charlotte 1-7 108 30.38 1.8% 58.7% 126
127 San Jose St 1-8 96 29.14 2.4% 60.4% 125
128 UTEP 0-8 68 29.08 0.1% 60.5% 128
129 Coastal Car 1-7 124 27.63 2.9% 62.5% 127
130 Ga Southern 0-7 97 25.80 6.6% 65.0% 130

Best win: Oklahoma 31-16 vs. Ohio St.
Worst loss: Coastal Carolina 10-52 vs. Western Illinois

Rk Conference Rating Best Team Worst Team
1 Big 10 58.19 72.92 41.96
2 SEC 56.24 72.39 46.95
3 ACC 55.82 70.75 42.08
4 Pac-12 54.69 65.50 37.89
5 Big 12 54.02 65.90 34.73
6 American 50.73 69.52 35.48
7 Mountain West 46.63 60.11 29.14
8 MAC 45.42 58.04 33.48
9 Conference USA 43.59 54.59 29.08
10 Sun Belt 39.44 52.20 25.80

SOS = Strength of schedule ranking based on games played
% Bhnd = Percentage of the average team’s rating a team is behind the next highest-ranked team
% Bhnd 1st = Percentage a team is behind the number one team

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *