J-Train College Football Computer Rankings, 2019 Pre-Bowls

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.

Rk Team Record SOS Rating % Bhnd % Bhnd 1st Prev
1 Ohio St 13-0 3 76.99 1
2 LSU 13-0 27 71.84 10.3% 6.7% 2
3 Clemson 13-0 83 70.77 2.1% 8.1% 3
4 Wisconsin 10-3 1 66.68 8.1% 13.4% 4
5 Alabama 10-2 69 66.61 0.1% 13.5% 5
6 Oklahoma 12-1 47 65.67 1.9% 14.7% 6
7 Georgia 11-2 24 65.67 0.0% 14.7% 7
8 Penn St 10-2 22 65.43 0.5% 15.0% 8
9 Memphis 12-1 52 65.30 0.3% 15.2% 9
10 Notre Dame 10-2 21 65.29 0.0% 15.2% 10
11 Oregon 11-2 42 64.87 0.8% 15.7% 11
12 Utah 11-2 58 64.77 0.2% 15.9% 12
13 Michigan 9-3 2 64.52 0.5% 16.2% 13
14 Appalachian St 12-1 96 63.86 1.3% 17.1% 14
15 Auburn 9-3 8 63.74 0.2% 17.2% 15
16 Florida 10-2 53 63.42 0.6% 17.6% 16
17 Boise St 12-1 92 63.36 0.1% 17.7% 17
18 Navy 10-2 64 62.28 2.1% 19.1% 19
19 Baylor 11-2 56 62.28 0.0% 19.1% 18
20 Iowa 9-3 15 61.68 1.2% 19.9% 20
21 SMU 10-2 54 61.42 0.5% 20.2% 21
22 Air Force 10-2 89 60.98 0.9% 20.8% 22
23 Minnesota 10-2 67 60.64 0.7% 21.2% 23
24 UCF 9-3 94 60.45 0.4% 21.5% 24
25 Cincinnati 10-3 19 60.32 0.3% 21.7% 25
26 Louisiana 10-3 91 59.49 1.6% 22.7% 26
27 FL Atlantic 10-3 85 59.22 0.5% 23.1% 27
28 USC 8-4 14 58.52 1.4% 24.0% 28
29 Washington 7-5 45 57.25 2.5% 25.6% 29
30 Texas 7-5 9 56.79 0.9% 26.2% 30
31 Oklahoma St 8-4 46 56.26 1.1% 26.9% 31
32 Iowa St 7-5 33 56.24 0.0% 27.0% 32
33 Kansas St 8-4 55 56.16 0.1% 27.1% 33
34 Virginia 9-4 60 56.00 0.3% 27.3% 34
35 Texas A&M 7-5 26 55.57 0.8% 27.8% 35
36 Indiana 8-4 63 55.29 0.6% 28.2% 36
37 Michigan St 6-6 6 53.76 3.1% 30.2% 37
38 San Diego St 9-3 123 53.56 0.4% 30.4% 38
39 Temple 8-4 75 53.54 0.0% 30.5% 39
40 Wake Forest 8-4 74 53.50 0.1% 30.5% 40
41 Tennessee 7-5 36 53.37 0.3% 30.7% 41
42 Virginia Tech 8-4 104 53.28 0.2% 30.8% 42
43 Kentucky 7-5 77 53.05 0.5% 31.1% 43
44 Arizona St 7-5 49 52.73 0.6% 31.5% 44
45 North Carolina 6-6 48 52.57 0.3% 31.7% 45
46 Tulane 6-6 38 52.32 0.5% 32.0% 46
47 WKU 8-4 110 52.17 0.3% 32.2% 47
48 Marshall 8-4 86 52.17 0.0% 32.2% 48
49 Mississippi St 6-6 11 52.00 0.3% 32.5% 49
50 Louisville 7-5 31 51.92 0.2% 32.6% 50
51 Wyoming 7-5 101 51.64 0.6% 32.9% 51
52 Hawaii 9-5 80 51.59 0.1% 33.0% 52
53 Louisiana Tech 9-3 129 51.54 0.1% 33.1% 53
54 Buffalo 7-5 120 51.49 0.1% 33.1% 54
55 BYU 7-5 70 51.46 0.1% 33.2% 55
56 Florida St 6-6 30 51.42 0.1% 33.2% 56
57 Miami FL 6-6 66 51.37 0.1% 33.3% 57
58 California 7-5 44 51.14 0.4% 33.6% 58
59 TCU 5-7 29 51.14 0.0% 33.6% 59
60 Washington St 6-6 71 51.03 0.2% 33.7% 60
61 Ga Southern 7-5 72 50.99 0.1% 33.8% 61
62 Utah St 7-5 50 50.90 0.2% 33.9% 62
63 Pittsburgh 7-5 51 50.33 1.1% 34.6% 63
64 Missouri 6-6 78 50.32 0.0% 34.6% 64
65 Nebraska 5-7 18 50.17 0.3% 34.8% 65
66 W Michigan 7-5 119 50.00 0.3% 35.1% 66
67 C Michigan 8-5 124 49.96 0.1% 35.1% 67
68 Boston College 6-6 62 49.92 0.1% 35.2% 68
69 Illinois 6-6 57 49.55 0.7% 35.6% 69
70 Miami OH 8-5 82 49.13 0.8% 36.2% 70
71 Southern Miss 7-5 106 49.10 0.1% 36.2% 71
72 Arkansas St 7-5 93 49.09 0.0% 36.2% 72
73 UAB 9-4 128 48.68 0.8% 36.8% 73
74 Oregon St 5-7 37 48.48 0.4% 37.0% 74
75 Ohio 6-6 118 48.42 0.1% 37.1% 75
76 Duke 5-7 43 47.72 1.4% 38.0% 77
77 Georgia St 7-5 103 47.71 0.0% 38.0% 76
78 South Carolina 4-8 4 47.66 0.1% 38.1% 78
79 Tulsa 4-8 5 47.58 0.2% 38.2% 79
80 Mississippi 4-8 35 47.29 0.6% 38.6% 80
81 Colorado 5-7 13 47.25 0.1% 38.6% 81
82 Charlotte 7-5 114 47.13 0.2% 38.8% 82
83 Ball St 5-7 98 46.65 0.9% 39.4% 83
84 Houston 4-8 23 46.43 0.4% 39.7% 85
85 Purdue 4-8 17 46.38 0.1% 39.8% 84
86 UCLA 4-8 10 46.26 0.3% 39.9% 86
87 Texas Tech 4-8 65 46.09 0.3% 40.1% 87
88 Syracuse 5-7 73 45.97 0.2% 40.3% 88
89 ULM 5-7 61 45.92 0.1% 40.4% 89
90 Kent 6-6 99 45.54 0.8% 40.9% 91
91 Stanford 4-8 12 45.25 0.6% 41.2% 92
92 West Virginia 5-7 39 45.20 0.1% 41.3% 93
93 Liberty 7-5 130 45.14 0.1% 41.4% 94
94 Army 5-8 109 44.96 0.4% 41.6% 90
95 South Florida 4-8 28 44.90 0.1% 41.7% 96
96 Troy 5-7 108 44.85 0.1% 41.7% 95
97 Florida Intl 6-6 125 44.66 0.4% 42.0% 97
98 Nevada 7-5 115 44.66 0.0% 42.0% 98
99 E Michigan 6-6 122 44.46 0.4% 42.2% 99
100 Fresno St 4-8 88 44.38 0.2% 42.4% 100
101 San Jose St 5-7 102 44.14 0.5% 42.7% 101
102 Northwestern 3-9 20 43.95 0.4% 42.9% 102
103 Coastal Car 5-7 117 43.64 0.6% 43.3% 103
104 Maryland 3-9 16 43.54 0.2% 43.4% 104
105 Toledo 6-6 111 43.36 0.4% 43.7% 105
106 MTSU 4-8 87 43.28 0.2% 43.8% 106
107 Arizona 4-8 40 42.79 1.0% 44.4% 107
108 Colorado St 4-8 97 41.90 1.8% 45.6% 108
109 N Illinois 5-7 113 41.41 1.0% 46.2% 109
110 NC State 4-8 81 41.28 0.3% 46.4% 110
111 Kansas 3-9 32 41.10 0.4% 46.6% 111
112 North Texas 4-8 121 40.78 0.6% 47.0% 112
113 East Carolina 4-8 105 39.58 2.4% 48.6% 113
114 Georgia Tech 3-9 34 39.27 0.6% 49.0% 114
115 UNLV 4-8 100 39.12 0.3% 49.2% 116
116 Rice 3-9 84 39.10 0.0% 49.2% 115
117 Arkansas 2-10 25 38.70 0.8% 49.7% 117
118 Vanderbilt 3-9 41 38.29 0.8% 50.3% 118
119 Texas St 3-9 68 37.63 1.3% 51.1% 119
120 Rutgers 2-10 7 37.43 0.4% 51.4% 120
121 South Alabama 2-10 59 36.97 0.9% 52.0% 121
122 UT San Antonio 4-8 112 36.58 0.8% 52.5% 122
123 Bowling Green 3-9 90 34.92 3.3% 54.6% 123
124 New Mexico 2-10 76 34.88 0.1% 54.7% 124
125 Connecticut 2-10 79 33.36 3.0% 56.7% 125
126 New Mexico St 2-10 107 32.29 2.1% 58.1% 126
127 Old Dominion 1-11 95 32.28 0.0% 58.1% 127
128 UTEP 1-11 126 27.26 10.0% 64.6% 128
129 Akron 0-12 116 25.13 4.2% 67.4% 129
130 Massachusetts 1-11 127 22.66 4.9% 70.6% 130

Best win: Ohio St. 38-7 vs. Wisconsin
Worst loss: Massachusetts 45-20 vs. Southern Illinois

Rk Conference Rating Best Team Worst Team
1 Big 10 55.43 76.99 37.43
2 SEC 54.82 71.84 38.29
3 Big 12 53.69 65.67 41.10
4 Pac-12 52.53 64.87 42.79
5 American 52.29 65.30 33.36
6 ACC 51.09 70.77 39.27
7 Mountain West 48.43 63.36 34.88
8 Sun Belt 48.02 63.86 36.97
9 Conference USA 44.57 59.22 27.26
10 MAC 44.21 51.49 25.13

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 *