J-Train College Football Computer Rankings, 2019 Week 7

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 6-0 11 77.28 1
2 Wisconsin 6-0 22 73.69 7.2% 4.7% 3
3 Alabama 6-0 39 72.22 2.9% 6.5% 2
4 Clemson 6-0 43 69.24 5.9% 10.4% 4
5 LSU 6-0 69 68.59 1.3% 11.3% 6
6 Auburn 5-1 4 67.91 1.3% 12.1% 5
7 Penn St 6-0 72 67.49 0.8% 12.7% 7
8 Oklahoma 6-0 91 67.19 0.6% 13.1% 8
9 Oregon 5-1 40 64.99 4.4% 15.9% 18
10 SMU 6-0 65 64.60 0.8% 16.4% 10
11 Boise St 6-0 81 64.49 0.2% 16.5% 22
12 Notre Dame 5-1 28 64.48 0.0% 16.6% 11
13 Appalachian St 5-0 96 62.92 3.1% 18.6% 21
14 Cincinnati 5-1 19 62.70 0.4% 18.9% 19
15 Baylor 6-0 102 62.14 1.1% 19.6% 15
16 Georgia 5-1 89 62.10 0.1% 19.7% 9
17 Missouri 5-1 87 61.95 0.3% 19.8% 23
18 Texas 4-2 8 61.90 0.1% 19.9% 12
19 Michigan 5-1 26 61.49 0.8% 20.4% 20
20 Florida 6-1 60 61.27 0.4% 20.7% 14
21 Memphis 5-1 85 60.53 1.5% 21.7% 13
22 Navy 4-1 76 60.35 0.4% 21.9% 32
23 Washington 5-2 56 60.14 0.4% 22.2% 27
24 Utah 5-1 112 60.01 0.2% 22.3% 33
25 Iowa 4-2 21 59.91 0.2% 22.5% 17
26 Michigan St 4-3 1 59.84 0.1% 22.6% 16
27 Iowa St 4-2 38 59.64 0.4% 22.8% 35
28 UCF 4-2 74 59.20 0.9% 23.4% 25
29 Minnesota 6-0 115 59.05 0.3% 23.6% 39
30 Tulane 5-1 94 58.89 0.3% 23.8% 28
31 Arizona St 5-1 59 58.30 1.2% 24.6% 29
32 Wake Forest 5-1 82 57.58 1.4% 25.5% 24
33 Oklahoma St 4-2 62 56.28 2.6% 27.2% 34
34 Air Force 4-2 51 56.09 0.4% 27.4% 48
35 North Carolina 3-3 6 55.59 1.0% 28.1% 44
36 Duke 4-2 79 55.45 0.3% 28.2% 45
37 TCU 3-2 57 55.25 0.4% 28.5% 47
38 USC 3-3 12 55.05 0.4% 28.8% 40
39 Louisiana 4-2 84 55.01 0.1% 28.8% 26
40 Temple 5-1 109 54.60 0.8% 29.3% 52
41 Indiana 4-2 80 54.59 0.0% 29.4% 51
42 Florida St 3-3 2 54.45 0.3% 29.5% 37
43 Louisville 4-2 37 54.01 0.9% 30.1% 61
44 Virginia 4-2 66 53.92 0.2% 30.2% 31
45 FL Atlantic 4-2 50 53.85 0.1% 30.3% 58
46 California 4-2 35 53.67 0.4% 30.6% 49
47 South Carolina 3-3 13 53.50 0.3% 30.8% 67
48 San Diego St 5-1 125 53.23 0.5% 31.1% 62
49 Texas A&M 3-3 17 53.18 0.1% 31.2% 43
50 Mississippi St 3-3 15 52.99 0.4% 31.4% 30
51 Hawaii 4-2 45 52.87 0.2% 31.6% 38
52 Wyoming 4-2 92 52.72 0.3% 31.8% 42
53 Utah St 3-2 46 52.65 0.1% 31.9% 57
54 Kansas St 3-2 61 52.52 0.2% 32.0% 54
55 Pittsburgh 4-2 29 51.90 1.3% 32.8% 55
56 Arizona 4-2 63 51.87 0.1% 32.9% 36
57 Louisiana Tech 5-1 128 51.83 0.1% 32.9% 65
58 Miami FL 3-3 49 51.35 0.9% 33.6% 75
59 NC State 4-2 97 51.33 0.0% 33.6% 71
60 W Michigan 4-3 73 51.32 0.0% 33.6% 70
61 Colorado 3-3 14 51.17 0.3% 33.8% 46
62 Stanford 3-3 7 50.73 0.9% 34.4% 64
63 UAB 5-1 130 50.72 0.0% 34.4% 73
64 Nebraska 4-3 33 50.67 0.1% 34.4% 50
65 Texas Tech 3-3 44 50.55 0.2% 34.6% 60
66 Maryland 3-3 68 50.00 1.1% 35.3% 41
67 Southern Miss 4-2 95 49.93 0.1% 35.4% 76
68 Syracuse 3-3 41 49.78 0.3% 35.6% 53
69 Kentucky 3-3 32 49.42 0.7% 36.1% 68
70 WKU 4-2 108 48.90 1.0% 36.7% 92
71 Mississippi 3-4 34 48.47 0.9% 37.3% 66
72 Army 3-3 90 48.37 0.2% 37.4% 59
73 Washington St 3-3 101 48.23 0.3% 37.6% 72
74 Georgia St 4-2 116 48.05 0.4% 37.8% 90
75 Toledo 4-2 122 48.00 0.1% 37.9% 56
76 C Michigan 4-3 111 47.46 1.1% 38.6% 85
77 Purdue 2-4 20 47.37 0.2% 38.7% 110
78 West Virginia 3-3 27 47.36 0.0% 38.7% 69
79 Tulsa 2-4 3 47.09 0.5% 39.1% 63
80 Boston College 3-3 104 46.92 0.3% 39.3% 79
81 ULM 3-3 77 46.78 0.3% 39.5% 89
82 Arkansas St 3-3 64 46.76 0.0% 39.5% 83
83 Liberty 4-2 126 46.74 0.0% 39.5% 74
84 South Florida 3-3 75 46.54 0.4% 39.8% 93
85 Houston 2-4 25 46.20 0.7% 40.2% 78
86 Virginia Tech 4-2 127 46.01 0.4% 40.5% 87
87 Kent 3-3 52 45.82 0.4% 40.7% 94
88 Ball St 3-3 100 45.23 1.2% 41.5% 109
89 Nevada 4-2 99 45.22 0.0% 41.5% 103
90 Marshall 3-3 93 45.14 0.2% 41.6% 96
91 Northwestern 1-4 9 45.13 0.0% 41.6% 88
92 Florida Intl 3-3 120 45.11 0.0% 41.6% 112
93 Oregon St 2-4 54 44.61 1.0% 42.3% 77
94 Fresno St 2-3 83 44.30 0.6% 42.7% 82
95 BYU 2-4 18 44.13 0.3% 42.9% 86
96 Coastal Car 3-3 124 44.06 0.2% 43.0% 81
97 Tennessee 2-4 42 43.99 0.1% 43.1% 113
98 Miami OH 2-4 16 43.95 0.1% 43.1% 80
99 San Jose St 3-3 117 43.45 1.0% 43.8% 84
100 Ga Southern 2-3 47 42.87 1.2% 44.5% 99
101 Troy 2-3 119 42.56 0.6% 44.9% 108
102 Buffalo 2-4 70 42.30 0.5% 45.3% 98
103 Kansas 2-4 58 42.22 0.2% 45.4% 102
104 Illinois 2-4 86 42.07 0.3% 45.6% 101
105 MTSU 2-4 30 41.82 0.5% 45.9% 95
106 North Texas 2-4 78 41.73 0.2% 46.0% 91
107 UCLA 1-5 10 41.45 0.6% 46.4% 107
108 East Carolina 3-3 123 41.32 0.3% 46.5% 111
109 Arkansas 2-4 105 41.19 0.3% 46.7% 104
110 Texas St 2-4 48 40.82 0.7% 47.2% 100
111 E Michigan 3-3 114 40.55 0.5% 47.5% 106
112 Charlotte 2-4 67 40.35 0.4% 47.8% 97
113 Ohio 2-4 107 39.84 1.0% 48.4% 105
114 Bowling Green 2-4 53 38.94 1.8% 49.6% 125
115 UNLV 2-4 88 38.86 0.2% 49.7% 122
116 Colorado St 2-5 98 38.19 1.3% 50.6% 120
117 Rice 0-6 5 37.36 1.7% 51.7% 115
118 N Illinois 2-4 110 37.16 0.4% 51.9% 123
119 Georgia Tech 1-5 23 36.72 0.9% 52.5% 118
120 UT San Antonio 2-4 106 35.81 1.8% 53.7% 116
121 New Mexico 2-4 118 35.17 1.3% 54.5% 114
122 South Alabama 1-5 71 34.87 0.6% 54.9% 121
123 Vanderbilt 1-5 24 34.62 0.5% 55.2% 117
124 Rutgers 1-5 36 34.13 1.0% 55.8% 119
125 Old Dominion 1-5 103 32.74 2.8% 57.6% 124
126 Connecticut 1-5 55 31.63 2.2% 59.1% 127
127 New Mexico St 0-7 31 31.08 1.1% 59.8% 126
128 UTEP 1-4 121 29.28 3.6% 62.1% 128
129 Akron 0-6 113 23.91 10.7% 69.1% 129
130 Massachusetts 1-6 129 22.37 3.1% 71.0% 130

Best win: Ohio St. 42-0 vs. Cincinnati
Worst loss: Massachusetts 45-20 vs. Southern Illinois

Rk Conference Rating Best Team Worst Team
1 Big 10 55.91 77.28 34.13
2 Big 12 55.50 67.19 42.22
3 SEC 55.10 72.22 34.62
4 Pac-12 53.35 64.99 41.45
5 American 52.80 64.60 31.63
6 ACC 52.45 69.24 36.72
7 Mountain West 48.10 64.49 35.17
8 Sun Belt 46.47 62.92 34.87
9 Conference USA 43.18 53.85 29.28
10 MAC 42.04 51.32 23.91

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 *