J-Train College Football Computer Rankings, 2022 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 46 71.59 1
2 Tennessee 6-0 15 70.82 1.5% 1.1% 4
3 Georgia 7-0 59 69.49 2.6% 2.9% 3
4 Alabama 6-1 8 69.08 0.8% 3.5% 2
5 TCU 6-0 38 68.07 2.0% 4.9% 10
6 Clemson 7-0 51 67.55 1.0% 5.6% 6
7 Michigan 7-0 78 67.54 0.0% 5.7% 14
8 Mississippi 7-0 62 66.88 1.3% 6.6% 9
9 Syracuse 6-0 57 66.37 1.0% 7.3% 15
10 Texas 5-2 5 66.26 0.2% 7.4% 8
11 USC 6-1 32 66.11 0.3% 7.6% 5
12 UCLA 6-0 69 65.07 2.1% 9.1% 16
13 Oklahoma St 5-1 49 63.03 4.1% 11.9% 12
14 Mississippi St 5-2 20 62.72 0.6% 12.4% 7
15 Wake Forest 5-1 43 62.67 0.1% 12.5% 18
16 UCF 5-1 88 62.20 0.9% 13.1% 22
17 Kansas St 5-1 34 62.05 0.3% 13.3% 21
18 Utah 5-2 29 61.78 0.5% 13.7% 27
19 Penn St 5-1 40 61.73 0.1% 13.8% 11
20 Oregon 5-1 50 61.15 1.1% 14.6% 19
21 Illinois 6-1 111 60.89 0.5% 14.9% 26
22 LSU 5-2 27 60.61 0.6% 15.3% 24
23 Kansas 5-2 22 60.28 0.6% 15.8% 17
24 NC State 5-2 13 59.79 1.0% 16.5% 20
25 Maryland 5-2 37 59.46 0.6% 16.9% 29
26 Tulane 6-1 94 59.14 0.6% 17.4% 25
27 Kentucky 5-2 41 58.95 0.4% 17.7% 42
28 Purdue 5-2 26 58.90 0.1% 17.7% 28
29 James Madison 5-1 112 58.26 1.3% 18.6% 13
30 South Alabama 5-1 98 57.94 0.6% 19.1% 31
31 Florida St 4-3 11 57.62 0.6% 19.5% 30
32 Oklahoma 4-3 7 57.61 0.0% 19.5% 51
33 Oregon St 5-2 42 56.48 2.3% 21.1% 58
34 Washington 5-2 79 56.29 0.4% 21.4% 43
35 Cincinnati 5-1 117 55.87 0.8% 22.0% 38
36 Arkansas 4-3 10 55.86 0.0% 22.0% 54
37 North Carolina 6-1 91 55.54 0.6% 22.4% 39
38 Minnesota 4-2 100 54.90 1.3% 23.3% 40
39 Texas Tech 3-3 1 54.89 0.0% 23.3% 41
40 South Carolina 4-2 61 54.72 0.3% 23.6% 56
41 Florida 4-3 16 54.51 0.4% 23.9% 47
42 Louisville 3-3 24 54.42 0.2% 24.0% 53
43 Pittsburgh 4-2 76 54.36 0.1% 24.1% 50
44 Liberty 6-1 109 54.33 0.1% 24.1% 32
45 Notre Dame 3-3 12 54.13 0.4% 24.4% 23
46 Memphis 4-3 44 54.10 0.1% 24.4% 33
47 Troy 5-2 70 53.97 0.3% 24.6% 48
48 Iowa St 3-4 23 53.97 0.0% 24.6% 49
49 Houston 3-3 4 53.37 1.2% 25.4% 44
50 Toledo 5-2 116 53.35 0.1% 25.5% 62
51 Texas A&M 3-3 19 53.21 0.3% 25.7% 55
52 SMU 3-3 28 52.96 0.5% 26.0% 65
53 East Carolina 4-3 66 52.64 0.6% 26.5% 66
54 UAB 4-2 115 52.56 0.2% 26.6% 45
55 Baylor 3-3 54 52.49 0.1% 26.7% 36
56 Coastal Car 6-1 114 52.26 0.5% 27.0% 35
57 BYU 4-3 67 52.03 0.4% 27.3% 34
58 UT San Antonio 5-2 99 51.97 0.1% 27.4% 60
59 Duke 4-3 92 51.66 0.6% 27.8% 52
60 West Virginia 3-3 35 51.43 0.5% 28.2% 70
61 Georgia Tech 3-3 2 50.85 1.2% 29.0% 67
62 Auburn 3-4 3 50.81 0.1% 29.0% 59
63 Washington St 4-3 64 50.47 0.7% 29.5% 46
64 Iowa 3-3 58 50.26 0.4% 29.8% 68
65 Air Force 5-2 131 50.23 0.1% 29.8% 74
66 Appalachian St 3-3 52 50.13 0.2% 30.0% 63
67 San Jose St 4-2 128 49.82 0.6% 30.4% 37
68 Rice 3-3 45 49.52 0.6% 30.8% 57
69 Ga Southern 4-3 75 49.50 0.0% 30.9% 83
70 WKU 4-3 123 48.75 1.5% 31.9% 84
71 Missouri 2-4 33 48.25 1.0% 32.6% 72
72 Stanford 2-4 9 48.14 0.2% 32.8% 91
73 Michigan St 3-4 30 48.14 0.0% 32.8% 81
74 Boise St 4-2 125 48.03 0.2% 32.9% 73
75 Old Dominion 3-3 55 47.64 0.8% 33.5% 99
76 Miami FL 3-3 96 47.57 0.1% 33.5% 76
77 Vanderbilt 3-4 14 47.56 0.0% 33.6% 78
78 Louisiana 3-3 102 47.45 0.2% 33.7% 80
79 Indiana 3-4 21 47.37 0.2% 33.8% 85
80 Wisconsin 3-4 74 47.33 0.1% 33.9% 69
81 Southern Miss 3-3 56 47.21 0.2% 34.1% 82
82 North Texas 4-3 108 46.34 1.7% 35.3% 90
83 Arizona St 2-4 17 46.23 0.2% 35.4% 79
84 Wyoming 4-3 86 45.52 1.4% 36.4% 75
85 Buffalo 4-3 121 45.47 0.1% 36.5% 87
86 Marshall 3-3 120 45.13 0.7% 37.0% 71
87 FL Atlantic 3-4 85 45.12 0.0% 37.0% 105
88 Arkansas St 2-5 36 45.10 0.0% 37.0% 77
89 UNLV 4-3 118 45.02 0.2% 37.1% 64
90 Rutgers 3-3 77 44.75 0.5% 37.5% 88
91 Nebraska 3-4 80 44.70 0.1% 37.6% 94
92 Virginia 2-4 25 44.60 0.2% 37.7% 96
93 California 3-3 107 44.54 0.1% 37.8% 61
94 Ball St 4-3 103 44.17 0.7% 38.3% 107
95 Fresno St 2-4 53 43.73 0.9% 38.9% 116
96 Arizona 3-4 65 43.64 0.2% 39.0% 89
97 Ohio 4-3 113 43.55 0.2% 39.2% 104
98 ULM 2-5 18 43.27 0.6% 39.6% 93
99 Navy 2-4 71 42.66 1.2% 40.4% 97
100 Georgia St 2-4 68 42.55 0.2% 40.6% 101
101 C Michigan 2-5 48 42.12 0.9% 41.2% 109
102 MTSU 3-4 89 42.00 0.2% 41.3% 86
103 Connecticut 3-5 63 41.95 0.1% 41.4% 102
104 Kent 2-5 39 41.87 0.2% 41.5% 100
105 Tulsa 2-4 104 41.82 0.1% 41.6% 110
106 Texas St 3-4 106 41.60 0.5% 41.9% 95
107 Boston College 2-4 47 41.55 0.1% 42.0% 108
108 San Diego St 3-3 95 41.39 0.3% 42.2% 112
109 Army 2-4 97 40.78 1.2% 43.0% 115
110 Miami OH 3-4 105 40.24 1.1% 43.8% 103
111 Virginia Tech 2-5 73 40.15 0.2% 43.9% 114
112 Louisiana Tech 2-4 60 39.71 0.9% 44.5% 98
113 N Illinois 2-5 93 39.69 0.0% 44.6% 122
114 Utah St 3-4 90 39.56 0.3% 44.7% 111
115 Temple 2-4 87 39.30 0.5% 45.1% 106
116 Bowling Green 3-4 81 39.27 0.1% 45.1% 118
117 E Michigan 4-3 127 39.21 0.1% 45.2% 92
118 South Florida 1-6 31 38.75 0.9% 45.9% 117
119 Colorado 1-5 6 37.63 2.2% 47.4% 126
120 UTEP 3-4 122 36.73 1.8% 48.7% 120
121 New Mexico 2-5 126 35.15 3.2% 50.9% 113
122 Northwestern 1-5 82 34.61 1.1% 51.7% 121
123 W Michigan 2-5 101 34.49 0.2% 51.8% 119
124 Akron 1-6 72 32.93 3.1% 54.0% 124
125 Hawaii 2-5 119 32.50 0.9% 54.6% 129
126 Massachusetts 1-6 84 30.50 4.0% 57.4% 123
127 Nevada 2-5 130 30.18 0.6% 57.8% 125
128 Florida Intl 2-4 124 30.15 0.0% 57.9% 127
129 New Mexico St 2-5 129 29.96 0.4% 58.2% 131
130 Charlotte 1-6 83 29.76 0.4% 58.4% 130
131 Colorado St 1-5 110 28.24 3.9% 60.6% 128

Best win: Georgia 49-3 vs. Oregon
Worst loss: Colorado St 41-10 vs. CS Sacramento

Rk Conference Rating Best Team Worst Team
1 Big 12 59.01 68.07 51.43
2 SEC 58.82 70.82 47.56
3 ACC 53.91 67.55 40.15
4 Big 10 53.73 71.59 34.61
5 Pac-12 53.13 66.11 37.63
6 American 50.26 62.20 38.75
7 Sun Belt 48.71 58.26 41.60
8 Conference USA 42.96 52.56 29.76
9 MAC 41.36 53.35 32.93
10 Mountain West 40.78 50.23 28.24

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 *