J-Train Computer Rankings, 2016 Week 8

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 Alabama 8-0 10 18.190 2
2 Michigan 7-0 19 17.914 1.5% 1.5% 1
3 Clemson 7-0 18 15.891 11.1% 12.6% 4
4 W Michigan 8-0 90 14.068 10.0% 22.7% 7
5 Washington 7-0 118 13.818 1.4% 24.0% 6
6 Boise St 7-0 46 13.462 2.0% 26.0% 9
7 Ohio St 6-1 25 13.191 1.5% 27.5% 3
8 Louisville 6-1 27 13.099 0.5% 28.0% 11
9 Nebraska 7-0 88 12.931 0.9% 28.9% 8
10 West Virginia 6-0 92 12.496 2.4% 31.3% 10
11 Texas A&M 6-1 16 11.732 4.2% 35.5% 5
12 Baylor 6-0 125 11.196 2.9% 38.4% 13
13 Florida 5-1 57 10.089 6.1% 44.5% 14
14 Tennessee 5-2 1 9.385 3.9% 48.4% 15
15 Troy 6-1 96 9.096 1.6% 50.0% 17
16 Auburn 5-2 17 8.957 0.8% 50.8% 20
17 Penn St 5-2 2 8.695 1.4% 52.2% 26
18 Wisconsin 5-2 5 8.451 1.3% 53.5% 21
19 Toledo 6-1 121 8.239 1.2% 54.7% 23
20 Colorado 6-2 31 8.230 0.1% 54.8% 19
21 Utah 7-1 103 7.895 1.8% 56.6% 22
22 Navy 5-1 76 7.670 1.2% 57.8% 25
23 Florida St 5-2 15 7.428 1.3% 59.2% 18
24 Houston 6-2 75 7.011 2.3% 61.5% 12
25 LSU 5-2 54 6.972 0.2% 61.7% 34
26 Washington St 5-2 51 6.838 0.7% 62.4% 28
27 Virginia Tech 5-2 60 6.626 1.2% 63.6% 38
28 Oklahoma 5-2 23 6.403 1.2% 64.8% 27
29 Appalachian St 5-2 37 6.355 0.3% 65.1% 37
30 San Diego St 6-1 126 6.259 0.5% 65.6% 36
31 South Florida 6-2 100 6.131 0.7% 66.3% 16
32 North Carolina 6-2 50 5.909 1.2% 67.5% 33
33 Pittsburgh 5-2 62 5.360 3.0% 70.5% 35
34 Minnesota 5-2 64 5.283 0.4% 71.0% 40
35 Oklahoma St 5-2 95 5.031 1.4% 72.3% 42
36 USC 4-3 4 4.703 1.8% 74.1% 39
37 Maryland 5-2 91 4.614 0.5% 74.6% 46
38 Wyoming 5-2 84 4.443 0.9% 75.6% 45
39 MTSU 5-2 110 4.122 1.8% 77.3% 55
40 Tulsa 5-2 99 4.095 0.2% 77.5% 51
41 Wake Forest 5-2 78 4.011 0.5% 78.0% 41
42 Memphis 5-2 114 3.952 0.3% 78.3% 24
43 Temple 5-3 49 3.718 1.3% 79.6% 59
44 Miami FL 4-3 39 3.578 0.8% 80.3% 29
45 Stanford 4-3 6 3.365 1.2% 81.5% 32
46 WKU 5-3 72 3.249 0.6% 82.1% 66
47 Arkansas 5-3 20 3.030 1.2% 83.3% 30
48 NC State 4-3 33 2.796 1.3% 84.6% 31
49 Northwestern 4-3 35 2.653 0.8% 85.4% 58
50 Arizona St 5-3 40 2.441 1.2% 86.6% 43
51 Georgia Tech 4-3 28 2.345 0.5% 87.1% 52
52 UCF 4-3 63 2.124 1.2% 88.3% 61
53 Iowa 5-3 109 2.122 0.0% 88.3% 48
54 BYU 4-4 12 2.068 0.3% 88.6% 50
55 California 4-3 30 2.014 0.3% 88.9% 60
56 Louisiana Tech 5-3 116 1.861 0.8% 89.8% 65
57 Akron 5-3 80 1.625 1.3% 91.1% 68
58 Air Force 4-3 83 1.318 1.7% 92.8% 47
59 E Michigan 5-3 67 1.278 0.2% 93.0% 54
60 C Michigan 5-3 73 1.245 0.2% 93.2% 49
61 Kansas St 4-3 68 1.212 0.2% 93.3% 67
62 Kentucky 4-3 24 0.946 1.5% 94.8% 70
63 Mississippi 3-4 9 0.933 0.1% 94.9% 44
64 TCU 4-3 87 0.765 0.9% 95.8% 53
65 Georgia 4-3 59 0.396 2.0% 97.8% 64
66 Southern Miss 4-3 105 -0.040 2.4% 100.2% 71
67 Colorado St 4-4 34 -0.331 1.6% 101.8% 78
68 Ohio 5-3 123 -0.586 1.4% 103.2% 73
69 Vanderbilt 4-4 36 -0.619 0.2% 103.4% 79
70 North Texas 4-3 102 -0.648 0.2% 103.6% 92
71 New Mexico 4-3 117 -0.659 0.1% 103.6% 82
72 Old Dominion 4-3 111 -0.662 0.0% 103.6% 56
73 Ga Southern 4-3 112 -0.681 0.1% 103.7% 75
74 Army 4-3 127 -1.040 2.0% 105.7% 63
75 Cincinnati 4-3 113 -1.185 0.8% 106.5% 81
76 Indiana 3-4 21 -1.290 0.6% 107.1% 57
77 UCLA 3-5 11 -1.346 0.3% 107.4% 62
78 Syracuse 4-4 38 -1.497 0.8% 108.2% 85
79 Texas Tech 3-4 43 -1.728 1.3% 109.5% 69
80 SMU 3-4 22 -1.906 1.0% 110.5% 103
81 Texas 3-4 70 -2.584 3.7% 114.2% 76
82 Idaho 4-4 45 -2.915 1.8% 116.0% 72
83 Hawaii 4-4 94 -2.976 0.3% 116.4% 97
84 Utah St 3-4 81 -3.182 1.1% 117.5% 96
85 Tulane 3-4 74 -3.592 2.3% 119.7% 74
86 Duke 3-4 66 -3.645 0.3% 120.0% 88
87 Boston College 3-4 93 -3.781 0.7% 120.8% 77
88 Oregon 2-5 13 -3.986 1.1% 121.9% 80
89 Missouri 2-5 14 -4.148 0.9% 122.8% 86
90 Ball St 4-4 124 -4.159 0.1% 122.9% 83
91 Oregon St 2-5 3 -4.362 1.1% 124.0% 89
92 South Carolina 3-4 71 -4.603 1.3% 125.3% 102
93 Purdue 3-4 65 -4.623 0.1% 125.4% 90
94 South Alabama 3-4 86 -4.636 0.1% 125.5% 93
95 ULL 3-4 98 -4.667 0.2% 125.7% 107
96 Illinois 2-5 8 -4.850 1.0% 126.7% 91
97 UT San Antonio 3-4 119 -4.971 0.7% 127.3% 84
98 Connecticut 3-5 44 -5.011 0.2% 127.6% 87
99 Mississippi St 2-5 41 -5.431 2.3% 129.9% 95
100 Arizona 2-5 26 -5.963 2.9% 132.8% 100
101 Notre Dame 2-5 82 -6.141 1.0% 133.8% 99
102 Rutgers 2-6 7 -6.223 0.5% 134.2% 98
103 UNLV 3-5 101 -6.299 0.4% 134.6% 94
104 Georgia St 2-5 52 -6.772 2.6% 137.2% 113
105 Michigan St 2-5 53 -7.381 3.3% 140.6% 104
106 Arkansas St 2-4 56 -7.423 0.2% 140.8% 108
107 Charlotte 3-5 104 -7.430 0.0% 140.8% 115
108 East Carolina 2-5 48 -7.570 0.8% 141.6% 101
109 N Illinois 2-6 47 -7.733 0.9% 142.5% 116
110 Virginia 2-5 79 -8.189 2.5% 145.0% 106
111 Marshall 2-5 85 -8.561 2.0% 147.1% 109
112 ULM 2-5 77 -8.646 0.5% 147.5% 105
113 Florida Intl 3-5 115 -8.739 0.5% 148.0% 111
114 Kent 2-6 107 -8.837 0.5% 148.6% 112
115 New Mexico St 2-5 58 -9.235 2.2% 150.8% 117
116 Nevada 3-5 128 -9.235 0.0% 150.8% 114
117 Miami OH 2-6 108 -10.125 4.9% 155.7% 124
118 Texas St 2-5 106 -10.417 1.6% 157.3% 110
119 San Jose St 2-6 89 -10.690 1.5% 158.8% 120
120 UTEP 2-5 97 -10.736 0.3% 159.0% 126
121 Iowa St 1-6 61 -11.385 3.6% 162.6% 121
122 Kansas 1-6 32 -11.500 0.6% 163.2% 119
123 Rice 1-6 55 -11.696 1.1% 164.3% 127
124 Fresno St 1-7 42 -12.239 3.0% 167.3% 122
125 Bowling Green 1-7 29 -12.251 0.1% 167.4% 118
126 Massachusetts 1-7 69 -13.139 4.9% 172.2% 123
127 FL Atlantic 1-6 120 -13.825 3.8% 176.0% 125
128 Buffalo 1-6 122 -16.774 16.2% 192.2% 128

Best win: Alabama 49-10 vs. Tennessee
Worst loss: Virginia 20-37 vs. Richmond

Rk Conference Rating Best Team Worst Team
1 SEC 3.988 18.190 -5.431
2 Big 10 3.678 17.914 -7.381
3 ACC 3.566 15.891 -8.189
4 Pac-12 2.804 13.818 -5.963
5 American 1.286 7.670 -7.570
6 Big 12 0.991 12.496 -11.500
7 Mountain West -1.677 13.462 -12.239
8 MAC -2.834 14.068 -16.774
9 Sun Belt -3.631 9.096 -10.417
10 Conference USA -4.467 4.122 -13.825

SOS = Strength of schedule ranking based on games played
% Bhnd = Percentage of the number one 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 *