digdat0 Ballot for 2025 Week 8
Ballot Type: Computer
Submitted: Oct. 12, 2025, 8:20 a.m.
Overall Rationale: The ranking formula measures overall team strength using results, schedule difficulty, quality of wins, and recency. It adjusts for game location, caps margin of victory, and gives bonus credit for beating top-ranked opponents. The final composite score ranks FBS teams by rewarding recent, high-quality performances against strong competition.
| Rank | Team | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Indiana Hoosiers
|
1. Indiana — Score: 0.815 | Results: 1.077, SOS Rank: #11, Quality: 0.027, Recency: 0.073 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 4, Off Rk: #4, Def Rk: #4 |
| 2 |
Ohio State Buckeyes
|
2. Ohio State — Score: 0.807 | Results: 1.082, SOS Rank: #19, Quality: 0.080, Recency: 0.080 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 3, Off Rk: #23, Def Rk: #1 |
| 3 |
Texas Tech Red Raiders
|
3. Texas Tech — Score: 0.766 | Results: 0.983, SOS Rank: #89, Quality: 0.027, Recency: 0.077 | T10W: 1, T25W: 1, T50W: 3, Off Rk: #2, Def Rk: #6 |
| 4 |
Miami Hurricanes
|
4. Miami — Score: 0.751 | Results: 0.993, SOS Rank: #34, Quality: 0.064, Recency: 0.064 | T10W: 0, T25W: 2, T50W: 3, Off Rk: #35, Def Rk: #9 |
| 5 |
Ole Miss Rebels
|
5. Ole Miss — Score: 0.730 | Results: 0.967, SOS Rank: #56, Quality: 0.053, Recency: 0.073 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #20, Def Rk: #34 |
| 6 |
Texas A&M Aggies
|
6. Texas A&M — Score: 0.710 | Results: 1.011, SOS Rank: #52, Quality: 0.027, Recency: 0.080 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #37, Def Rk: #42 |
| 7 |
Memphis Tigers
|
7. Memphis — Score: 0.690 | Results: 0.848, SOS Rank: #122, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.070 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #13, Def Rk: #16 |
| 8 |
Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets
|
8. Georgia Tech — Score: 0.682 | Results: 0.925, SOS Rank: #69, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.073 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #24, Def Rk: #48 |
| 9 |
BYU Cougars
|
9. BYU — Score: 0.682 | Results: 0.832, SOS Rank: #120, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.083 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #21, Def Rk: #12 |
| 10 |
Utah Utes
|
10. Utah — Score: 0.665 | Results: 0.737, SOS Rank: #54, Quality: -0.018, Recency: 0.073 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #16, Def Rk: #11 |
| 11 |
Alabama Crimson Tide
|
11. Alabama — Score: 0.664 | Results: 0.813, SOS Rank: #16, Quality: 0.010, Recency: 0.080 | T10W: 0, T25W: 3, T50W: 3, Off Rk: #36, Def Rk: #22 |
| 12 |
Washington Huskies
|
12. Washington — Score: 0.660 | Results: 0.792, SOS Rank: #18, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.083 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #17, Def Rk: #37 |
| 13 |
Oregon Ducks
|
13. Oregon — Score: 0.645 | Results: 0.692, SOS Rank: #76, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.073 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #9, Def Rk: #14 |
| 14 |
Georgia Bulldogs
|
14. Georgia — Score: 0.629 | Results: 0.777, SOS Rank: #28, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.080 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #50, Def Rk: #19 |
| 15 |
Notre Dame Fighting Irish
|
15. Notre Dame — Score: 0.618 | Results: 0.628, SOS Rank: #6, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.087 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #14, Def Rk: #47 |
| 16 |
Nebraska Cornhuskers
|
16. Nebraska — Score: 0.607 | Results: 0.664, SOS Rank: #78, Quality: -0.043, Recency: 0.077 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #11, Def Rk: #30 |
| 17 |
USC Trojans
|
17. USC — Score: 0.605 | Results: 0.731, SOS Rank: #66, Quality: -0.018, Recency: 0.073 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #3, Def Rk: #51 |
| 18 |
Louisville Cardinals
|
18. Louisville — Score: 0.602 | Results: 0.741, SOS Rank: #20, Quality: -0.052, Recency: 0.072 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #29, Def Rk: #49 |
| 19 |
Missouri Tigers
|
19. Missouri — Score: 0.598 | Results: 0.615, SOS Rank: #114, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.073 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #10, Def Rk: #17 |
| 20 |
Cincinnati Bearcats
|
20. Cincinnati — Score: 0.591 | Results: 0.675, SOS Rank: #59, Quality: -0.043, Recency: 0.080 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #30, Def Rk: #35 |
| 21 |
Oklahoma Sooners
|
21. Oklahoma — Score: 0.590 | Results: 0.710, SOS Rank: #55, Quality: -0.043, Recency: 0.077 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #66, Def Rk: #2 |
| 22 |
LSU Tigers
|
22. LSU — Score: 0.580 | Results: 0.753, SOS Rank: #23, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.073 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #86, Def Rk: #5 |
| 23 |
Navy Midshipmen
|
23. Navy — Score: 0.580 | Results: 0.739, SOS Rank: #131, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.080 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #25, Def Rk: #53 |
| 24 |
USF Bulls
|
24. South Florida — Score: 0.578 | Results: 0.739, SOS Rank: #41, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.077 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #12, Def Rk: #70 |
| 25 |
Vanderbilt Commodores
|
25. Vanderbilt — Score: 0.566 | Results: 0.601, SOS Rank: #118, Quality: 0.000, Recency: 0.070 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #7, Def Rk: #36 |
Teams Ranked:
| Rank | Team | Unusualness |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Indiana Hoosiers
|
0.14 |
| 2 |
Ohio State Buckeyes
|
0.00 |
| 3 |
Texas Tech Red Raiders
|
0.62 |
| 4 |
Miami Hurricanes
|
0.00 |
| 5 |
Ole Miss Rebels
|
0.00 |
| 6 |
Texas A&M Aggies
|
-0.05 |
| 7 |
Memphis Tigers
|
1.63 |
| 8 |
Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets
|
0.01 |
| 9 |
BYU Cougars
|
0.20 |
| 10 |
Utah Utes
|
1.49 |
| 11 |
Alabama Crimson Tide
|
-0.44 |
| 12 |
Washington Huskies
|
2.34 |
| 13 |
Oregon Ducks
|
0.00 |
| 14 |
Georgia Bulldogs
|
-0.46 |
| 15 |
Notre Dame Fighting Irish
|
0.00 |
| 16 |
Nebraska Cornhuskers
|
1.47 |
| 17 |
USC Trojans
|
0.00 |
| 18 |
Louisville Cardinals
|
4.88 |
| 19 |
Missouri Tigers
|
0.00 |
| 20 |
Cincinnati Bearcats
|
0.00 |
| 21 |
Oklahoma Sooners
|
-0.21 |
| 22 |
LSU Tigers
|
-1.32 |
| 23 |
Navy Midshipmen
|
0.00 |
| 24 |
USF Bulls
|
-0.27 |
| 25 |
Vanderbilt Commodores
|
-0.91 |
Omissions:
| Team | Unusualness |
|---|---|
Tennessee Volunteers
|
2.30 |
Virginia Cavaliers
|
1.02 |
Texas Longhorns
|
0.16 |
Total Score: 19.92