Ballot Type: Computer
Submitted: Oct. 4, 2026, 9:34 a.m.
Overall Rationale: This ranking measures how good each team is right now. Its biggest input is opponent-adjusted scoring: how many points a team scores and allows compared with what its opponents usually give up and score. That is combined with results, strength of schedule, quality of wins and losses, and recent form. It adjusts for home field, limits the effect of blowouts, gives more credit for beating highly ranked opponents, and penalizes bad losses. Recent games count more than early ones. Early-season rankings lean partly on preseason ratings and can look odd until more games are played.
| Rank | Team | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Alabama Crimson Tide
|
1. Alabama — Score: 0.317 | Results: 1.796, SOS Rank: #6, Quality: 0.256, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 3, Off Rk: #1, Def Rk: #20 |
| 2 |
Texas Longhorns
|
2. Texas — Score: 0.280 | Results: 1.651, SOS Rank: #2, Quality: 0.271, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 1, T25W: 2, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #48, Def Rk: #1 |
| 3 |
Notre Dame Fighting Irish
|
3. Notre Dame — Score: 0.250 | Results: 1.706, SOS Rank: #37, Quality: 0.134, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #7, Def Rk: #5 |
| 4 |
Miami Hurricanes
|
4. Miami — Score: 0.231 | Results: 1.587, SOS Rank: #86, Quality: 0.089, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #4, Def Rk: #17 |
| 5 |
Texas Tech Red Raiders
|
5. Texas Tech — Score: 0.219 | Results: 1.588, SOS Rank: #38, Quality: 0.143, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #19, Def Rk: #9 |
| 6 |
Indiana Hoosiers
|
6. Indiana — Score: 0.213 | Results: 1.499, SOS Rank: #90, Quality: 0.115, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #23, Def Rk: #2 |
| 7 |
Georgia Bulldogs
|
7. Georgia — Score: 0.199 | Results: 1.556, SOS Rank: #111, Quality: 0.060, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #2, Def Rk: #48 |
| 8 |
Ohio State Buckeyes
|
8. Ohio State — Score: 0.195 | Results: 1.182, SOS Rank: #44, Quality: 0.071, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #5, Def Rk: #22 |
| 9 |
Utah Utes
|
9. Utah — Score: 0.188 | Results: 1.549, SOS Rank: #104, Quality: 0.051, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #21, Def Rk: #3 |
| 10 |
Oregon Ducks
|
10. Oregon — Score: 0.182 | Results: 0.886, SOS Rank: #30, Quality: 0.153, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #10, Def Rk: #73 |
| 11 |
LSU Tigers
|
11. LSU — Score: 0.182 | Results: 0.996, SOS Rank: #58, Quality: 0.073, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #9, Def Rk: #25 |
| 12 |
Nebraska Cornhuskers
|
12. Nebraska — Score: 0.179 | Results: 1.547, SOS Rank: #82, Quality: 0.019, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #8, Def Rk: #24 |
| 13 |
Pittsburgh Panthers
|
13. Pittsburgh — Score: 0.177 | Results: 1.433, SOS Rank: #66, Quality: 0.103, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #38, Def Rk: #30 |
| 14 |
Missouri Tigers
|
14. Missouri — Score: 0.172 | Results: 1.019, SOS Rank: #16, Quality: 0.102, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #24, Def Rk: #10 |
| 15 |
BYU Cougars
|
15. BYU — Score: 0.171 | Results: 1.525, SOS Rank: #95, Quality: 0.094, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #54, Def Rk: #8 |
| 16 |
Houston Cougars
|
16. Houston — Score: 0.171 | Results: 1.031, SOS Rank: #22, Quality: 0.125, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #13, Def Rk: #42 |
| 17 |
UCLA Bruins
|
17. UCLA — Score: 0.165 | Results: 1.626, SOS Rank: #97, Quality: 0.010, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 0, Off Rk: #12, Def Rk: #50 |
| 18 |
James Madison Dukes
|
18. James Madison — Score: 0.159 | Results: 1.437, SOS Rank: #123, Quality: 0.047, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #16, Def Rk: #52 |
| 19 |
Northwestern Wildcats
|
19. Northwestern — Score: 0.146 | Results: 0.894, SOS Rank: #3, Quality: 0.060, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #18, Def Rk: #11 |
| 20 |
Wisconsin Badgers
|
20. Wisconsin — Score: 0.141 | Results: 1.125, SOS Rank: #24, Quality: 0.044, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #33, Def Rk: #12 |
| 21 |
Boise State Broncos
|
21. Boise State — Score: 0.139 | Results: 1.150, SOS Rank: #26, Quality: 0.058, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #29, Def Rk: #28 |
| 22 |
Florida Gators
|
22. Florida — Score: 0.136 | Results: 0.911, SOS Rank: #7, Quality: 0.132, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #3, Def Rk: #97 |
| 23 |
Mississippi State Bulldogs
|
23. Mississippi State — Score: 0.127 | Results: 0.901, SOS Rank: #12, Quality: 0.153, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 1, T50W: 2, Off Rk: #15, Def Rk: #69 |
| 24 |
Oklahoma State Cowboys
|
24. Oklahoma State — Score: 0.127 | Results: 0.908, SOS Rank: #77, Quality: 0.087, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 1, T25W: 1, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #52, Def Rk: #44 |
| 25 |
Tennessee Volunteers
|
25. Tennessee — Score: 0.127 | Results: 0.947, SOS Rank: #53, Quality: 0.052, Recency: 0.000 | T10W: 0, T25W: 0, T50W: 1, Off Rk: #17, Def Rk: #31 |
Teams Ranked:
| Rank | Team | Unusualness |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Alabama Crimson Tide
|
0.72 |
| 2 |
Texas Longhorns
|
0.00 |
| 3 |
Notre Dame Fighting Irish
|
0.00 |
| 4 |
Miami Hurricanes
|
0.00 |
| 5 |
Texas Tech Red Raiders
|
0.85 |
| 6 |
Indiana Hoosiers
|
0.00 |
| 7 |
Georgia Bulldogs
|
-0.57 |
| 8 |
Ohio State Buckeyes
|
0.00 |
| 9 |
Utah Utes
|
0.00 |
| 10 |
Oregon Ducks
|
0.46 |
| 11 |
LSU Tigers
|
0.00 |
| 12 |
Nebraska Cornhuskers
|
0.82 |
| 13 |
Pittsburgh Panthers
|
0.29 |
| 14 |
Missouri Tigers
|
0.00 |
| 15 |
BYU Cougars
|
-0.69 |
| 16 |
Houston Cougars
|
1.22 |
| 17 |
UCLA Bruins
|
0.00 |
| 18 |
James Madison Dukes
|
1.17 |
| 19 |
Northwestern Wildcats
|
0.53 |
| 20 |
Wisconsin Badgers
|
1.36 |
| 21 |
Boise State Broncos
|
0.15 |
| 22 |
Florida Gators
|
-0.37 |
| 23 |
Mississippi State Bulldogs
|
-0.14 |
| 24 |
Oklahoma State Cowboys
|
0.00 |
| 25 |
Tennessee Volunteers
|
-0.69 |
Omissions:
| Team | Unusualness |
|---|---|
Ole Miss Rebels
|
1.19 |
Iowa Hawkeyes
|
0.47 |
USC Trojans
|
0.25 |
Duke Blue Devils
|
0.16 |
Total Score: 12.11