[list][*]2/3 winning % (1A wins, all losses count)[/*:m]
[*]2/9 1A opps' winning %[/*:m]
[*]1/9 1A opps' 1A opps' winning %[/*:m]
[*]-.1 for every lower-division loss[/*:m]
[*][i:[/*:m]]subtotal
[*]if team has beaten a team with >.700 subtotal, add 1/4 the difference to subtotal.[/list:u:[/*:m]]

1. LSU 808.48
2. USC 788.56
3. Miami (OH) 779.00
4. Boise State 765.56
5. Oklahoma 750.08
6. Ohio State 747.38
7. Miami 739.94
8. Utah 718.81
9. TCU 711.93
10. Iowa 708.51
11. Georgia 704.79
12. Michigan 704.58
13. Florida State 697.24
14. Tennessee 693.40
15. Texas 688.43
16. Washington State 683.80
17. Bowling Green 681.88
18. Northern Illinois 680.91
19. Mississippi 679.55
20. Nebraska 679.54
21. Maryland 674.34
22. Minnesota 668.00
23. Kansas State 655.03
24. Arkansas 638.37
25. Purdue 634.40
26. Southern Mississippi 633.77
27. Clemson 624.11
28. Connecticut 622.71
29. Oklahoma State 616.31
30. Florida 611.80
31. Louisville 606.87
32. Memphis 603.80
33. North Texas 603.15
34. Oregon 585.97
35. Oregon State 585.73
36. Marshall 583.16
37. Virginia 583.07
38. Michigan State 582.74
39. Texas Tech 581.43
40. California 580.31
41. Toledo 578.91
42. Pittsburgh 577.26
43. West Virginia 576.24
44. Fresno State 576.14
45. Boston College 575.91
46. Auburn 573.29
47. North Carolina State 573.23
48. Virginia Tech 569.27
49. Hawaii 569.15
50. New Mexico 558.89
51. Missouri 554.63
52. Wisconsin 546.30
53. Tulsa 545.37
54. Georgia Tech 534.74
55. South Florida 527.41
56. Air Force 523.78
57. Houston 517.12
58. Colorado State 514.88
59. Washington 507.89
60. UNLV 503.61
61. Syracuse 499.21
62. Northwestern 487.36
63. UCLA 483.04
64. Notre Dame 475.47
65. Akron 475.40
66. Nevada 468.36
67. South Carolina 466.29
68. Colorado 463.89
69. Wake Forest 455.73
70. Louisiana Tech 451.59
71. UAB 443.71
72. Kansas 443.55
73. Rutgers 441.32
74. Troy State 436.96
75. San Diego State 435.57
76. Rice 429.33
77. Navy 427.96
78. Stanford 420.45
79. Texas A&M 418.35
80. Arizona State 416.66
81. BYU 411.40
82. Cincinnati 410.19
83. Alabama 408.37
84. Western Michigan 407.71
85. Tulane 406.86
86. Kent State 400.92
87. Duke 364.91
88. Ball State 359.06
89. Wyoming 357.95
90. Penn State 348.44
91. Arkansas State 345.47
92. Kentucky 341.57
93. ULL 338.66
94. Utah State 314.92
95. Arizona 305.02
96. Baylor 299.57
97. Mississippi State 293.76
98. San Jose State 292.69
99. North Carolina 284.30
100. New Mexico State 273.09
101. Central Florida 271.68
102. Middle Tennessee State 268.43
103. Iowa State 259.51
104. Vanderbilt 247.30
105. Indiana 238.91
106. Central Michigan 233.06
107. East Carolina 221.05
108. Ohio 216.99
109. Illinois 186.46
110. Eastern Michigan 185.40
111. SMU 167.64
112. Army 166.89
113. Buffalo 130.31
114. Temple 129.58
115. Idaho 115.62
116. UTEP 113.79
117. ULM 14.37

Judging from your belief that non-BCS conference teams do not deserve BCS bowl bids, I have to believe that you aren't particularly satisfied with the results your ratings generate. Do you really think 4 of the Top 9 teams this year were from minor conferences? If so, then 4 of the 8 teams in the BCS bowls should have been non-BCS conference teams.

There's a clear overemphasis on W-L record inherent in your system. It doesn't matter that teams like Boise St and TCU played horrible schedules. Let's use TCU and Alabama as an example. Alabama beat the USM who beat TCU and also beat S. Florida by much worse than did TCU. TCU played two legitimate Top 50 teams all year and lost both games. Their beating up on 11 weaklings, while Alabama was losing almost exclusively to Top 35 teams (Auburn down at #46 is also clearly wrong) doesn't make TCU 74 places better than Alabama. In fact, Alabama should probably be ranked higher than TCU.

I would guess that there are a lot of minor conference teams with pretty records ranked ahead of major conference teams who beat them. That shouldn't be the case.

Here's a link to an explanation of my own ratings (though there have been modifications since the explantion was written):
http://www.gasf.com/article.asp?id=ratings_explain

Here are the final rankings:
http://www.gasf.com/comm/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=26566

I believe that Boise State and Miami-OH deserved better than what they got--if that's a BCS bid, I would have been fine with it. It must be noted, however, that BSU wasn't in my top 8 at bowl selection time, meaning if it were up to me they definitely wouldn't be in. As far as Miami, though, I think they were my #5, and OU was ranked above them--that would make UM-O my second at-large bid. The computers had UM-O #6, so I wasn't too different from them. Remember, those rankings above are after the bowls.

As far as w/l % being overemphasized, I won't categorically disagree with you, and I've been thinking of compiling another system just to compare. My system basically says boldly, "Your winning percentage is twice as important as everything else," and goes with it. Just an opinion, that's all. I'm not flashing it around demanding respect for it or anything--just good fun with Excel, and an objective way of looking at things.

Geaux Tigers!

Don't get me wrong. I admire any attempt to develop consistent, objective means for ranking teams. My point was more to encourage you to explore ways to modify your system to bring it more into line with what you subjectively feel is correct. Even from an objective standpoint, you have to know that 4 of the 9 best teams were not non-BCS teams.

While not every team with talent is going to live up to its potential and not every BCS conference team is well-coached, there are going to be enough BCS conference teams who have good enough coaching to make use of the talent they have to make that an impossible scenario. The numbers I posted in my minor conference vs. BCS conference thread should be enough to show that such is the case.

There are some very good coaches at non-BCS schools, but they eventually graduate to the big-time where they will have more talent and money with which to work. A minor conference team will rise up and have a great year from time-to-time, but not 4 of the top 9 or 6 of the top 18.

Miami-Ohio has a legit claim to Top 10 status, though based more on what their opponents did than what they themselves did. I don't necessarily think they were one of the 10 best teams this season, but I do believe they had one of the 10 best seasons. They had the best season for a minor conference team since probably BYU in 1984.

Boise St has had Top 25 caliber seasons the last two years, though that has been exclusively feeding on minor conference teams. I'm not sure they would have done that well even in MWC or C-USA. They played one BCS conference team in 2003 and lost to a very mediocre Oregon St team. In 2002, they lost to 9-5 Arkansas 31-7. I think each of the seasons was good enough to warrant inclusion in the Top 25, but, again, I do not believe they were one of the 25 best teams either season. No way did they have a Top 10 season either year.

TCU in the Top 10 or even the Top 25 is a joke. They played two Top 40 teams all year and lost both games. They struggled mightily against quite a few very bad teams. Had they played a BCS conference schedule they probably wouldn't have even had a winning season.

A case can be made for Utah at the bottom of the Top 25, but not Top 10, and that's only because this was a year in which the gap between BCS and non-BCS was smaller than normal. Even there, they lost to a Texas A&M team who went 0-8 against BCS conference teams with winning records. Still, they did have quality wins over Cal and Oregon.

A case can also be made for Bowling Green at the bottom of the Top 25. Their road win at Purdue was impressive. Of course, that's really the extent of their Top 25 credentials. Still, in a season like 2003, that's arguably enough.

There's no doubt that minor conference teams had more claims to Top 25 status this year than probably any year in the past 20-25. Very few BCS teams played with any degree of consistency. Things drop off substantially past the Top 10 and past the top 16 or so, you're really having to take some questionable teams to fill out a Top 25. On average, however, there aren't any legit Top 10 teams amongst the minor conferences and only two or three have any real arguments for inclusion in the Top 25.

Hooray! I've caused controversy!

Seriously, when I first came up with this formula (which isn't a very complex one, btw, making changes easy), it included 90% winning %, 10% opps' winning %, and 1% opps' opps' winning %. I'd say my current system is a step in the right direction.

However, I've revised it again, having suspected for some time that it was still too steep.

[list][*].6 winning %[/*:m]
[*].3 opps %[/*:m]
[*].15 opps opps %[/*:m]
[*]-.1 per lower-div loss[/*:m]
[*][i:[/*:m]]subtotal
[*]If a team has defeated a team whose subtotal is >.70000, add 3/10 the difference to that team's subtotal[/list:u:[/*:m]]

Here's how 2003 shapes up for this season:

1. LSU 823.38
2. USC 789.11
3. Miami (OH) 773.07
4. Oklahoma 755.46
5. Ohio State 755.11
6. Boise State 754.97
7. Miami 752.07
8. Iowa 724.89
9. Michigan 722.80
10. Utah 720.39
11. Georgia 715.75
12. Florida State 710.50
13. TCU 707.25
14. Tennessee 706.87
15. Texas 698.61
16. Bowling Green 695.54
17. Washington State 692.36
18. Mississippi 686.62
19. Nebraska 686.61
20. Maryland 685.36
21. Kansas State 678.18
22. Northern Illinois 673.77
23. Minnesota 671.03
24. Florida 654.45
25. Arkansas 654.11
26. Purdue 648.75
27. Southern Mississippi 646.29
28. Clemson 646.04
29. Oklahoma State 632.01
30. Connecticut 622.48
31. Memphis 615.13
32. Oregon State 612.13
33. Louisville 611.59
34. California 611.31
35. Oregon 607.93
36. North Texas 606.57
37. Virginia 602.53
38. Michigan State 602.09
39. Texas Tech 600.31
40. Auburn 598.94
41. North Carolina State 598.86
42. Marshall 596.36
43. Virginia Tech 595.06
44. Pittsburgh 594.69
45. West Virginia 593.31
46. Fresno State 593.17
47. Boston College 592.87
48. Toledo 590.62
49. Hawaii 583.74
50. New Mexico 579.95
51. Wisconsin 578.35
52. Missouri 573.75
53. Tulsa 561.25
54. Georgia Tech 560.36
55. South Florida 545.33
56. Colorado State 545.09
57. Air Force 543.47
58. Houston 536.57
59. Washington 535.65
60. UNLV 529.87
61. Syracuse 523.94
62. Northwestern 519.47
63. Notre Dame 516.89
64. UCLA 513.64
65. South Carolina 504.50
66. Colorado 501.25
67. Nevada 495.92
68. Akron 491.79
69. Wake Forest 490.24
70. Louisiana Tech 484.65
71. UAB 474.01
72. Kansas 473.80
73. Rutgers 470.79
74. Troy State 469.90
75. San Diego State 468.02
76. Texas A&M 465.22
77. Alabama 458.99
78. Stanford 458.52
79. BYU 455.39
80. Rice 454.60
81. Arizona State 453.39
82. Cincinnati 444.67
83. Western Michigan 441.32
84. Tulane 440.17
85. Navy 437.75
86. Kent State 432.15
87. Duke 410.80
88. Ball State 402.92
89. Wyoming 401.41
90. Penn State 395.39
91. Kentucky 379.30
92. Arkansas State 376.38
93. ULL 375.38
94. Arizona 361.78
95. Utah State 350.15
96. Baylor 349.87
97. Mississippi State 346.58
98. San Jose State 335.14
99. North Carolina 333.81
100. Iowa State 323.07
101. New Mexico State 314.13
102. Central Florida 312.22
103. Vanderbilt 306.58
104. Middle Tennessee State 297.38
105. Indiana 295.25
106. Central Michigan 284.63
107. East Carolina 273.41
108. Ohio 265.67
109. Illinois 251.73
110. Eastern Michigan 230.75
111. SMU 226.32
112. Army 225.30
113. Buffalo 185.92
114. Temple 184.94
115. UTEP 163.61
116. Idaho 151.09
117. ULM 64.40


The most glaring difference to me is a very good one: previously I had TCU ahead of Iowa, UGA, Michigan, & FSU, which is ridiculous. TCU at #13 seems less stupid.

Also, Florida jumped six spots because of the toughest schedule in the country (according to my #'s). I previously had Connecticut ranked ahead of them.