Monday, November 30, 2009

NCAA Football Strength of Schedule - Week 13

The following ranking is dependent on Opponent's Winning Percentage (OW%). It takes into account only teams that have been played and not future opponents. FCS (I-AA) teams' records are only reflective of games they have played against FBS (I-A) opponents. This means that if an FCS opponent plays one game against an FBS (I-A) opponent and lose, their record is reflected as 0-1. Teams of note have been written in bold.

HARDEST

1. Mississippi State [OW%: 0.699]

2. Florida State [OW%: 0.632]

3. Syracuse [OW%: 0.630]

4. Miami (OH) [OW%: 0.629]

5. Louisville [OW%: 0.627]

6. Virginia [OW%: 0.624]

7. Oklahoma [OW%: 0.619]

8. Arkansas [OW%: 0.617]

9. Baylor [OW%: 0.609]

10. Illinois [OW%: 0.608]

11. Minnesota [OW%: 0.608]

12. Connecticut [OW%: 0.607]

13. Georgia [OW%: 0.604]

14. San Jose State [OW%: 0.600]

15. South Carolina [OW%: 0.598]

16. Vanderbilt [OW%: 0.598]

17. Virginia Tech [OW%: 0.590]

18. Washington State [OW%: 0.587]

19. Louisiana Tech [OW%: 0.587]

20. Colorado [OW%: 0.580]

21. Michigan State [OW%: 0.580]

22. Memphis [OW%: 0.579]

23. Arizona [OW%: 0.576]

24. Miami (FL) [OW%: 0.576]

25. Washington [OW%: 0.570]

26. North Carolina [OW%: 0.570]

27. Auburn [OW%: 0.568]

28. Clemson [OW%: 0.567]

29. Maryland [OW%: 0.565]

30. Kansas [OW%: 0.564]

31. Arizona State [OW%: 0.563]

32. Oregon [OW%: 0.563]

33. Wisconsin [OW%: 0.562]

34. Iowa [OW%: 0.562]

35. UNLV [OW%: 0.561]

36. Florida International [OW%: 0.558]

37. Utah State [OW%: 0.557]

38. West Virginia [OW%: 0.556]

39. Tulane [OW%: 0.553]

40. Tennessee [OW%: 0.552]

41. South Florida [OW%: 0.551]

42. NC State [OW%: 0.549]

43. Wake Forest [OW%: 0.549]

44. Oklahoma State [OW%: 0.549]

45. Purdue [OW%: 0.546]

46. Notre Dame [OW%: 0.543]

47. Fresno State [OW%: 0.542]

48. New Mexico [OW%: 0.542]

49. Missouri [OW%: 0.541]

50. Alabama [OW%: 0.538]

51. Colorado State [OW%: 0.537]

52. UCLA [OW%: 0.536]

53. LSU [OW%: 0.535]

54. Rice [OW%: 0.535]

55. Oregon State [OW%: 0.534]

56. Texas Tech [OW%: 0.534]

57. Ohio State [OW%: 0.532]

58. Iowa State [OW%: 0.530]

59. Indiana [OW%: 0.530]

60. Akron [OW%: 0.526]

61. Buffalo [OW%: 0.526]

62. Wyoming [OW%: 0.526]

63. Kentucky [OW%: 0.522]

64. Pittsburgh [OW%: 0.521]

65. Arkansas State [OW%: 0.521]

66. Western Kentucky [OW%: 0.521]

67. Bowling Green [OW%: 0.521]

68. Kansas State [OW%: 0.520]

69. Southern Cal [OW%: 0.520]

70. Central Florida [OW%: 0.519]

71. Air Force [OW%: 0.519]

72. Florida [OW%: 0.519]

73. Penn State [OW%: 0.515]

74. Marshall [OW%: 0.515]

75. San Diego State [OW%: 0.515]

76. Texas [OW%: 0.514]

77. Duke [OW%: 0.512]

78. Mississippi [OW%: 0.512]

79. Michigan [OW%: 0.511]

80. East Carolina [OW%: 0.508]

81. Ball State [OW%: 0.508]

82. California [OW%: 0.504]

83. Boston College [OW%: 0.504]

84. Georgia Tech [OW%: 0.500]

85. Texas A&M [OW%: 0.500]

86. UAB [OW%: 0.497]

87. Eastern Michigan [OW%: 0.497]

88. Stanford [OW%: 0.496]

89. Navy [OW%: 0.492]

90. Cincinnati [OW%: 0.491]

91. North Texas [OW%: 0.489]

92. Nebraska [OW%: 0.486]

93. Rutgers [OW%: 0.486]

94. Southern Methodist [OW%: 0.481]

95. Florida Atlantic [OW%: 0.477]

96. Tulsa [OW%: 0.474]

97. Texas Christian [OW%: 0.474]

98. Utah [OW%: 0.472]

99. Nevada [OW%: 0.468]

100. Hawaii [OW%: 0.466]

101. Brigham Young [OW%: 0.465]

102. Louisiana-Lafayette [OW%: 0.465]

103. Troy [OW%: 0.457]

104. Louisiana-Monroe [OW%: 0.454]

105. Boise State [OW%: 0.454]

106. UTEP [OW%: 0.451]

107. Idaho [OW%: 0.450]

108. Houston [OW%: 0.448]

109. Southern Miss [OW%: 0.440]

110. Northwestern [OW%: 0.435]

111. Toledo [OW%: 0.434]

112. New Mexico State [OW%: 0.431]

113. Kent State [OW%: 0.425]

114. Northern Illinois [OW%: 0.417]

115. Central Michigan [OW%: 0.414]

116. Temple [OW%: 0.409]

117. Ohio [OW%: 0.406]

118. Western Michigan [OW%: 0.376]

119. Army [OW%: 0.367]

120. Middle Tennessee [OW%: 0.357]

EASIEST


These rankings and numeric values are the sole property of ZONQ Sports. Any written use must be approved.

0 comments: