(December 2, 2012)
| |
Harris Interactive
|
USA Today
|
Computers
|
| Rank |
Team |
BCS Avg. |
Prev. |
Rank |
Pts. |
% |
Rank |
Pts. |
% |
Avg. Rank |
% |
| 1. |
Notre Dame (12-0) |
.9978 |
1 |
1 |
2866 |
.9969 |
1 |
1470 |
.9966 |
1 |
1.0000 |
| 2. |
Alabama (12-1) |
.9441 |
2 |
2 |
2765 |
.9617 |
2 |
1417 |
.9607 |
3 |
.9100 |
| 3. |
Florida (11-1) |
.8984 |
4 |
4 |
2480 |
.8626 |
4 |
1287 |
.8725 |
2 |
.9600 |
| 4. |
Oregon (11-1) |
.8621 |
5 |
3 |
2548 |
.8863 |
3 |
1313 |
.8902 |
6 |
.8100 |
| 5. |
Kansas State (11-1) |
.8226 |
6 |
6 |
2332 |
.8111 |
6 |
1190 |
.8068 |
4 |
.8500 |
| 6. |
Stanford (11-2) |
.7683 |
8 |
7 |
2142 |
.7450 |
8 |
1047 |
.7098 |
4 |
.8500 |
| 7. |
Georgia (11-2) |
.7583 |
3 |
5 |
2388 |
.8306 |
5 |
1216 |
.8244 |
11 |
.6200 |
| 8. |
LSU (10-2) |
.7511 |
7 |
8 |
2128 |
.7402 |
7 |
1111 |
.7532 |
7 |
.7600 |
| 9. |
Texas A&M (10-2) |
.6756 |
9 |
9 |
1991 |
.6925 |
9 |
1039 |
.7044 |
10 |
.6300 |
| 10. |
South Carolina (10-2) |
.6604 |
10 |
10 |
1838 |
.6393 |
10 |
947 |
.6420 |
9 |
.7000 |
| 11. |
Oklahoma (10-2) |
.6502 |
11 |
11 |
1745 |
.6070 |
11 |
905 |
.6136 |
8 |
.7300 |
| 12. |
Florida State (11-2) |
.5047 |
13 |
12 |
1655 |
.5757 |
12 |
853 |
.5783 |
16 |
.3600 |
| 13. |
Oregon State (9-3) |
.4716 |
15 |
14 |
1280 |
.4452 |
14 |
663 |
.4495 |
12 |
.5200 |
| 14. |
Clemson (10-2) |
.4693 |
14 |
13 |
1485 |
.5165 |
13 |
769 |
.5214 |
15 |
.3700 |
| 15. |
Northern Illinois (12-1) |
.3276 |
21 |
16 |
998 |
.3471 |
16 |
495 |
.3356 |
19 |
.3000 |
| 16. |
Nebraska (10-3) |
.3264 |
12 |
18 |
710 |
.2470 |
21 |
328 |
.2224 |
13 |
.5100 |
| 17. |
UCLA (9-4) |
.2872 |
16 |
17 |
791 |
.2751 |
19 |
408 |
.2766 |
17 |
.3100 |
| 18. |
Michigan (8-4) |
.2537 |
19 |
22 |
525 |
.1826 |
22 |
278 |
.1885 |
14 |
.3900 |
| 19. |
Boise State (10-2) |
.2513 |
20 |
15 |
1058 |
.3680 |
15 |
569 |
.3858 |
31 |
.0000 |
| 20. |
Northwestern (9-3) |
.2327 |
22 |
20 |
682 |
.2372 |
17 |
444 |
.3010 |
21 |
.1600 |
| 21. |
Louisville (10-2) |
.1808 |
NR |
19 |
705 |
.2452 |
18 |
409 |
.2773 |
29 |
.0200 |
| 22. |
Utah State (10-2) |
.1787 |
24 |
21 |
660 |
.2296 |
20 |
334 |
.2264 |
23 |
.0800 |
| 23. |
Texas (8-4) |
.1519 |
18 |
24 |
230 |
.0800 |
25 |
97 |
.0658 |
17 |
.3100 |
| 24. |
San Jose State (10-2) |
.1346 |
25 |
26 |
199 |
.0692 |
24 |
110 |
.0746 |
20 |
.2600 |
| 25. |
Kent State (11-2) |
.0772 |
17 |
23 |
330 |
.1148 |
26 |
84 |
.0569 |
25 |
.0600 |
POLL EXPLANATION & ABOUT THE BCS:
The Harris Interactive Poll, USA Today Coaches Poll and computer rankings each comprise one-third of the BCS Standings. To derive the three percentages, each team is assigned an inverse point total (25 for No. 1, 24 for No. 2, etc.) The two poll percentages are calculated by dividing each team’s point total by a maximum 2875 possible points (Harris) and 1475 possible points (USA Today). The computer rankings percentage is calculated by dropping the highest and lowest ranking for each team and then dividing the remaining total by 100 (the maximum possible points). The BCS Average is calculated by averaging the percentage totals of the Harris Interactive Poll, USA Today Poll, and computer rankings. The teams’ BCS Averages are ranked to produce the BCS Standings. The six computer ranking providers are Anderson & Hester, Richard Billingsley, Wes Colley, Kenneth Massey, Jeff Sagarin and Peter Wolfe. Each computer ranking provider accounts for schedule strength within its formula.
The BCS is a five-game arrangement for post-season college football that is managed by the 11 Football Bowl Subdivision conferences and institutions. Its purpose is to match the top two teams in a bowl game and to create exciting matchups in four other games.