PAST THE HALF MILE POLE….
The college football season at the FBS level of play has just past the half mile pole and lots of crazy results are occurring. The most prominent facts and results that are happening is that the Southeastern Conference (SEC) has started to see the results of their own doing, by expanding the conference to 16 teams, playing 9 conference games and creating their own mediocrity; like the large soccer leagues with 18-20 teams each. Not only is the SEC topic at the forefront, but the subjective rankings by the AP, AFCA and FWAA are under scrutiny for the subjective biases towards how the “SEC” teams are being ranked over other FBS teams who deserve the fair, just and equal opportunity for recognition of their season success . The added excitement does not include all the great games between ranked and non ranked competitive FBS teams which is creating great stories and drama as the season starts to wind down to the finish line.
Furthermore, the quantitative data of the 2026 season results are shaping up like the historical data indicates and was published in research. As of now we have 3 0-loss FBS teams; Miami Fla, UCLA, and Utah. That is the ACC, Big 10 and Big 12. What published research has proven, is that on average there are only 2.54 0-loss programs remain at the end of the regular season. Not to mention the great and “mighty”, “powerful”… “only we can win the national championship”; SEC is left out of the exclusive 0-loss group. What the current quantitative data has returned for the 2026 season is, 29 of the 138 FBS teams, which is 21% are bowl eligible with 6 wins or more at the current time of the season. Of those 21 FBS teams; 8 are from the Group of Six Conference, which should be commendable. Currently through the half mile pole of the FBS season, there are 27 FBS teams who have earned 5-wins looking forward to the next weeks to earn the 6th win to become bowl eligible. The next group of FBS teams with 4-wins, which is 32 FBS teams, are looking to earn bowl eligibility with the remaining weeks left. The key question is; “how many of those 59 FBS teams will earn bowl eligibility and how many will end up in the (5-7) group. As of now, only 1 FBS team, Northern Illinois has not earned a win. With 5 games remaining, they still have a chance to earn their first win.
This is all ACADEMIC RESEARCH and not artificial intelligence that I use to support and publish my findings. This is an aspect of what artificial intelligence CANNOT perform, unless you feed it the information.
Week 5 Top 16 Rankings
Below is my ranking grid of the TOP16 FBS college football teams for the 2026 FBS season. All rankings are determined by the Professional Model Theory, evaluation of 4 strength of schedule variables in which I developed, negative variables that assists in establishing my rankings along with the use of offensive efficiency and defensive play to account for my rankings.
RANKINGS ARE BEST VIEWED ON LAPTOP/DESKTOP OR ON YOUR PHONE SIDEWAYS DUE TO THE GRID FACTOR.
| RANK | TEAM | RECORD | OVERAL | CONFERNC | NON CONF | OFF EFF | DEFENSE |
| 1 BIG10 | UCLA | (7-0) | (44-44 .500) | (15-23 .395) | (9-14 .391) | 38-109 .347 | 18 |
| 2 ACC | MIAMI FL | (7-0) | (50-31 .671) | (20-20 .500) | (9-6 .600) | 46-82 .561 | 12 |
| 3 BIG 12 | UTAH | (7-0) | (44-35 .557) | (16-22 .421 | (5-9 .357) | 41-89 .461 | 14 |
| 4 BIG 10 | INDIANA | (7-1) | (49-29 .628) | (20-17 .541) | (8-6 .571) | 37-85 .436 | 16 |
| 5 SEC | KENTUCK | (7-1) | (51-31 .622) | (20-24 .455) | (8-6 .571) | 43-107 .402 | 9 |
| 6 AAC | TX SAN AN | (7-1) | (41-38 .519) | (11-17 .393) | (12-9 .571) | 44-106 .415 | 14 |
| 7 SBC | JAMS MAD | (7-1 | (38-41 .481) | (10-16 .385) | (13-9 .591) | 55-114 .483 | 9 |
| 8 IND | NOTRE DM | (6-1) | (47-40 .540) | (19-18 .514) | (24-20 .546) | 47-91 .517 | 12 |
| 9 BIG 10 | OHIO ST | (6-1) | (54-34 .614) | (18-20 .474) | (11-12 .479) | 44-89 .494 | 15 |
| 10 BIG 12 | BYU | (6-1) | (47-29 .618) | (17-18 .486) | (9-5 .643) | 33-73 .452 | 11 |
| 11 ACC | SMU | (6-1) | (45-36 .556) | (20-23 .465) | (8-6 .571) | 41-89 .461 | 10 |
| 12 BIG 12 | TX TECH | (6-1) | (46-33 .582) | (17-21 .447) | (6-8 .429) | 38-87 .437 | 11 |
| 13 MWC | NEW MEX | (6-1) | (40-42 .488) | (18-17 .415) | (10-12 .455) | 41-91 .451 | 16 |
| 14 BIG 12 | ARIZONA | (6-1) | (44-35 .557) | (19-18 .514) | (1-14 .067) | 40-87 .460 | 14 |
| 15 ACC | WK FORST | (6-1) | (42-39 .519) | (22-20 .524) | (4-11 .267) | 42-78 .539 | 14 |
| 16 BIG 10 | NRTHWST | (6-1) | (43-37 .538) | (17-21 .447) | (5-10 .333) | 41-88 .466 | 9 |
THIS RANKING PROCESS IS COPYRIGHT PROTECTED
KEY TO GRID: FCS– FBS TEAMS IN BOLD PLAYED OR HAVE SCHEDULED AN FCS TEAM, OVERALL– CUMULATIVE WIN-LOSS RECORDS OF EACH FBS TEAM ON THE RANKED TEAMS SCHEDULE, CONF– CUMUALTIVE WIN-LOSS CONFERENCE RECORDS OF EACH FBS TEAM ON THE RANKED TEAMS SCHEDULE, NON CONF– CUMULATIVE OVERALL WIN LOSS RECORDS OF EACH FBS NON CONFERENCE OPPONENT ON THE RANKED TEAMS SCHEDULE, OFFENSE- NUMBER OF TIMES SCORED VERSUS TOTAL POSSESSIONS FOR EACH RANKED FBS TEAM, and DEFENSE- RANKED TEAMS DEFENSE RECEIVES 1 CREDIT FOR 3 SUCCESSIVE POSSESSION STOP OF THEIR OPPONENT.
Conclusion….
To all those who think I am not ranking right because you believe I possess a bias against the SEC. Well, I do not rank based upon bias. I rank based upon what the quantitative data returns per each FBS program. NO MATTER the conference or program name. I believe that all FBS teams have the fair, just and equal opportunity to compete for the national championship. I have faith and belief that my rankings are more accurate than the human subjective rankings.
If you read my post, then decide to recite or share what I posted, always use MLA/APA citations. Giving credit to the author and their hard work
Follow me on X/Twitter: @cfbpoexpert on BLUESKY: cfbpoexpert.bsky.social
Please leave a comment if you wish.
All Information is protected by © Copyrights and Intellectual Property Rights.