Alex's College Football Computer Rankings

Hello everyone, sorry I haven't posted in a while, I've spent much of the week trying to come up with a new computer ranking system for College Football. The unique part is that this ranking system factors in margin of victory, something that BCS computers are not allowed to do. I know this is controversial, as teams can rack up points, but the fact is, top teams should be able to blow certain teams out, and should not be blown out themselves (ie. Georgia's blowout loss to South Carolina or Notre Dame's escape against Pitt). It is not a huge factor, but is one of four determinants in my system.

Number 1: Winning Percentage
This should go without saying, and is the most obvious indicator of a team's success. Teams' records in determining their winning percentages have been modified NOT to include games against FCS schools.

Number 2: Adjusted Average Margin of Victory
To put Margin of Victory on a similar scale as winning percentage, a teams average margin of victory (or defeat) is divided by 100 and then added to (or subtracted from) .5. For example, Florida State's average margin of victory is 32.9, so divided by 100 is .329, and added to .5 is .829. This statistic does include games against FCS opponents, because although I do not believe they are important enough to count in a team's record, it should not go completely unnoticed if a team destroys an FCS school, and should not go completely unpunished if they lose.

Number 3: Adjusted Opponents' Winning Percentage
This is a pretty straightforward way of determining strength of schedule, adding up all of a team's opponents' wins and losses, and taking out games played against that team. For example Oregon would take 8 away from their opponents' loss total, as those 8 losses came to Oregon.

Number 4: Opponents' Adjusted Opponents' Winning Percentage
Confused yet? This measure is to account for any misleading from the previous statistic. For example, in the above stat, playing a 6-2 Texas A&M would count the same as playing a 6-2 Middle Tennessee. This stat also takes Texas A&M's schedule strength into account (or Middle Tennessee's), and rewards the team accordingly.

Got it?

Now this system is not flawless, as no computer ranking ever will be. For instance Cincinnati is ranked way too high due to the small sample size as they've only played 6 FBS teams. As the sample size increases, this ship will right itself.
*Note: this does not include yesterday's games.

Here you go!

1. Alabama 2.947

2. Oregon 2.897

3. Notre Dame 2.867

4. Kansas St. 2.768

5. Florida 2.736

6. Florida St. 2.728

7. Oklahoma 2.671

8. Texas A&M 2.653

9. Georgia 2.619

10. LSU 2.595

11. Oregon St. 2.569

12. South Carolina 2.529

13. Stanford 2.521

14. Cincinnati? 2.477

15. Nebraska 2.463

16. Ohio St. 2.462

17. Clemson 2.461

18. UCLA 2.458

19. Louisville 2.426

20. Northern Illinois 2.409

21. Rutgers 2.401

22. San Jose St. 2.384

23. Louisiana Tech 2.384

24. Mississippi St. 2.380

25. Oklahoma St. 2.351