We think about college football 24/7 so you don't have to.

The Countdown

A bottom-to-top assessment of the F.B.S. landscape heading into the 2012 season.

Weekly Rankings

P.S.R. 1-124: Week 3 Re-Ranking

With the weekend in the books, here’s a look at how the country ranks — using the original rankings as the starting point, with the season’s results as rationale for any movement. The top 25 teams land a one-sentence breakdown. The rest? Not so much. Part of the perks of being one of the best. Think your team is too low? Feel another team deserves more credit, less credit? Let’s hear it below. It’s a delicate ranking process, particularly with only two weeks in the books, so you may see one team ranked below a team it just beat — see Louisiana-Monroe and Arkansas, for example. Don’t be alarmed. Everything will become clearer by the end of the month.

The top 25

1. Alabama (2-0, 0-0)
Are we allowed to say nice things in this space?
2. L.S.U. (2-0, 0-0)
Calmly, slowly and surely, the Tigers tore Washington apart.
3. Oregon (2-0, 0-0)
The Ducks’ focus leaves a bit to be desired.
4. Florida State (2-0, 0-0)
Thankfully, the Seminoles’ game was called early.
5. U.S.C. (2-0, 0-0)
Weather slowed the Barkley and the Trojans for three quarters.
6. Georgia (2-0, 1-0)
Old SEC beat new SEC, with help from some “old-man football.”
7. Michigan State (2-0, 0-0)
The Spartans go from the M.W.C. to the MAC with little difficulty.
8. West Virginia (1-0, 0-0)
The calm before the storm: W.V.U. gets back it on Saturday.
9. Texas (2-0, 0-0)
David Ash has been far better through the first two weeks.
10. Oklahoma (2-0, 0-0)
O.U. flashed far more explosiveness on offense than in the opener.
11. Clemson (2-0, 0-0)
The Tigers now have two receivers with Heisman credentials.
12. South Carolina (2-0, 1-0)
There’s no controversy… but Thompson looked very good.
13. Kansas State (2-0, 0-0)
A complete and utter destruction of a once-proud program.
14. Virginia Tech (2-0, 1-0)
The Hokies struggled a bit early, as some expected.
15. Ohio State (2-0, 0-0)
Can Braxton Miller handle this workload for an entire season?
16. U.C.L.A. (2-0, 0-0)
A program-building, tenure-building win for U.C.L.A. and Mora.
17. B.Y.U. (2-0, 0-0)
It’s still must-see, but some life out of date with the Utes.
18. Ohio (2-0, 0-0)
After N.M.S.U., another test awaits at Marshall.
19. Mississippi State (2-0, 1-0)
For the first time since 1999, a 1-0 start in SEC play.
20. Tennessee (2-0, 0-0)
Offense has looked good, but can U.T. move ball against Florida?
21. Stanford (2-0, 0-0)
For a little while, I thought Duke could hang with the Cardinal.
22. Boise State (0-1, 0-0)
The Broncos are about to embark on a long winning streak.
23. T.C.U. (1-0, 0-0)
The Horned Frogs christen the renovated stadium in style.
24. Notre Dame (2-0, 0-0)
Two-must win games — two must-have wins.
25. Florida (2-0, 1-0)
Like Georgia, the Gators gave a rude taste of life in the SEC.

The Rest

26. Nebraska (1-1, 0-0)
27. Louisville (2-0, 0-0))
28. Iowa State (2-0, 0-0)
29. Utah State (2-0, 0-0)
30. Arizona (2-0, 0-0)
31. Michigan (1-1, 0-0)
32. Oregon State (1-0, 0-0)
33. South Florida (2-0, 0-0)
34. Georgia Tech (1-1, 0-1)
35. Wisconsin (1-1, 0-0)
36. Utah (1-1, 0-0)
37. Louisiana Tech (1-0, 0-0)
38. Baylor (1-0, 0-0)
39. Northwestern (2-0, 0-0)
40. Rutgers (2-0, 0-0)
41. Virginia (2-0, 0-0)
42. Cincinnati (1-0, 1-0)
43. Nevada (1-1, 0-0)
44. N.C. State (1-1, 0-0)
45. Missouri (1-1, 0-1)
46. Oklahoma State (1-1, 0-0)
47. Arkansas (1-1, 0-0)
48. Arizona State (2-0, 0-0)
49. U.C.F. (1-1, 0-0)
50. Louisiana-Monroe (1-0, 0-0)
51. Northern Illinois (1-1, 0-0)
52. Texas A&M (0-1, 0-1)
53. Air Force (1-1, 0-0)
54. Texas Tech (2-0, 0-0)
55. Wake Forest (2-0, 1-0)
56. Iowa (1-1, 0-0)
57. Tulsa (1-1, 1-0)
58. North Carolina (1-1, 0-1)
59. Purdue (1-1, 0-0)
60. Auburn (0-2, 0-1)
61. California (1-1, 0-0)
62. Washington (1-1, 0-0)
63. Louisiana-Lafayette (2-0, 1-0)
64. San Jose State (1-1, 0-0)
65. Toledo (1-1, 0-0)
66. S.M.U. (1-1, 0-0)
67. Penn State (0-2, 0-0)
68. Southern Mississippi (0-1, 0-0)
69. Bowling Green (1-1, 0-0)
70. Western Kentucky (1-1, 0-0)
71. Illinois (1-1, 0-0)
72. Western Michigan (1-1, 0-0)
73. Vanderbilt (0-2, 0-1)
74. San Diego State (1-1, 0-0)
75. Navy (0-1, 0-0)
76. Minnesota (2-0, 0-0)
77. East Carolina (1-1, 0-0)
78. Connecticut (1-1, 0-0)
79. Arkansas State (1-1, 0-0)
80. Washington State (1-1, 0-0)
81. Miami (Fla.) (1-1, 0-0)
82. Wyoming (0-2, 0-0)
83. Mississippi (2-0, 0-0)
84. Duke (1-1, 0-0)
85. Syracuse (0-2, 0-0)
86. Fresno State (1-1, 0-0)
87. Maryland (2-0, 0-0)
88. Ball State (1-1, 1-0)
89. Florida International (1-1, 0-0)
90. Pittsburgh (0-2, 0-1)
91. Temple (1-1, 0-0)
92. Houston (0-2, 0-0)
93. Army (0-1, 0-0)
94. New Mexico State (1-1, 0-0)
95. Miami (Ohio) (1-1, 0-0)
96. Hawaii (0-1, 0-0)
97. Kentucky (1-1, 0-0)
98. Troy (1-1, 0-1)
99. Marshall (1-1, 0-0)
100. North Texas (1-1, 0-0)
101. Texas State (1-1, 0-0)
102. Rice (1-1, 0-0)
103. Buffalo (1-1, 0-0)
104. Indiana (2-0, 0-0)
105. Kansas (1-1, 0-0)
106. Central Michigan (1-1, 0-0)
107. Kent State (1-1, 0-0)
108. Colorado State (1-1, 0-0)
109. Boston College (1-1, 0-0)
110. U.A.B. (0-1, 0-0)
111. UTEP (0-2, 0-0)
112. Tulane (0-2, 0-1)
113. Texas-San Antonio (2-0, 0-0)
114. New Mexico (1-1, 0-0)
115. Akron (0-2, 0-0)
116. Colorado (0-2, 0-0)
117. Eastern Michigan (0-2, 0-1)
118. Middle Tennessee (1-1, 1-0)
119. Memphis (0-2, 0-0)
120. U.N.L.V. (0-2, 0-0)
121. Idaho (0-2, 0-0)
122. Florida Atlantic (1-1, 0-1)
123. South Alabama (1-1, 0-0)
124. Massachusetts (0-2, 0-0)

Dropped out of top 25

Nebraska No. 10 (No. 26)
Wisconsin No. 14 (No. 35)
Utah No. 15 (No. 36)
Arkansas No. 21 (No. 47)

New in top 25

U.C.L.A. No. 16 (No. 54)
Mississippi State No. 19 (No. 31)
Stanford No. 21 (No. 26)
Florida No. 25 (No. 37)

Three noteworthy jumps

Louisiana-Monroe 59 spots (No. 109 to No. 50)
Utah State 33 spots (No. 62 to No. 29)
Arizona 25 spots (No. 55 to No. 30)

Three noteworthy tumbles

Arkansas 26 spots (No. 21 to No. 47)
Wisconsin 21 spots (No. 14 to No. 35)
Penn State 14 spots (No. 53 to No. 67)

Previous rankings

Week 2 rankings Alabama, No. 1
The preseason list is on the right sidebar.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Home  Home

Comments

  1. Monty says:

    Between the Ducks’ focus (which I agree with you on, by the way) and their ludicrous injury list that has cropped up out of nowhere, I thought you were pretty nice to my boys in green / yellow / black / white /chrome.

  2. WashingtonDCduck says:

    Monty – I do agree that No. 3 is a nice spot to have Oregon but at this juncture it really has no consequence. Oregon will have a pillow fight this Saturday with Tennessee Tech coming to Eugene and then we’ll really start to know where the Ducks stand with Rich Rod and U of A coming into Autzen on 9/29 for a nationally televised game.

    Oregon’s a little banged up, but no different than other teams and actually I’d argue they are more healthy than most other Pac-12 teams right now. John Boyet is a gigantic, monumental loss to the UO defense. He’s a warrior, and a cerebral and emotional leader of that defense. However, it’s not 1992 in Eugene. If a quality starter goes down, the program is at a point where they can recover and insert the next guy. The defense will take a step back, absolutely, however it’s not all doom and gloom.

    I’m feeling good about going into week three with the Ducks. They are in a good spot, and from top to bottom the roster looks pretty healthy with the exception of Boyet and Carson York re-aggravating that knee.

  3. Guy says:

    After that atrocity of a game on Saturday, I have trouble believing Alabama is any better than about #5

  4. Paul, please. says:

    @Paul: It’s N.I.U.

    Thank you.

  5. Bill Condon says:

    Re: Georgia, at #6. That was GROWN man football, especially from Jarvis Jones, this week’s SEC Defensive Player of the Week. Paul, you had Georgia pegged in your profile–they’ve had trouble sustaining effort for 60 minutes. This time, they started slowly, but the team that got worn down in the second half was Mizzou, not Georgia. I hope that’s a good sign for how this team will grow through the season.

  6. Wayne S says:

    Please, can we correct this and let other sports writers know a well:

    Change Texas-San Antonio to UTSA

    I’d appreciate it. Thanks

    Paul: Wayne, I understand that the fan base (and the university as well, perhaps) would rather go by “UTSA” instead of Texas-San Antonio. For now, however, because of the fact that not every reader would immediately grasp what “UTSA” stands for, I’m going to spell it out on first reference. This will probably last for a little while. And as an aside, I will always put initials into “UTSA.” It’ll be U.T.S.A., not UTSA.

  7. N.I.U. says:

    Dearest Paul:

    If U.N.L.V., U.A.B. (You don’t think that 95.3% of casual readers have to look up UAB? Long after I became a diehard college football fan, I still had to look it up — UAB, c’mon! UAB!?!), UTEP (why not U.T.E.P.), S.M.U., U.C.F., T.C.U., get initials why not N.I.U.?

    At this point, I assert that most readers should recognize N.I.U., certainly college football fans but even some/most casual readers. And if they do not, then the onus is on the reader the familiarize themselves with one of the winningest college football programs over the last decade.

    N.I.U. has a storied football program founded in 1899, has the highest all-time winning percentage among the three current FBS programs in Illinois, has the highest winning percentage (by far) of the three Illinois FBS programs over the past decade, has produced three NCAA Div-1 Rushing Champions, and revolutionized the college football landscape by ushering in Howard Fletcher’s innovative “Shotgun Formation” of the 1950′s which he later adapted and evolved into the “Shotgun Spread” of the 1960′s that produced George Bork, the first 3,000 yard passer in college football history.

    Please use N.I.U.

    Huskies everywhere would be greatly appreciative.

    Thank you and keep up the great work. GO HUSKIES!

  8. Think Like Ya Enemy says:

    “I will always put initials into “UTSA.” It’ll be U.T.S.A., not UTSA.” -Paul

    What about #111 UTEP ?

Leave a Comment