Adam Burke shares his weekly college football power ratings
Upsets and blowouts were the theme of Week 1, as we saw a lot of non-competitive games, but also got some pretty surprising results with Colorado and Texas State both winning outright as dogs of more than 20 points. We also got some expected results, as a lot of underdogs failed to remotely put a scare into their superior opponents.
That should continue to be the theme early in the season, as non-conference play rolls on. There are going to be substantial mismatches for the next few weeks, but all of these teams will start to settle in one way or another. We did see some really slow starts out of certain teams and then saw them really rise up after halftime. We’re dealing with 18 to 24-year-old kids here, so those things are going to happen as well.
As I mentioned last week, I go through a three-step process each week when it comes to updating my College Football Power Ratings.
- Compare my line to the closing line
- Study the box score
- Look for injury information
When I talk about studying the box score, I’m not just looking at yardage. I’m looking for special teams touchdowns. I’m looking for turnover margin discrepancies. I’m looking for yards per play differentials. Drive logs and play-by-play data are really important parts of the process because raw yardage and the final score don’t always tell the full story.
I’m also looking for things that teams can build on. For example, it was against NC A&T, but UAB QB Jacob Zeno was 38-of-41 passing. That’s a ridiculous amount of completions for a lot of pass attempts. I’m generally low on UAB between the personnel losses and new head coach Trent Dilfer, but maybe there’s something there, so I gave UAB a bump.
Similarly, while Sam Houston State got shut out by BYU, the Bearkats only allowed 3.83 yards per play, so their defense stood up well against a Big 12 (in name only) opponent. They got a bump from me, since it sure looks like their offense is legit.
The early part of the season does present some challenges. Every team will play its best and worst game of the season at some point. What if that game was in Week 1? The challenge is in not overreacting to one data point, while also trying to react the proper amount. Colorado is the most obvious example in Week 1. This was an unprecedented situation with over 80 players in and out via the transfer portal and a coach who had never coached at the FBS level.
Lost in the Shedeur Sanders hype and the big upset win is that Colorado still allowed 42 points and over seven yards per carry to a team that lost its starting QB, top two RB, and top WR from last season. It is a unique situation and the most blatant one of the week, but not the only one.
The other factor that comes into play at this time of year is admitting that you were wrong. Nobody likes to do that, especially in the sports betting world, which is an ego-driven business. I admitted defeat on Louisiana Tech this week after they got obliterated by SMU. They’re the first, but they won’t be the last.
But, there were also some wins. I was purposely low on Minnesota and they looked quite bad against Nebraska - it’s just that Nebraska looked quite bad as well. When those positions are validated, I’ll stick with them and likely stick with them a lot longer. I’ll pull the ripcord quickly when I know I’m beat, but I’ll dig in when I get one right.
As I’ve mentioned before, this is an inexact science and forever will be. It is open to a lot of interpretation and college football is inherently volatile given the number of teams, the talent gaps, and the ages and maturity levels of the players. The boat will always spring leaks, but you also have enough sealant to fix as many as possible.
Here are my Week 2 College Football Power Ratings:
|
Rank
|
Team
|
PR
|
HFA
|
|
1
|
Georgia
|
96.5
|
3.5
|
|
2
|
Ohio State
|
93
|
3.5
|
|
3
|
Michigan
|
93
|
3.5
|
|
4
|
Alabama
|
91.5
|
3.5
|
|
5
|
Florida State
|
90
|
2
|
|
6
|
LSU
|
88.5
|
3
|
|
7
|
Texas
|
88
|
2
|
|
8
|
Penn State
|
87
|
2.5
|
|
9
|
USC
|
87
|
2
|
|
10
|
Tennessee
|
86.5
|
2
|
|
11
|
Clemson
|
86
|
3.5
|
|
12
|
Washington
|
85
|
2
|
|
13
|
Oregon
|
84
|
3.5
|
|
14
|
Notre Dame
|
84
|
3.5
|
|
15
|
Mississippi
|
82.5
|
2
|
|
16
|
Oklahoma
|
82.5
|
3.5
|
|
17
|
Utah
|
82
|
3.5
|
|
18
|
Wisconsin
|
82
|
2
|
|
19
|
Texas A&M
|
81
|
3
|
|
20
|
Kentucky
|
80
|
3
|
|
21
|
Kansas State
|
79.5
|
2.5
|
|
22
|
Auburn
|
78.5
|
2.5
|
|
23
|
Oregon State
|
78
|
2.5
|
|
24
|
North Carolina
|
78
|
2
|
|
25
|
Arkansas
|
77.5
|
2
|
|
26
|
UCLA
|
76.5
|
2
|
|
27
|
Florida
|
76.5
|
2
|
|
28
|
Mississippi State
|
76
|
2
|
|
29
|
TCU
|
75.5
|
2
|
|
30
|
UCF
|
75.5
|
3.5
|
|
31
|
North Carolina State
|
74.5
|
3
|
|
32
|
Texas Tech
|
74.5
|
2
|
|
33
|
Iowa
|
74
|
2.5
|
|
34
|
Tulane
|
74
|
3
|
|
35
|
Duke
|
73.5
|
2
|
|
36
|
Miami (Florida)
|
73.5
|
2
|
|
37
|
Missouri
|
73.5
|
2.5
|
|
38
|
South Carolina
|
73
|
2
|
|
39
|
Baylor
|
72.5
|
3
|
|
40
|
Washington State
|
72.5
|
2.5
|
|
41
|
Pittsburgh
|
72
|
2
|
|
42
|
UTSA
|
71.5
|
2
|
|
43
|
Illinois
|
71
|
2
|
|
44
|
Louisville
|
71
|
2
|
|
45
|
Boise State
|
71
|
3
|
|
46
|
Kansas
|
71
|
1.5
|
|
47
|
Oklahoma State
|
71
|
3.5
|
|
48
|
Minnesota
|
71
|
2.5
|
|
49
|
Maryland
|
70
|
2
|
|
50
|
South Alabama
|
70
|
2
|
|
51
|
Iowa State
|
69
|
2.5
|
|
52
|
Fresno State
|
69
|
2.5
|
|
53
|
Wake Forest
|
69
|
2.5
|
|
54
|
Syracuse
|
68.5
|
2
|
|
55
|
California
|
68.5
|
2
|
|
56
|
Purdue
|
68
|
2
|
|
57
|
SMU
|
68
|
3
|
|
58
|
Arizona
|
67.5
|
2
|
|
59
|
Houston
|
67.5
|
2
|
|
60
|
West Virginia
|
67.5
|
2.5
|
|
61
|
Appalachian State
|
67
|
3
|
|
62
|
Arizona State
|
67
|
2
|
|
63
|
Florida Atlantic
|
67
|
2.5
|
|
64
|
Michigan State
|
67
|
2
|
|
65
|
Troy
|
67
|
2
|
|
66
|
Nebraska
|
66.5
|
2
|
|
67
|
Air Force
|
66.5
|
3
|
|
68
|
Toledo
|
66.5
|
2
|
|
69
|
Memphis
|
66
|
3.5
|
|
70
|
Colorado
|
66
|
2
|
|
71
|
Marshall
|
65.5
|
2
|
|
72
|
Cincinnati
|
65.5
|
3.5
|
|
73
|
Western Kentucky
|
64.5
|
2
|
|
74
|
Vanderbilt
|
64
|
1
|
|
75
|
James Madison
|
64
|
3.5
|
|
76
|
BYU
|
63.5
|
2.5
|
|
77
|
Virginia Tech
|
63.5
|
2
|
|
78
|
Coastal Carolina
|
63
|
2
|
|
79
|
Ohio
|
63
|
2
|
|
80
|
Georgia Tech
|
63
|
1
|
|
81
|
Rutgers
|
62.5
|
1.5
|
|
82
|
East Carolina
|
62
|
2
|
|
83
|
Wyoming
|
62
|
2.5
|
|
84
|
Southern Mississippi
|
61.5
|
2
|
|
85
|
Indiana
|
61
|
2
|
|
86
|
Army
|
60.5
|
3
|
|
87
|
Louisiana-Lafayette
|
60.5
|
3.5
|
|
88
|
Temple
|
59.5
|
2
|
|
89
|
Georgia Southern
|
59
|
3
|
|
90
|
Stanford
|
59
|
1.5
|
|
91
|
Boston College
|
58.5
|
2
|
|
92
|
Georgia State
|
58.5
|
2
|
|
93
|
Connecticut
|
58.5
|
2
|
|
94
|
Navy
|
58
|
2
|
|
95
|
San Jose State
|
58
|
2
|
|
96
|
Tulsa
|
57.5
|
2
|
|
97
|
San Diego State
|
57.5
|
2
|
|
98
|
Liberty
|
57.5
|
3
|
|
99
|
Northern Illinois
|
57.5
|
1.5
|
|
100
|
Miami (Ohio)
|
57
|
3
|
|
101
|
UAB
|
57
|
3.5
|
|
102
|
Virginia
|
56.5
|
3
|
|
103
|
North Texas
|
56.5
|
2
|
|
104
|
Texas State
|
56.5
|
2
|
|
105
|
Buffalo
|
56
|
3
|
|
106
|
UTEP
|
56
|
2
|
|
107
|
Colorado State
|
56
|
2
|
|
108
|
Rice
|
55.5
|
2
|
|
109
|
Ball State
|
55
|
2
|
|
110
|
Middle Tennessee
|
55
|
2.5
|
|
111
|
UNLV
|
54
|
2
|
|
112
|
Bowling Green
|
54
|
1.5
|
|
113
|
South Florida
|
54
|
1.5
|
|
114
|
Utah State
|
53.5
|
2.5
|
|
115
|
Akron
|
53
|
1
|
|
116
|
Jacksonville State
|
53
|
2
|
|
117
|
Northwestern
|
52
|
1.5
|
|
118
|
Eastern Michigan
|
52
|
2
|
|
119
|
Central Michigan
|
52
|
2
|
|
120
|
Nevada
|
51.5
|
2
|
|
121
|
Hawai'i
|
51.5
|
2
|
|
122
|
Louisiana Tech
|
51
|
2.5
|
|
123
|
Old Dominion
|
51
|
1.5
|
|
124
|
Louisiana-Monroe
|
50
|
2
|
|
125
|
Sam Houston State
|
50
|
2
|
|
126
|
New Mexico State
|
49
|
2
|
|
127
|
Western Michigan
|
48.5
|
2
|
|
128
|
Charlotte
|
48
|
2
|
|
129
|
Arkansas State
|
47
|
2
|
|
130
|
Massachusetts
|
47
|
1
|
|
131
|
New Mexico
|
46
|
1
|
|
132
|
Kent State
|
42.5
|
2.5
|
|
133
|
Florida International
|
41
|
2
|
Here are my Week 2 power ratings adjustments:
Up: UCF +1, Georgia Tech +2.5, Stanford +3, Texas State +5.5, Oklahoma +1, Indiana +2, Fresno State +2.5, Akron +1.5, Temple +1.5, Northern Illinois +1.5, North Carolina +3, Toledo +1, Colorado +7.5, Sam Houston State +2, Colorado State +2.5, Washington +2, South Florida +2.5, California +3, Tennessee +1.5, Tulane +2, West Virginia +1.5, Jacksonville State +2, Oregon +1, Notre Dame +1.5, UConn +1.5, UAB +2, Bowling Green +2.5, Rutgers +1.5, Wake Forest +2.5, Washington State +2.5, Florida State +3
Down: Kent State -4, NC State -2, Nebraska -3, Eastern Michigan -3, Baylor -2.5, East Carolina -1, Arkansas State -2, Boston College -2.5, Old Dominion -1, South Carolina -2.5, Wisconsin -1.5, Iowa -1.5, Illinois -4, TCU -2, Texas Tech -1.5, UTSA -1, North Texas -3, Virginia -2.5, Army -1.5, Louisiana Tech -3, Marshall -2, FIU -2, San Diego State -4, Utah -2, Georgia State -2, Louisville -1, Kentucky -2, Liberty -1.5, Purdue -1.5, Western Kentucky -2, BYU -2.5, Northwestern -4, Tulsa -2, LSU -1.5
Injury: Ohio -7.5 (Rourke)*
Pending: Clemson, Duke
Some notes on the biggest movers:
Colorado +7.5: As I mentioned above, this is an unprecedented situation with so many transfers in, but Shedeur Sanders looks legit and Travis Hunter is a bona fide star. There are still plenty of concerns about the defense, but this offense was really impressive.
Texas State +5.5: Huge win over Baylor for GJ Kinne’s program and TJ Finley looked pretty damn legit. Given how Finley looked and how Bo Nix is playing at Oregon, I’m not sure what’s in the water in Auburn, but it must be something to keep those guys from reaching their full potential.
Stanford +3: One of a few teams that moved up three points. Troy Taylor’s offense was really good at Sacramento State and maybe we underestimated the Cardinal.
North Carolina +3: I knew Drake Maye was good, but how about nine sacks against South Carolina? If this defense has any measure of competence, look out.
San Diego State -4: One bad performance might be worth ignoring. Two straight awful performances is too much to overlook. A healthy Kurtis Rourke beats this team in Week 0 and Jalen Mayden had 13 completions for 87 yards in Week 1.
Northwestern -4: Woof. Getting blown out by Rutgers is bad. The offense looked totally inept yet again and it’ll be a long year in Evanston.
Kent State -4: I thought I had this team rated as badly as they are, but I thought wrong. Very, very wrong.
Illinois -4: It turns out that the losses of Tommy DeVito and Chase Brown are a huge deal. My line was too high last week, but QB Luke Altmeyer only threw for 211 yards and was also the leading rusher, not to mention Toledo racked up over 400 yards on the Illini defense.
Here are my Week 2 lines:
|
Date
|
Away Team
|
Home Team
|
Line
|
|
9/8
|
Illinois
|
Kansas
|
-1.5
|
| |
|
|
|
|
9/9
|
Vanderbilt
|
Wake Forest
|
-7.5
|
| |
Notre Dame
|
NC State
|
+6.5
|
| |
Western Michigan
|
Syracuse
|
-22
|
| |
Ball State
|
Georgia
|
-45
|
| |
Marshall
|
East Carolina
|
+1.5
|
| |
Cincinnati
|
Pittsburgh
|
-8.5
|
| |
James Madison
|
Virginia
|
+4.5
|
| |
Purdue
|
Virginia Tech
|
+2.5
|
| |
Nebraska
|
Colorado
|
-1.5
|
| |
Utah
|
Baylor
|
+6.5
|
| |
Oklahoma State
|
Arizona State
|
+2
|
| |
UCLA
|
San Diego State
|
+17
|
| |
Wisconsin
|
Washington State
|
+7
|
| |
Tulsa
|
Washington
|
-29.5
|
| |
Miami (OH)
|
UMass
|
+9
|
| |
UNLV
|
Michigan
|
-42.5
|
| |
Texas A&M
|
Miami (FL)
|
+5.5
|
| |
Iowa
|
Iowa State
|
+2.5
|
| |
SMU
|
Oklahoma
|
-18
|
| |
Air Force (N - Houston)
|
Sam Houston State
|
+16.5
|
| |
Texas State
|
UTSA
|
-17
|
| |
Troy
|
Kansas State
|
-15
|
| |
Kent State
|
Arkansas
|
-37
|
| |
Eastern Michigan
|
Minnesota
|
-21.5
|
| |
Ole Miss
|
Tulane
|
+5.5
|
| |
UTEP
|
Northwestern
|
+2.5
|
| |
Middle Tennessee
|
Missouri
|
-21
|
| |
Houston
|
Rice
|
+10
|
| |
Oregon
|
Texas Tech
|
+7.5
|
| |
Arizona
|
Mississippi State
|
-10.5
|
| |
App State
|
North Carolina
|
-13
|
| |
New Mexico State
|
Liberty
|
-11.5
|
| |
Ohio (w/ Rourke)
|
FAU
|
-6.5
|
| |
UAB
|
Georgia Southern
|
-5
|
| |
Louisiana
|
Old Dominion
|
+8
|
| |
North Texas
|
FIU
|
+13.5
|
| |
Jacksonville State
|
Coastal Carolina
|
-12
|
| |
UConn
|
Georgia State
|
-2
|
| |
Memphis
|
Arkansas State
|
+17
|
| |
UCF
|
Boise State
|
+1.5
|
| |
Texas
|
Alabama
|
-7
|
| |
Temple
|
Rutgers
|
-4.5
|
| |
Charlotte
|
Maryland
|
-24
|
| |
Southern Miss
|
Florida State
|
-30.5
|
| |
Stanford
|
USC
|
-30
|
| |
Auburn
|
California
|
+8
|
Games to consider based on my Power Ratings (by date/rotation number):
UCLA (-13 / -17) vs. San Diego State: My depressed power rating on San Diego State comes into play here, as my line is four points off the market line with a four-point drop on SDSU.
Michigan (-36 / -42.5) vs. UNLV: UNLV’s 44-14 win over Bryant was very misleading, as the two teams both had 409 yards of offense. I didn’t move either team after Week 1 and this line feels a touch cheap.
UTSA (-11 / -17) vs. Texas State: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice… I was on UTSA last week and Frank Harris arguably played the worst game of his life in the 17-14 loss. I’m not selling my UTSA stock and I’m not buying the Texas State stock at a premium.
Temple (+10 / +4.5) at Rutgers: I really liked this Temple team coming into the season and the close win over Akron didn’t sour me on their prospects. Rutgers played well against a dumpster fire Northwestern team, but I really don’t think they’re any better. This line sure looks like a lot.
If you ever have questions about the power ratings process, you can find me on X as @SkatingTripods or email aburke [at] vsin [dot] com.