2026 season · through Week 3
College football power rankings, week 4
All 138 FBS teams, ranked by how good each is once the luck is adjusted for: the points it would beat an average FBS team by on a neutral field. Indiana is No. 1 at +24.8 points, Ohio State No. 2 (+24.4), Notre Dame No. 3 (+24.3).
Biggest climb since last week: Kentucky, up 26 to No. 37. Biggest drop: Boston College, down 20 to No. 113. South Florida is 3–0 with +1.2 wins of luck in it, so it ranks below what the record says. The same ratings make our predictions.
| # | Team | Record | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3–0 | +24.8 | |
| 2 | 2–1 | +24.4 | |
| 3 | 3–0 | +24.3 | |
| 4 | 3–0 | +21.9 | |
| 5 | 3–0 | +20.6 | |
| 6 | 3–0 | +20.0 | |
| 7 | 3–0 | +19.8 | |
| 8 | 3–0 | +19.5 | |
| 9 | 3–0 | +19.3 | |
| 10 | 3–0 | +15.9 | |
| 11 | 2–1 | +15.7 | |
| 12 | 2–1 | +15.4 | |
| 13 | 3–0 | +15.2 | |
| 14 | 3–0 | +14.9 | |
| 15 | 3–0 | +13.9 | |
| 16 | 3–0 | +13.9 | |
| 17 | 2–1 | +13.6 | |
| 18 | 2–1 | +12.8 | |
| 19 | 4–0 | +12.7 | |
| 20 | 3–0 | +12.3 | |
| 21 | 2–1 | +12.3 | |
| 22 | 2–1 | +12.1 | |
| 23 | 3–0 | +11.8 | |
| 24 | 3–0 | +11.0 | |
| 25 | 3–0 | +10.7 | |
| 26 | 2–1 | +10.3 | |
| 27 | 3–0 | +10.0 | |
| 28 | 3–0 | +9.4 | |
| 29 | 3–0 | +9.1 | |
| 30 | 2–1 | +8.0 | |
| 31 | 2–1 | +7.8 | |
| 32 | 3–0 | +7.7 | |
| 33 | 3–0 | +7.6 | |
| 34 | 3–0 | +7.5 | |
| 35 | 3–0 | +7.3 | |
| 36 | 2–1 | +7.1 | |
| 37 | 2–1 | +6.9 | |
| 38 | 2–0 | +6.9 | |
| 39 | 3–0 | +6.8 | |
| 40 | 2–1 | +6.7 | |
| 41 | 2–1 | +6.5 | |
| 42 | 4–0 | +6.1 | |
| 43 | 2–1 | +5.8 | |
| 44 | 2–1 | +5.8 | |
| 45 | 2–1 | +5.7 | |
| 46 | 1–2 | +5.5 | |
| 47 | 1–2 | +5.4 | |
| 48 | 2–1 | +4.7 | |
| 49 | 2–1 | +4.6 | |
| 50 | 3–0 | +4.5 | |
| 51 | 3–0 | +4.3 | |
| 52 | 2–1 | +4.2 | |
| 53 | 3–0 | +4.1 | |
| 54 | 1–2 | +3.9 | |
| 55 | 2–1 | +3.8 | |
| 56 | 2–1 | +3.5 | |
| 57 | 2–1 | +3.4 | |
| 58 | 1–1 | +2.9 | |
| 59 | 3–0 | +2.5 | |
| 60 | 2–1 | +2.3 | |
| 61 | 2–1 | +2.3 | |
| 62 | 2–1 | +2.2 | |
| 63 | 2–1 | +2.1 | |
| 64 | 2–1 | +1.6 | |
| 65 | 1–2 | +1.3 | |
| 66 | 2–1 | +1.2 | |
| 67 | 2–1 | +0.5 | |
| 68 | 3–1 | +0.4 | |
| 69 | 2–1 | +0.4 | |
| 70 | 1–2 | +0.2 | |
| 71 | 2–1 | −0.5 | |
| 72 | 1–2 | −1.0 | |
| 73 | 2–1 | −1.3 | |
| 74 | 1–2 | −1.5 | |
| 75 | 1–2 | −1.6 | |
| 76 | 1–2 | −3.1 | |
| 77 | 1–2 | −3.5 | |
| 78 | 1–2 | −3.8 | |
| 79 | 1–1 | −4.0 | |
| 80 | 3–0 | −4.1 | |
| 81 | 1–2 | −4.1 | |
| 82 | 2–1 | −4.2 | |
| 83 | 2–1 | −4.2 | |
| 84 | 1–2 | −4.3 | |
| 85 | 1–2 | −4.7 | |
| 86 | 1–2 | −4.9 | |
| 87 | 1–2 | −5.0 | |
| 88 | 2–1 | −5.1 | |
| 89 | 2–1 | −5.1 | |
| 90 | 3–0 | −5.4 | |
| 91 | 2–1 | −5.5 | |
| 92 | 1–2 | −5.7 | |
| 93 | 1–2 | −5.7 | |
| 94 | 2–2 | −5.9 | |
| 95 | 1–2 | −6.0 | |
| 96 | 2–1 | −6.0 | |
| 97 | 2–1 | −6.1 | |
| 98 | 1–1 | −6.4 | |
| 99 | 1–2 | −6.4 | |
| 100 | 2–1 | −6.5 | |
| 101 | 0–3 | −6.5 | |
| 102 | 1–2 | −7.1 | |
| 103 | 2–1 | −7.2 | |
| 104 | 1–2 | −7.2 | |
| 105 | 2–1 | −7.3 | |
| 106 | 1–2 | −7.6 | |
| 107 | 0–3 | −8.3 | |
| 108 | 1–2 | −8.4 | |
| 109 | 2–1 | −9.0 | |
| 110 | 1–2 | −9.5 | |
| 111 | 1–2 | −9.6 | |
| 112 | 1–2 | −10.2 | |
| 113 | 2–1 | −10.2 | |
| 114 | 1–2 | −10.5 | |
| 115 | 1–2 | −10.7 | |
| 116 | 2–1 | −11.3 | |
| 117 | 1–2 | −12.3 | |
| 118 | 1–2 | −12.4 | |
| 119 | 2–2 | −12.4 | |
| 120 | 1–2 | −13.4 | |
| 121 | 2–1 | −13.6 | |
| 122 | 2–1 | −13.8 | |
| 123 | 1–2 | −13.9 | |
| 124 | 1–2 | −14.0 | |
| 125 | 0–3 | −15.0 | |
| 126 | 0–3 | −15.0 | |
| 127 | 1–2 | −15.1 | |
| 128 | 3–0 | −15.6 | |
| 129 | 1–2 | −16.1 | |
| 130 | 1–2 | −17.4 | |
| 131 | 1–2 | −17.4 | |
| 132 | 0–3 | −18.7 | |
| 133 | 1–2 | −19.1 | |
| 134 | 1–3 | −19.1 | |
| 135 | 1–3 | −20.2 | |
| 136 | 0–3 | −20.9 | |
| 137 | 1–2 | −20.9 | |
| 138 | 0–3 | −21.0 |
Rating: points better than an average FBS team on a neutral field. This season and last season add up to it: this season’s games, rated against the opponents played, and the start from last season’s final rating. Luck: wins above what the team’s play was worth, from replaying every game 4,000 times. Injuries, which change the week’s predictions, are left out: one week’s news.
Top 25, week 4
- Indiana Hoosiers +24.8, 3–0
- Ohio State Buckeyes +24.4, 2–1
- Notre Dame Fighting Irish +24.3, 3–0
- Alabama Crimson Tide +21.9, 3–0
- Texas Longhorns +20.6, 3–0
- Miami Hurricanes +20.0, 3–0
- Georgia Bulldogs +19.8, 3–0
- Utah Utes +19.5, 3–0
- Penn State Nittany Lions +19.3, 3–0
- Tennessee Volunteers +15.9, 3–0
- LSU Tigers +15.7, 2–1
- Texas A&M Aggies +15.4, 2–1
- Ole Miss Rebels +15.2, 3–0
- Iowa Hawkeyes +14.9, 3–0
- Florida Gators +13.9, 3–0
- Mississippi State Bulldogs +13.9, 3–0
- Oklahoma Sooners +13.6, 2–1
- Oregon Ducks +12.8, 2–1
- USC Trojans +12.7, 4–0
- BYU Cougars +12.3, 3–0
- SMU Mustangs +12.3, 2–1
- Louisville Cardinals +12.1, 2–1
- Texas Tech Red Raiders +11.8, 3–0
- Pittsburgh Panthers +11.0, 3–0
- Nebraska Cornhuskers +10.7, 3–0
Questions
Who is No. 1 in the college football power rankings for week 4 of 2026?
Indiana, rated +24.8 points better than an average FBS team on a neutral field, from a 3–0 start. Next: Ohio State (+24.4) and Notre Dame (+24.3).
How are these power rankings made?
Every team, FBS and FCS, is rated against the opponents it has played: each game’s final margin (capped at 50) and its luck-adjusted result, with the kicks, fumble bounces and conversions re-rolled at their expected rates. Last season’s rating is the starting point and fades as games are played. The rating is the points a team would beat an average FBS team by on a neutral field; the same ratings make our predictions.
Why is a team with a better record ranked lower?
Because records carry luck, and close games, fumble bounces and missed kicks even out. A team that won its games by luck is rated on how it played, like South Florida: 3–0, +1.2 wins of luck, ranked 35; one that lost by bad luck ranks higher than its record, like Rutgers (0–3, −1.6 wins of luck, ranked 107).
Predictions · Luck rankings 2026 · Expected wins · How the replays work