{"id":267525,"date":"2025-09-30T21:54:11","date_gmt":"2025-09-30T21:54:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/267525\/"},"modified":"2025-09-30T21:54:11","modified_gmt":"2025-09-30T21:54:11","slug":"college-football-and-nfl-effective-play-by-play-ratings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/267525\/","title":{"rendered":"College Football and NFL Effective Play-by-Play Ratings"},"content":{"rendered":"

A couple of weeks ago, I introduced a football strength metric called the Effective Play-by-Play Ratings<\/a>. I received a lot of great feedback about it, especially after the first 15 college football variance games I shared produced a 9-6 record. I received numerous questions about how to best use these ratings, and quite frankly, since they are relatively new to me, I can honestly say I\u2019m in learning mode myself. I answered those questions and provided some more explanation in a separate article last week<\/a>, which included the top 15 college and top six NFL variances. Those games went 8-7 ATS and 3-3 ATS, respectively. Upon request, I will continue to provide these games on a weekly basis until further notice.\u00a0<\/p>\n

I would encourage you to go back and read either of the two earlier articles on the introduction and further details of the Effective Play-by-Play Ratings for college and pro football. For now though, here are the top 25 college teams and all pro team current ratings, plus the top variances in terms of my new rating metric against the actual lines for this weekend<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

(on an equivalent scale as my power ratings)<\/p>\n

Rank. Team: Effective Play-by-Play Rating<\/strong>
1. NOTRE DAME: 76.4
2. OREGON: 72.4
3. USC: 71.6
4. OHIO STATE: 70.5
5. TEXAS A&M: 69.7
6. MICHIGAN: 68.5
7. FLORIDA STATE: 67.4
8. INDIANA: 66.8
9. OLD DOMINION: 66.5
10. ALABAMA: 66
11. OLE MISS: 65.3
12. TEXAS TECH: 64
13. OKLAHOMA: 63.9
14. TEXAS: 62.3
15. VANDERBILT: 62.2
16. TENNESSEE: 62
17. WASHINGTON: 61.7
18. MIAMI FL: 61.6
19. GEORGIA TECH: 59.9
20. ARKANSAS: 59.5
21. SOUTH FLORIDA: 59.5
22. BYU: 58.9
23. MISSOURI: 57.3
24. CINCINNATI: 57.1
25. DUKE: 55.8<\/p>\n

Interesting here in that five of the current top eight teams are Big Ten teams. Also, the highest-rated SEC team is Texas A&M, a team that is sort of flying under the radar in terms of the powers of that conference. If you recall, Old Dominion was ranked second on this list last week, but dropped to 10th after its 14-point win over Liberty. These numbers do change quickly, not only based on what a specific team does each week, but also what all of its previous opponents do.<\/p>\n

All NFL Teams Ranked in Effective Play-by-Play Strength<\/p>\n

(on an equivalent scale as my power ratings)<\/p>\n

Rank. Team: Effective Play-by-Play Rating<\/strong>
1. BALTIMORE RAVENS: 37.2
2. LOS ANGELES RAMS: 35.6
3. LOS ANGELES CHARGERS: 34
4. GREEN BAY PACKERS: 33.7
5. SEATTLE SEAHAWKS: 32.8
6. SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS: 32.7
7. DETROIT LIONS: 29.5
8. INDIANAPOLIS COLTS: 29.5
9. ATLANTA FALCONS: 28.6
10. TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS: 28.2
11. CLEVELAND BROWNS: 27.9
12. HOUSTON TEXANS: 27.1
13. DENVER BRONCOS: 27
14. MINNESOTA VIKINGS: 26.7
15. WASHINGTON COMMANDERS: 26.7
16. BUFFALO BILLS: 26.5
17. NEW YORK JETS: 26.5
18. JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS: 24.4
19. KANSAS CITY CHIEFS: 24.3
20. LAS VEGAS RAIDERS: 23.6
21. DALLAS COWBOYS: 21
22. NEW YORK GIANTS: 19.4
23. NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS: 19.3
24. ARIZONA CARDINALS: 16.9
25. MIAMI DOLPHINS: 16.5
26. NEW ORLEANS SAINTS: 16.1
27. PITTSBURGH STEELERS: 15.9
28. PHILADELPHIA EAGLES: 15.5
29. CAROLINA PANTHERS: 14.2
30. CHICAGO BEARS: 12.6
31. CINCINNATI BENGALS: 12.2
32. TENNESSEE TITANS: 8.6<\/p>\n

Baltimore\u2019s schedule has been so tough in the early going that, despite the 1-3 record, they are still the best team in the league in terms of a play-by-play strength metric. However, keep in mind that if QB Lamar Jackson misses this week\u2019s game, you would need to deduct about 5.5 points from this number. If you\u2019re looking for potentially underrated teams, consider the Falcons, Browns and Texans. If you\u2019re looking for potentially overrated teams, the Bears, Eagles and Steelers top that list.<\/p>\n

Here are the top 15 games for this weekend, based on the differential of Effective Play-by-Play ratings versus actual point spreads, with home-field advantage factored into the differences.\u00a0<\/p>\n

1. (319) COASTAL CAROLINA at (320) OLD DOMINION<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: OLD DOMINION -18.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: OLD DOMINION -44.4
Difference: 25.9, Favors: OLD DOMINION<\/strong><\/p>\n

2. (341) WAKE FOREST at (342) VIRGINIA TECH<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: VIRGINIA TECH -6.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: VIRGINIA TECH +13.9
Difference: 20.4, Favors: WAKE FOREST<\/strong><\/p>\n

3. (333) WISCONSIN at (334) MICHIGAN<\/strong>
Actual Line: MICHIGAN -16.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: MICHIGAN -36.4
Difference: 19.9, Favors: MICHIGAN<\/strong><\/p>\n

4. (361) MIAMI OHIO at (362) NORTHERN ILLINOIS<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: NORTHERN ILLINOIS +5.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: NORTHERN ILLINOIS +24.3
Difference: 18.8, Favors: MIAMI OHIO<\/strong><\/p>\n

5. (305) CHARLOTTE at (306) SOUTH FLORIDA<\/strong>
Actual Line: SOUTH FLORIDA -26.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: SOUTH FLORIDA -44.8
Difference: 18.3, Favors: SOUTH FLORIDA<\/strong><\/p>\n

6. (365) DUKE at (366) CALIFORNIA<\/strong>
Actual Line: CALIFORNIA +3
Effective Play-by-Play Line: CALIFORNIA +19.1
Difference: 16.1, Favors: DUKE<\/strong><\/p>\n

7. (363) OKLAHOMA STATE at (364) ARIZONA<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: ARIZONA -20.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: ARIZONA -36.1
Difference: 15.6, Favors: ARIZONA<\/strong><\/p>\n

8. (371) MIAMI FL at (372) FLORIDA STATE<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Home Line \u2013 FLORIDA STATE +4.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line \u2013 FLORIDA STATE -7.8
Difference: 12.3, Favors: FLORIDA STATE<\/strong><\/p>\n

9. (367) PENN STATE at (368) UCLA<\/strong>
Actual Line: UCLA +25.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: UCLA +13.8
Difference: 11.7, Favors: UCLA<\/strong><\/p>\n

10. (391) BOISE STATE at (392) NOTRE DAME<\/strong>
Actual Line: NOTRE DAME -20.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: NOTRE DAME -31.6
Difference: 11.1, Favors: NOTRE DAME<\/strong><\/p>\n

11. (395) MISSISSIPPI STATE at (396) TEXAS A&M<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: TEXAS A&M -14
Effective Play-by-Play Line: TEXAS A&M -24.7
Difference: 10.7, Favors: TEXAS A&M<\/strong><\/p>\n

12. (399) TEXAS STATE at (400) ARKANSAS STATE<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: ARKANSAS STATE +13.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: ARKANSAS STATE +24
Difference: 10.5, Favors: TEXAS STATE<\/strong><\/p>\n

13. (345) OHIO U at (346) BALL STATE<\/strong>
Actual Line: BALL STATE +14.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: BALL STATE +4.5
Difference: 10, Favors: BALL STATE<\/strong><\/p>\n

14. (327) IOWA STATE at (328) CINCINNATI
<\/strong>Actual Line: CINCINNATI -1.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: CINCINNATI -10.5
Difference: 9, Favors: CINCINNATI<\/strong><\/p>\n

15. (331) WASHINGTON at (332) MARYLAND
<\/strong>Actual Line: MARYLAND +6.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: MARYLAND +15.3
Difference: 8.8, Favors: WASHINGTON<\/strong><\/p>\n

Comparing the Effective Play-by-Play equivalent ratings to the actual Week 5 NFL lines:<\/p>\n

Here are the top six games for this weekend\u2019s games, based on the differential of Effective Play-by-Play ratings versus actual point spreads, with home-field advantage built into the differences.<\/p>\n

1. (469) DENVER BRONCOS at (470) PHILADELPHIA EAGLES<\/strong>
Actual Line: PHILADELPHIA EAGLES -4
Effective Play-by-Play Line: PHILADELPHIA EAGLES +8.9
Difference: 12.9, Favors: DENVER BRONCOS<\/strong><\/p>\n

2. (481) WASHINGTON COMMANDERS at (482) LOS ANGELES CHARGERS<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: LOS ANGELES CHARGERS -3
Effective Play-by-Play Line: LOS ANGELES CHARGERS -12.6
Difference: 9.6, Favors: LOS ANGELES CHARGERS<\/strong><\/p>\n

3. (479) DETROIT LIONS at (480) CINCINNATI BENGALS<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: CINCINNATI BENGALS +10.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: CINCINNATI BENGALS +20
Difference: 9.5, Favors: DETROIT LIONS<\/strong><\/p>\n

4. (465) DALLAS COWBOYS at (466) NEW YORK JETS<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: NEW YORK JETS +2.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: NEW YORK JETS -6.5
Difference: 9, Favors: NEW YORK JETS<\/strong><\/p>\n

5. (485) KANSAS CITY CHIEFS at (486) JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS<\/strong>
<\/strong>Actual Line: JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS +3.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS -1.9
Difference: 5.4, Favors: JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS<\/strong><\/p>\n

6. (461) MINNESOTA VIKINGS at (462) CLEVELAND BROWNS<\/strong>
Actual Line: CLEVELAND BROWNS +3.5
Effective Play-by-Play Line: CLEVELAND BROWNS -0.4
Difference: 3.9, Favors: CLEVELAND BROWNS<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A couple of weeks ago, I introduced a football strength metric called the Effective Play-by-Play Ratings. I received…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":267526,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[43],"tags":[1428,139422,1318,1317,1315,1316,1232,139423,62,67,132,68],"class_list":{"0":"post-267525","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-ncaa-football","8":"tag-college-football","9":"tag-college-football-power-ratings","10":"tag-football","11":"tag-ncaa","12":"tag-ncaa-football","13":"tag-ncaafootball","14":"tag-nfl","15":"tag-nfl-power-ratings","16":"tag-sports","17":"tag-united-states","18":"tag-unitedstates","19":"tag-us"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115295477173964192","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267525","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=267525"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267525\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/267526"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=267525"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=267525"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=267525"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}