WillisWG
I don't like radicals left or right!
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 21,738
- Likes
- 50,793
Tennessee lands as the No. 15 team in the SP+ rankings, coming in one spot behind Michigan and one spot ahead of Ole Miss. The Vols have a 16.0 overall rating, and the Wolverines and Rebels are only 0.1 different in each direction. For comparison, Ohio State’s top spot on the list is a 31.8 rating.
Tennessee boasts the No. 4 offensive rating, the No. 50 defensive rating, and the No. 34 special teams rating. The Vols are the seventh highest-ranked team from the SEC, behind No. 4 Georgia, No. 6 Texas, No. 9 Texas A&M, No. 10 LSU, No. 11 Alabama, and No. 12 Oklahoma
www.rockytopinsider.com
www.espn.com
base preseason projections on four primary factors, weighted by their predictiveness:
1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as possible to account for transfers and attrition. Combine last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on current returning production numbers, and you're pretty far down the projections road.
2. Recent history. Using a chunk of information from previous seasons gives us a good measure of overall program health, even in this era of wild swings in quality. It still stands to reason that a team that has played well for only one year is less likely to duplicate that effort than a team that has been good -- and has likely spent bigger on its roster -- for years on end (and vice versa).
3. Recent recruiting. This piece informs us of the caliber of a team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. It is determined by both the past few years of recruiting rankings and the quality of incoming transfers, though as you might have predicted while watching Indiana surge to the national title last season, this doesn't carry nearly the weight that it once did. A decade or so ago, this piece made up about 20-25% of the preseason formula. Now it's about 1-2%. That's pretty incredible, isn't it?
4. Coaching change effects. I referenced this in a recent piece. As it turns out, comparing last season's output to a 20-year SP+ baseline gives us a pretty good idea of what's going to happen when a team changes coaches (and/or coordinators). If you underachieved to an historic degree, like Oklahoma State did last season, a change is likely to bring with it significant improvement. (That's doubly true when the new coach brings loads of high-productivity transfers with him, as OSU's Eric Morris did.) And on the flip side, if you overachieved significantly against history, as Morris' North Texas team did in 2025, you're likely to take a pretty significant hit when the head coach leaves (along with most of his star talent). Adding this to the list of projection factors allows me to make SP+ a bit more nimble in an era when fortunes can change significantly with coaching changes.
With transfers increasing so dramatically each season, figuring out the right mix of the above factors is a bit of a moving target. But I'm pretty happy with the results below. I will update these numbers in August, but for now, let's establish the 2026 hierarchy.
Tennessee boasts the No. 4 offensive rating, the No. 50 defensive rating, and the No. 34 special teams rating. The Vols are the seventh highest-ranked team from the SEC, behind No. 4 Georgia, No. 6 Texas, No. 9 Texas A&M, No. 10 LSU, No. 11 Alabama, and No. 12 Oklahoma
Where Tennessee Football Lands in ESPN's Debut Analytical Rankings | Rocky Top Insider
See where Tennessee Football lands in ESPN's SP+ Rankings from Bill Connelly with spring training camp ongoing throughout the country.
www.rockytopinsider.com
2026 college football SP+ rankings for all 138 FBS teams
The first SP+ rankings, plus strength of schedule and résumé SP+, for the 2026 season.
base preseason projections on four primary factors, weighted by their predictiveness:
1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as possible to account for transfers and attrition. Combine last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on current returning production numbers, and you're pretty far down the projections road.
2. Recent history. Using a chunk of information from previous seasons gives us a good measure of overall program health, even in this era of wild swings in quality. It still stands to reason that a team that has played well for only one year is less likely to duplicate that effort than a team that has been good -- and has likely spent bigger on its roster -- for years on end (and vice versa).
3. Recent recruiting. This piece informs us of the caliber of a team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. It is determined by both the past few years of recruiting rankings and the quality of incoming transfers, though as you might have predicted while watching Indiana surge to the national title last season, this doesn't carry nearly the weight that it once did. A decade or so ago, this piece made up about 20-25% of the preseason formula. Now it's about 1-2%. That's pretty incredible, isn't it?
4. Coaching change effects. I referenced this in a recent piece. As it turns out, comparing last season's output to a 20-year SP+ baseline gives us a pretty good idea of what's going to happen when a team changes coaches (and/or coordinators). If you underachieved to an historic degree, like Oklahoma State did last season, a change is likely to bring with it significant improvement. (That's doubly true when the new coach brings loads of high-productivity transfers with him, as OSU's Eric Morris did.) And on the flip side, if you overachieved significantly against history, as Morris' North Texas team did in 2025, you're likely to take a pretty significant hit when the head coach leaves (along with most of his star talent). Adding this to the list of projection factors allows me to make SP+ a bit more nimble in an era when fortunes can change significantly with coaching changes.
With transfers increasing so dramatically each season, figuring out the right mix of the above factors is a bit of a moving target. But I'm pretty happy with the results below. I will update these numbers in August, but for now, let's establish the 2026 hierarchy.
Last edited:
