Valero Alamo Bowl Projection:
| Projection Week 08 | Big 12 | Pac-12 |
| NCAAF Oracle | Oklahoma | Washington |
We consider the NCAAF Oracle Ranking below to determine which teams would be selected for the Valero Alamo Bowl. Find out more about how the Oracle works and subscribe to our weekly newsletter
NCAAF Oracle has the Big 12 rankings as follows: (5) Texas Christian, (26) Oklahoma, (29) Oklahoma State, (43) Iowa State, (45) Texas Tech, (52) West Virginia, (73) Texas, (98) Kansas State, (119) Kansas, and (127) Baylor.
NCAAF Oracle has the Pac-12 rankings as follows: (4) Southern California, (8) Washington State, (11) Washington, (14) Stanford, (36) Oregon, (42) California, (50) Arizona, (56) Utah, (57) Colorado, (59) Arizona State, (65) UCLA, and (123) Oregon State.
As far as the Week 8 schedule goes, (26) Oklahoma has a conference match-up against (98) Kansas State while (5) Texas Christian is set for a conference match-up as well against (119) Kansas. This presents (5) Texas Christian an opportunity to remain undefeated overall and in-conference, helping to secure their positioning in advance of the College Football Playoffs and Bowl Games. Likewise, (26) Oklahoma has a chance to stay one game behind (5) Texas Christian in-conference, making them a strong projection for the Valero Alamo Bowl.
On the Pac-12 side of things, (4) Southern California is tied with (8) Washington State and (11) Washington for the best record in-conference at 6-1 overall, but (4) Southern California has the edge with a half game lead for best record in-conference at 4-1 to the two Washington teams’ 3-1 mark. (4) South California is safe from any movement in-conference this week, although their overall record may take a hit depending on how their game against Notre Dame plays out. (8) Washington State does have a conference game this week against (57) Colorado so, barring an upset, they will move into a tie for first with a 4-1 record in-conference. As it stands, this is a tight race atop the Pac-12, but the bye week for (11) Washington makes them a favorable projection to meet (26) Oklahoma in the Valero Alamo Bowl.
(11) Washington has only had one appearance in the Valero Alamo Bowl, coming back in 2011 in an epic offensive performance that even the 2016 TCU vs. Oregon match-up couldn’t surpass, with Baylor outlasting Washington 67-56. In the other corner, (26) Oklahoma has never appeared in the Valero Alamo Bowl. For those of you unfamiliar with that wild 2016 Valero Alamo Bowl showdown, take a look at the breakdown of that game compared to games in prior years, as well as compared to other Bowl Games
NCAAF Oracle – Week 08
| Rank | Team | Record | Trending |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alabama | (7-0) | ▲ 2 |
| 2 | Georgia | (7-0) | -- |
| 3 | Clemson | (6-1) | ▼ 2 |
| 4 | Southern California | (6-1) | ▲ 4 |
| 5 | Texas Christian | (6-0) | ▲ 4 |
| 6 | Penn State | (6-0) | ▼ 1 |
| 7 | San Diego State | (6-1) | ▼ 1 |
| 8 | Washington State | (6-1) | ▼ 4 |
| 9 | North Carolina State | (6-1) | ▲ 1 |
| 10 | Ohio State | (6-1) | ▲ 1 |
| 11 | Washington | (6-1) | ▼ 4 |
| 12 | Wisconsin | (6-0) | ▲ 2 |
| 13 | Michigan State | (5-1) | ▲ 3 |
| 14 | Stanford | (5-2) | ▲ 9 |
| 15 | Memphis | (5-1) | ▲ 17 |
| 16 | Miami FL_ | (5-0) | ▲ 10 |
| 17 | Central Florida | (5-0) | ▲ 3 |
| 18 | Texas A&M | (5-2) | ▲ 7 |
| 19 | South Carolina | (5-2) | ▲ 3 |
| 20 | Louisiana State | (5-2) | ▲ 13 |
| 21 | South Florida | (6-0) | -- |
| 22 | Notre Dame | (5-1) | ▼ 10 |
| 23 | Michigan | (5-1) | ▲ 1 |
| 24 | Virginia | (5-1) | ▲ 7 |
| 25 | Kentucky | (5-1) | ▼ 12 |
| 26 | Oklahoma | (5-1) | ▲ 9 |
| 27 | Navy | (5-1) | ▼ 12 |
| 28 | Virginia Tech | (5-1) | ▼ 11 |
| 29 | Oklahoma State | (5-1) | ▲ 8 |
| 30 | Iowa | (4-2) | ▼ 11 |
| 31 | Auburn | (5-2) | ▼ 13 |
| 32 | Boise State | (4-2) | ▲ 18 |
| 33 | Toledo | (5-1) | ▲ 10 |
| 34 | North Texas | (4-2) | ▲ 18 |
| 35 | Syracuse | (4-3) | ▲ 25 |
| 36 | Oregon | (4-3) | ▼ 7 |
| 37 | Troy | (4-2) | ▼ 7 |
| 38 | Colorado State | (5-2) | ▲ 4 |
| 39 | Army | (5-2) | ▲ 5 |
| 40 | Marshall | (5-1) | ▲ 5 |
| 41 | Houston | (4-2) | ▼ 13 |
| 42 | California | (4-3) | ▲ 29 |
| 43 | Iowa State | (4-2) | ▲ 5 |
| 44 | Southern Methodist | (4-2) | ▼ 8 |
| 45 | Texas Tech | (4-2) | ▼ 18 |
| 46 | Wake Forest | (4-2) | ▼ 12 |
| 47 | Ohio | (5-2) | -- |
| 48 | Mississippi State | (4-2) | ▲ 6 |
| 49 | Northern Illinois | (4-2) | ▲ 18 |
| 50 | Arizona | (4-2) | ▲ 22 |
| 51 | Western Michigan | (4-3) | ▼ 13 |
| 52 | West Virginia | (4-2) | ▲ 28 |
| 53 | Louisville | (4-3) | ▼ 14 |
| 54 | Akron | (4-3) | ▲ 25 |
| 55 | Alabama-Birmingham | (4-2) | ▲ 20 |
| 56 | Utah | (4-2) | ▼ 15 |
| 57 | Colorado | (4-3) | ▲ 7 |
| 58 | Wyoming | (4-2) | ▲ 20 |
| 59 | Arizona State | (3-3) | ▲ 30 |
| 60 | Appalachian State | (4-2) | ▲ 14 |
| 61 | Southern Mississippi | (4-2) | ▼ 5 |
| 62 | Fresno State | (4-2) | ▲ 19 |
| 63 | Florida | (3-3) | ▼ 23 |
| 64 | Florida International | (4-2) | ▲ 21 |
| 65 | UCLA | (3-3) | ▼ 14 |
| 66 | Duke | (4-3) | ▼ 20 |
| 67 | Boston College | (3-4) | ▲ 21 |
| 68 | Middle Tennessee State | (3-4) | ▼ 11 |
| 69 | Western Kentucky | (4-2) | ▲ 14 |
| 70 | Maryland | (3-3) | ▼ 21 |
| 71 | Purdue | (3-3) | ▼ 18 |
| 72 | Tulane | (3-3) | ▼ 7 |
| 73 | Texas | (3-3) | ▼ 18 |
| 74 | Nebraska | (3-4) | ▼ 13 |
| 75 | Louisiana Tech | (3-3) | ▼ 5 |
| 76 | Indiana | (3-3) | ▼ 13 |
| 77 | Buffalo | (3-4) | ▼ 9 |
| 78 | Mississippi | (3-3) | ▲ 21 |
| 79 | Central Michigan | (3-4) | ▼ 17 |
| 80 | Minnesota | (3-3) | ▼ 22 |
| 81 | Vanderbilt | (3-4) | ▼ 22 |
| 82 | Florida Atlantic | (3-3) | ▼ 16 |
| 83 | New Mexico | (3-3) | ▼ 1 |
| 84 | Northwestern | (3-3) | ▲ 17 |
| 85 | Tennessee | (3-3) | ▼ 16 |
| 86 | Louisiana-Lafayette | (3-3) | ▲ 7 |
| 87 | Louisiana-Monroe | (3-3) | ▼ 10 |
| 88 | Utah State | (3-4) | ▼ 15 |
| 89 | Georgia Tech | (3-2) | ▼ 13 |
| 90 | Georgia State | (3-2) | ▲ 16 |
| 91 | New Mexico State | (3-4) | ▲ 4 |
| 92 | Florida State | (2-3) | ▲ 15 |
| 93 | Temple | (3-4) | ▼ 9 |
| 94 | Tulsa | (2-5) | ▲ 16 |
| 95 | Hawaii | (3-4) | ▲ 7 |
| 96 | Arkansas State | (3-2) | ▲ 9 |
| 97 | Texas-San Antonio | (3-2) | ▼ 11 |
| 98 | Kansas State | (3-3) | ▼ 11 |
| 99 | Illinois | (2-4) | ▼ 9 |
| 100 | Ball State | (2-4) | ▼ 9 |
| 101 | South Alabama | (2-4) | ▲ 28 |
| 102 | Kent State | (2-5) | ▲ 6 |
| 103 | Rutgers | (2-4) | ▲ 18 |
| 104 | Arkansas | (2-4) | ▼ 10 |
| 105 | Idaho | (2-4) | ▼ 7 |
| 106 | Connecticut | (2-4) | ▲ 10 |
| 107 | Miami OH_ | (2-5) | ▼ 15 |
| 108 | Air Force | (2-4) | ▲ 9 |
| 109 | Nevada-Las Vegas | (2-4) | ▼ 13 |
| 110 | Cincinnati | (2-5) | ▼ 13 |
| 111 | Pittsburgh | (2-5) | ▼ 11 |
| 112 | Eastern Michigan | (2-4) | ▼ 8 |
| 113 | Old Dominion | (2-4) | ▼ 10 |
| 114 | Nevada | (1-6) | ▼ 1 |
| 115 | East Carolina | (1-6) | ▲ 6 |
| 116 | North Carolina | (1-6) | ▼ 6 |
| 117 | Bowling Green State | (1-6) | ▼ 6 |
| 118 | San Jose State | (1-7) | ▼ 5 |
| 119 | Kansas | (1-5) | ▼ 3 |
| 120 | Missouri | (1-5) | ▼ 3 |
| 121 | Texas State | (1-6) | ▼ 3 |
| 122 | Brigham Young | (1-6) | ▲ 3 |
| 123 | Oregon State | (1-6) | ▲ 3 |
| 124 | Coastal Carolina | (1-5) | ▲ 1 |
| 125 | Rice | (1-5) | -- |
| 126 | Georgia Southern | (0-5) | -- |
| 127 | Baylor | (0-6) | -- |
| 128 | Charlotte | (0-7) | -- |
| 129 | Texas-El Paso | (0-7) | -- |
| 130 | Massachusetts | (0-6) | -- |
The table above allows you to see how different teams are trending after their Week 7 performances. Within the top-10, (4) Southern California and (5) Texas Christian were the biggest positive movers (+4), while (8) Washington State was the biggest negative mover (-4) after an embarrassing blowout to California. Interestingly, when comparing this information with the table below, you can see that (4) Southern California has a strong chance of continuing to trend in a positive direction, whereas (5) Texas Christian isn’t projected to climb more than 2 ranks, if they even manage to trend positively.
NCAAF Oracle: Poll prediction feature for Week 8
The current top 20 teams are listed in the columns below. In the rows, we indicate the chances each team has to be ranked in that column by the end of the week.
| Rk | Team | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 1 | Alabama | 66% | 20% | 11% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 2 | Georgia | 6% | 23% | 32% | 23% | 12% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 3 | Clemson | 0% | 0% | 2% | 8% | 19% | 27% | 23% | 13% | 5% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 4 | Southern California | 16% | 27% | 6% | 1% | 3% | 6% | 10% | 10% | 8% | 6% | 4% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 5 | Texas Christian | 0% | 0% | 7% | 16% | 17% | 13% | 9% | 9% | 8% | 7% | 6% | 4% | 3% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 6 | Penn State | 12% | 24% | 13% | 1% | 2% | 4% | 6% | 7% | 8% | 7% | 5% | 4% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 7 | San Diego State | 0% | 4% | 17% | 18% | 8% | 3% | 1% | 3% | 5% | 7% | 8% | 9% | 8% | 5% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 8 | Washington State | 0% | 0% | 11% | 20% | 14% | 4% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 5% | 6% | 7% | 8% | 7% | 6% | 4% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% |
| 9 | North Carolina State | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 4% | 8% | 13% | 16% | 17% | 16% | 12% | 8% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 10 | Ohio State | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 4% | 6% | 8% | 11% | 13% | 14% | 13% | 11% | 8% | 5% | 2% | 1% |
| 11 | Washington | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 3% | 7% | 13% | 18% | 20% | 17% | 11% | 6% |
| 12 | Wisconsin | 0% | 0% | 2% | 7% | 14% | 15% | 9% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 4% | 7% | 9% | 10% | 8% | 5% | 3% |
| 13 | Michigan State | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 4% | 7% | 9% | 9% | 8% | 6% | 4% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 3% | 6% | 9% | 9% |
| 14 | Stanford | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 3% |
| 15 | Memphis | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 4% | 6% | 7% | 7% | 7% | 6% | 5% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 1% |
| 16 | Miami FL_ | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 4% | 6% | 8% | 8% | 8% | 6% | 4% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 17 | Central Florida | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 5% | 8% | 9% | 8% | 7% | 5% | 3% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% |
| 18 | Texas A&M | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% |
| 19 | South Carolina | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 4% |
| 20 | Louisiana State | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 4% | 6% | 9% | 9% | 8% | 6% | 4% | 2% | 0% |
Looking at this table, you can see that the #1 rank will be decided between four teams: Alabama, Georgia, Southern California, and Penn State. As they currently hold the #1 rank, Alabama possesses the strongest change of maintaining their position (66%). Take into account that their Week 8 match-up is against an unranked Tennessee team that has played inconsistent football and only registered 9 total points in their last two games combined, and it makes sense that, even if Alabama were to lose the #1 rank, their fall from grace would likely be minimized to only the #3 rank (11%).
Although Georgia holds the #2 rank at present, it is (4) Southern California (16%) and (6) Penn State (12%) that have the next best chances of dethroning the Crimson Tide. This is largely attributable to the fact that (2) Georgia is on a bye week, leaving their fate in the hands of other teams. As such, if (4) Southern California can perform better than they had in Week 7 against Utah (they’ll be facing a far-stronger opponent in Notre Dame), there is a good chance they may, if nothing else, leapfrog Georgia for the #2 rank (27%). Likewise, (6) Penn State can make a strong case for the #2 rank (24%) if they pull out a win against Michigan Saturday evening. The Nittany Lions are coming off a bye week, so expect a well-rested team that is hungry to remain unbeaten. All that being said, a loss for either of these teams would present a significant setback, as (4) Southern California could fall anywhere from #6 to #13, and (6) Penn State could fall anywhere from #7 to #15. Such significant drops are highly unlikely, even with a loss, but that does not mean it can’t happen.
Heading into Week 8, the team that faces the widest range for possible ranking by week’s end is (8) Washington State. Facing a 4-3 Colorado team, there is only a 2% chance that Washington State retains their #8 ranking, which presents two vastly different interpretations: the optimistic and more favorable of these two involves the Cougars winning, which could elevate them all the way up to #3 (11%) but has the strongest chance of stopping the climb at #4 (20%), if not #5 (14%). It’s still good that there’s a 45% chance Washington State will finish between #3 and #5, but here comes the second of those two interpretations: the pessimistic and less favorable scenario would likely arise following a Washington State loss. Should this occur, there is a 34% chance the team could fall anywhere between #11 and #15, although all of the wrong dominos could fall and drop the Cougars to #18.
Lastly, for those of you who are fans of (14) Stanford, (18) Texas A&M, or (19) South Carolina, the odds are not ever in your favor; with all three of these teams on a bye, consider their chances of remaining in the top-20 very slim.
Written and published by Tyler Caldwell
>>