Spring update of 2025 college football SP+ rankings for every FBS team
Bill ConnellyMay 22, 2025, 07:00 AM ET Close Bill Connelly is a writer for ESPN. He covers college football, soccer and tennis. He has been at ESPN since 2019. Open Extended Reactions In 93 days, it all starts again. From Week 0’s Irish Farmageddon (Iowa State vs. Kansas State in Dublin) in mid-August to the […]
Bill Connelly is a writer for ESPN. He covers college football, soccer and tennis. He has been at ESPN since 2019.
In 93 days, it all starts again. From Week 0’s Irish Farmageddon (Iowa State vs. Kansas State in Dublin) in mid-August to the national title game in late January, the 2025 college football season looms. And with transfer portal movement finally slowing down — including spring moves, FBS teams have averaged more than 19 transfers this offseason, up more than 40% from last season — we can finally take a semi-confident look at what’s in store this fall. That means updating our numbers.
Below are updated SP+ projections for the coming season. A quick reminder: Preseason projections are based on three factors.
1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as humanly possible to account for transfers and attrition. The combination of last year’s SP+ ratings and adjustments based on returning production makes up about two-thirds of the projections formula.
2. 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 the past few years of recruiting rankings in diminishing order (meaning the most recent class carries the most weight). This is also impacted by the recruiting rankings of incoming transfers, an acknowledgment that the art of roster management is now heavily dictated by the transfer portal.
3. Recent history. Using a sliver of information from the previous four seasons or so gives us a good measure of overall program health.
(One other reminder: SP+ is a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. It is a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football, not a résumé ranking, and along those lines, these projections aren’t intended to be a guess at what the AP Top 25 will look like at the end of the season. These are simply early offseason power rankings based on the information we have been able to gather.)
Here are the updated rankings:
This time around, I am also experimenting with what you might call a fourth projection factor: coaching changes. Using data discussed in this March column, I have incorporated some adjustments based on who changed head coaches and/or offensive or defensive coordinators and how those teams performed against historic norms last year. Translation: For teams or units that underachieved significantly against their 20-year averages and changed coaches or coordinators (example: Oklahoma’s offense, Purdue’s entire team), that means a slight bump upward. For teams or units that overachieved and lost their coaches or coordinators (example: UNLV as a team or Louisiana Tech’s defense), that means a bump down.
The adjustments aren’t enormous, but when you see that Oklahoma’s projected rating has risen since February, that explains it.
Minimal changes near the top
Thirteen teams moved up or down at least 10 spots compared to February’s rankings, due to either transfer portal addition/attrition, the coaching adjustments mentioned above, or simply me getting a much better read on returning production after official roster releases. At the very top, however, not a ton changed. The top four teams from February continue to occupy the same spots, though Texas hopped Notre Dame and Oregon into the No. 5 hole. Clemson and Michigan rose a bit, Tennessee dropped five spots after Nico Iamaleava’s transfer, and Oklahoma eased into the top 15. (With their ridiculous schedule, however, the Sooners’ projected win total still isn’t great.)
Editor’s Picks2 RelatedThe overall conference hierarchy hasn’t changed much either, though with the Sun Belt getting hit particularly hard by spring transfer attrition, the AAC moves into the top spot among Group of 5 conferences.Average SP+ rating by conference1. SEC (15.3 overall, 33.1 offense, 17.8 defense, 60.7% average returning production)Top three teams: No. 2 Alabama, No. 4 Georgia, No. 5 Texas2. Big Ten (9.5 overall, 29.1 offense, 19.6 defense, 56.7% average returning production)Top three teams: No. 1 Ohio State, No. 3 Penn State, No. 7 OregonBoth the SEC and Big Ten boast three of the projected top seven teams, but if we measure conferences by average ratings, the SEC still has a commanding lead due, as always, to the lack of dead weight. Only two of 16 SEC teams are projected lower than 43rd overall, while the Big Ten has six such teams, including three ranked 70th or worse. That helps explain why, despite playing only eight-game conference schedules, SEC teams occupy 13 of the top 15 spots in the strength of schedule rankings.3. Big 12 (6.3 overall, 31.0 offense, 24.7 defense, 61.8% average returning production)Top three teams: No. 18 Kansas State, No. 22 Arizona State, No. 26 Texas Tech4. ACC (5.0 overall, 30.8 offense, 25.8 defense, 59.2% average returning production)Top three teams: No. 8 Clemson, No. 12 Miami, No. 20 SMUWe see a similar dynamic with the Big 12 and ACC — in terms of the quality of its top teams, the ACC (three top-20 teams) seems to have an advantage over the Big 12 (one top-20 team). But the Big 12 has eight top-35 teams compared to the ACC’s four, and while no Big 12 team is projected lower than 66th, the ACC’s average is dragged down by three teams ranking 79th or lower.5. AAC (-7.8 overall, 26.0 offense, 33.8 defense, 49.4% average returning production)Top three teams: No. 48 Tulane, No. 53 Memphis, No. 63 UTSA6. Sun Belt (-8.1 overall, 24.9 offense, 33.0 defense, 46.3% average returning production)Top three teams: No. 49 James Madison, No. 74 Louisiana, No. 76 South Alabama7. Mountain West (-8.6 overall, 23.5 offense, 32.1 defense, 46.5% average returning production)Top three teams: No. 33 Boise State, No. 75 UNLV, No. 83 San Jose StateThree G5 teams are within one point of each other on average, though again, the distribution varies significantly by conference. The MWC is propped up significantly by Boise State, the best projected G5 team, but its average is dragged down by three teams ranking 119th or worse. The Sun Belt has only one such team. The AAC, meanwhile, has a solid five teams in the top 70 … and four teams projected 120th or worse.8. Conference USA (-13.0 overall, 20.4 offense, 33.4 defense, 50.7% average returning production)Top three teams: No. 69 Liberty, No. 85 Western Kentucky, No. 104 Jacksonville State9. MAC (-13.7 overall, 19.8 offense, 33.5 defense, 41.1% average returning production)Top three teams: No. 72 Toledo, No. 80 Ohio, No. 91 BuffaloNo conference was hit harder by the portal than the MAC, which has only three teams ranked higher than 94th in the returning production rankings below. That’s going to wreck your averages, though Toledo and Buffalo both escaped too much damage in this regard.An approximate CFP contenders listMy SP+ strength of schedule ratings are based on a simple question: How would the average top-five team fare against your schedule? Oklahoma’s schedule currently features five of the projected top 11 teams and nine of the top 25, while Notre Dame’s features only two teams projected higher than 30th; SP+ SOS says a top-five team would average a 0.757 win percentage against OU’s schedule (equivalent to 9.1 wins in 12 games) and a 0.894 win percentage against Notre Dame’s (10.7 wins). That’s a pretty big difference.Schedule strengths obviously vary quite a bit within conferences — not every SEC schedule is Oklahoma’s — but it’s worth acknowledging that when it comes to potential College Football Playoff-worthy résumés, the bar can be set in a different spot based on a team’s conference.Average strength-of-schedule rating per conferenceSEC 0.799 (9.6 wins for a typical top-five team)
With iconic stories, hit Originals and live sports, there’s something for everyone on Disney+, Hulu and ESPN+. Get all three for a price you’ll love.
Big Ten 0.846 (10.2)
ACC 0.891 (10.7)
Big 12 0.902 (10.8)
AAC 0.956 (11.5)
Sun Belt 0.958 (11.5)
MWC 0.959 (11.5)
CUSA 0.964 (11.6)
MAC 0.965 (11.6)
When it comes to how a top-five team would fare, the average SEC schedule is about one win harder than the average ACC or Big 12 schedule. The Big Ten, with its deadweight teams, is about a half-win harder than those leagues but is still more likely to get lumped in with the SEC than the others in the Power 4.
Long story short: We can confidently say that any 10-2 or better team in the SEC or Big Ten would be a likely playoff contender, just as any 11-1 or better team in the ACC or Big 12 would be. We can therefore create a loose list of likely CFP contenders by looking at the teams most likely to hit those marks.
Odds of an SEC team going 10-2 or better: Alabama 65% (SOS rank: 11th), Texas 61% (12th), Georgia 61% (13th), Ole Miss 38% (23rd), Tennessee 33% (24th), LSU 30% (ninth), Florida 18% (second), Auburn 13% (15th), Oklahoma 9% (first), Missouri 5% (25th)
Odds of a Big Ten team going 10-2 or better: Penn State 82% (SOS rank: 29th), Ohio State 77% (21st), Oregon 73% (32nd), Michigan 62% (38th), Illinois 29% (40th), Nebraska 13% (35th), USC 10% (20th), Indiana 9% (31st)
With a particularly weak nonconference schedule and a particularly good team, Penn State might be in the driver’s seat in terms of playoff qualification, while Ohio State, Oregon, Alabama, Michigan and Georgia are all over 60% likely to finish the regular season with two or fewer losses.
Odds of a Big 12 or ACC team (or Notre Dame) going 11-1 or better: Notre Dame 52% (SOS rank: 44th), Clemson 37% (34th), Miami 23% (36th), Kansas State 17% (57th), BYU 7% (64th), Texas Tech 7% (62nd), SMU 6% (45th), Arizona State 5% (61st)
Odds of a Group of 5 team going 11-1 or better: Boise State 37% (SOS rank: 84th), Liberty 17% (136th), Toledo 11% (133rd), Memphis 8% (121st), James Madison 7% (104th)
Notre Dame starts the season with games against Miami and Texas A&M, and while the rest of the schedule features plenty of solid opponents (five are projected between 30th and 47th), if the Irish are 2-0 out of the gates, they’re staring a second straight CFP appearance in the face.
Updated returning production rankings
With updated SP+ projections come updated returning production figures. A reminder: While returning production doesn’t correlate with pure quality, it does correlate well with improvement and regression, particularly at the extremes.
(Note: The production of incoming transfers is mashed into both the numerator and denominator of the returning production formula — so if you lose your starting quarterback but bring in someone else’s from the portal, your returning yardage is probably somewhere around 50%. The production of transfers from schools below the FBS level get half-credit.)
As was the case in February, Clemson leads the way here. And with the way that talent trickles upward in the transfer portal era, it’s probably not a surprise that nine of the top 10 teams in returning production (and 22 of the top 26) are power-conference teams. The P4 boasts 59.6% returning production overall, while the G5 is at 46.8%. That’s a pretty massive gap, one that isn’t likely to shrink anytime soon.
Highest-rated Class of 2026 football recruits from Iowa |
Highest-rated Class of 2026 football recruits from Iowa The recruiting race for the Class of 2026 is already heating up — not just on the field, but in the increasingly complex ecosystem of modern college football, where NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) deals are reshaping how programs and players navigate early recruitment. For elite underclassmen, […]
Highest-rated Class of 2026 football recruits from Iowa
The recruiting race for the Class of 2026 is already heating up — not just on the field, but in the increasingly complex ecosystem of modern college football, where NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) deals are reshaping how programs and players navigate early recruitment. For elite underclassmen, talent alone is no longer the only factor drawing attention; marketability, social media presence, and brand potential are now playing pivotal roles in how offers are extended and decisions are made. The top recruits in the 2026 cycle are not only physically advanced and highly skilled — they’re entering high school with endorsement potential and media savviness.
Stacker compiled a list of the highest rated Class of 2026 football recruits from Iowa using data from 247Sports. Here’s the players from Iowa set to dominate Saturdays (and potentially Sundays) for years to come.
Le’Veon Moss arrest: Mike Elko releases statement on Texas A&M RB
Texas A&M RB Le’Veon Moss was arrested early this morning for disorderly conduct. Mike Elko has now since addressed the incident regarding his team’s leading rusher last fall. Elko has shared a statement about Moss this afternoon. It was a straightforward one at this time as the Aggies are aware of the matter and intend […]
Texas A&M RB Le’Veon Moss was arrested early this morning for disorderly conduct. Mike Elko has now since addressed the incident regarding his team’s leading rusher last fall.
Elko has shared a statement about Moss this afternoon. It was a straightforward one at this time as the Aggies are aware of the matter and intend to handle it within the program at A&M.
“We are aware of the situation regarding Le’Veon Moss and will handle the matter internally,” said Elko per Carter Karels at GigEm247.
KBTX in College Station reported on the arrest this morning that took place around 1 a.m. CT. Moss was apparently involved in an argument where he was threatening and “speaking aggressively” someone else. After attempts were made by law enforcement and those in his party to calm him, Moss, as well as someone else with him at the time, were placed under arrest. No other details are known at this time of what caused the incident to begin with. That all comes per KBTX’s Rusty Surett.
Moss has spent the past three seasons with the Aggies. He, in 25 appearances in his career at the school, has 244 carries for 1,363 yards, at 54.5 yards per game and 5.6 per attempt, and 16 touchdowns when rushing. That includes what was a career-best season for him in nine starts last fall as a junior where he had 121 carries for 765 yards, averaging 85 a game and 6.3 per carry, and 10 scores, making him their leading rusher and a selection to the All-SEC Second Team. However, he had a season-ending injury in a loss on November 2nd at South Carolina which kept him out of their final four games.
More could come on this matter at SEC Media Days this week with Texas A&M to be the final team on the schedule with their appearance being last on Thursday. This was pretty clear by Elko, though, with the Aggies likely to only say so much on Moss’ arrest as they handle it themselves internally.
Kentucky’s interest in 4-star 2026 PF Cam Williams “starting to pick up”
Kentucky men’s basketball is looking to land its first 2026 commitment, but there are plenty of options out there still regularly hearing from the Wildcats. A new name to monitor is four-star power forward Cam Williams (no, not the Kam Williams already on Kentucky’s current roster). The 6-foot-11 prospect out of Arizona is considered the […]
Kentucky men’s basketball is looking to land its first 2026 commitment, but there are plenty of options out there still regularly hearing from the Wildcats.
A new name to monitor is four-star power forward Cam Williams (no, not the Kam Williams already on Kentucky’s current roster). The 6-foot-11 prospect out of Arizona is considered the No. 16 overall rising high school senior in the country, according to On3. He spoke with KSR at the adidas 3SSB Championships in Rock Hill, SC, on Friday to talk about the Wildcats’ recent push in his recruitment.
“It’s good, it’s starting to pick up,” Williams said of his communication with UK. “Couple days ago, I talked to Coach Mark Pope over the phone, he FaceTimed me, and we just had a good talk, we got to know each other and he was telling me about Kentucky and all that stuff.”
“(Pope) wanted to see where my mindset was on recruiting and if I was still open,” Williams added. “He was just trying to get to know me and my family.”
I’ve become a BIG fan of Cam Williams (Compton Magic 17u) over the last few days.
The 6’11” forward moves so well for his size, has some explosive athleticism to add to his length, and passes the ball well both from the perimeter and in the post.
Kentucky has not extended an offer to Williams (the only school he’s still considering yet to do so), but a connection is quickly forming. Pope, along with assistant coach Jason Hart, have been ramping up the contact since they watched Williams play in Iowa during the second 3SSB session back in May. Hart was the first one to speak with him, even talking with Williams’ coaches and parents, and their relationship has been growing ever since.
Pope has been paying extra close attention to Williams’ games in Rock Hill, SC, this week since college coaches were allowed in the gym starting Thursday. Suiting up for Compton Magic alongside top-five 2027 prospect Bruce Branch III — also a Kentucky target — Williams has noticed Pope watching from the baseline.
“It means a lot, you know?” Williams said of UK coaches coming to his games. “A lot of coaches are here for me, but the biggest thing for me is communication, and they’re starting to pick that up.”
As of right now, Williams has official visits locked in with Purdue, Texas, Duke, and Arizona for September and October. Southern California and North Carolina are also on his radar. A trip to Lexington has not been scheduled, but he says Kentucky coaches have talked about it happening down the road. Williams plans to take his recruitment into next spring with plans of making a decision after his senior season ends.
Want more Kentucky Basketball intel? Join KSR Plus for access to bonus content and KSBoard, KSR’s message board, to chat with fellow Cats fans and get exclusive scoop.
Kentucky men’s basketball is halfway through summer practices
Four weeks down, four weeks to go… Kentucky men’s basketball has officially hit the halfway point of summer practices. According to NCAA rules, college programs are allowed eight total weeks (capped at eight hours per week) of weight training and on-court skill instruction during the summer semester. Only four hours per week can be dedicated […]
Kentucky men’s basketball has officially hit the halfway point of summer practices. According to NCAA rules, college programs are allowed eight total weeks (capped at eight hours per week) of weight training and on-court skill instruction during the summer semester. Only four hours per week can be dedicated to on-court practice sessions.
With the “Blue Summer” already at the halfway point, the video team over at UK provided us with some more offseason content. One clip is a highlight reel of what’s been happening during practice at the Joe Craft Center, with a Mark Pope pep talk played over the videos. The second clip is labeled “lights out” as several Wildcats show off their shooting stroke. Collin Chandler hitting a jumper with the No. 9 banner in the background is perfect cinema. And finally, the third clip — “no regard for gravity” — is nothing but dunk after dunk after dunk.
Watch all three videos below to satisfy your basketball craving. Kentucky’s 2025-26 season isn’t too far off…
— Kentucky Men’s Basketball (@KentuckyMBB) July 12, 2025
Join KSR Plus! With a KSR Plus membership, you get access to bonus content and KSBoard, KSR’s message board, to chat with fellow Cats fans and get exclusive scoop.
NIL Deals Getting Rejected Already By New College Sports Commission
The purge of mostly fake NIL agreements has already begun PublishedJuly 13, 2025 7:56 PM EDT•UpdatedJuly 13, 2025 7:57 PM EDT Facebook Twitter Email Copy Link Things are changing quickly in the name, image and likeness world, thanks to the new College Sports Commission. This week, that new agency sent out a lengthy letter to […]
The purge of mostly fake NIL agreements has already begun
Published•Updated
Things are changing quickly in the name, image and likeness world, thanks to the new College Sports Commission.
This week, that new agency sent out a lengthy letter to schools informing them that the commission had rejected a number of agreements between recruits or players and the NIL collectives that have proliferated throughout college football in recent years. Those NIL collectives had previously operated with little oversight or interference, allowing them to funnel money to key players on behalf of their associated schools.
Part of the new House-approved settlement, though, created this commission to evaluate NIL deals moving forward. And they’re already making their presence felt.
RELATED: House Settlement Approved, College Athletics Undergo Massive Change
Inglewood, CA – January 09: Georgia Bulldogs fan cheer in the stands before the CFP National Championship Football game against the TCU Horned Frogs at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood on Monday, January 9, 2023. (Photo by Keith Birmingham/MediaNews Group/Pasadena Star-News via Getty Images)
College Sports Commission Shuts Down Invalid NIL Deals
Some of these arrangements, per the commission, have no “valid business purpose” and, according to a new Associated Press report, “don’t adhere to rules that call for outside NIL deals to be between players and companies that provide goods or services to the general public for profit.”
The new ruling is expected to lead to several collectives permanently shutting down, as schools will now pay players directly, and the “fake” NIL agreements will be under stricter scrutiny.
A number of them have already closed, with those supporting programs like Georgia, Colorado, Alabama and Notre Dame announcing plans to shut down. Some of those schools have made deals with Learfield to make legitimate NIL arrangements.
Roughly 1,500 deals have been cleared in the month or so since the NIL Go system started, with financial figures ranging from “three figures to seven figures.” Many others though, were denied because they did not fit with the new “valid business purpose” required standard.
“In other words, NIL collectives may act as marketing agencies that match student-athletes with businesses that have a valid business purpose and seek to use the student’s NIL to promote their businesses,” the memo explained.
How this impacts schools that have maximized NIL collective-based recruiting, like say, Texas A&M, remains to be seen. But things are rapidly changing in college football. As they always do.
‘100% It’s Going Back to Cheating’ – College Basketball Fans Fear NIL Cap Could Reignite Under-the-Table Recruiting
College basketball has undergone significant changes in recent years with the introduction of NIL. With NIL in the mix, players have been more inclined to flip from school to school in search of the best possible deal. This has led to some frustration in the college basketball fan base. However, following the NCAA house settlement […]
College basketball has undergone significant changes in recent years with the introduction of NIL. With NIL in the mix, players have been more inclined to flip from school to school in search of the best possible deal. This has led to some frustration in the college basketball fan base.
However, following the NCAA house settlement deal, there has been a lot of talk about an NIL cap. This led to a discussion on Reddit, as one fan asked if the cap on NIL could reignite under-the-table recruiting and payments.
With there being a cap on NIL now, do you think that most schools will go back to paying players under the table again? byu/Coolsun13 inCollegeBasketball
Many other college basketball fans chimed in with their opinions.
“100% it’s going back to cheating,” one fan wrote.
“No, there’s no cap on NIL, but all NIL deals must go through an NIL clearing house to get approved. Will teams still pay under the table? Probably. There will be people who will always cheat to gain an advantage. Human nature,” one fan commented.
“What is this “under the table money” you speak of?” one fan added.
Fans continued to react in the comments.
“The cap is only on how much colleges can spend on teams. There’s no limit for a player’s earning potential. Arch Manning can still make over the 17.6M cap that the House settlement put into place. Just the NIL deals have to go through the other org,” one fan wrote.
“It’ll be called lobbying players now. It’s as American as Apple Pie,” one fan commented.
“It’s going to be back to normal. Paying recruits under the table. Duke, Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, Michigan were the biggest,” one fan added.
There Is No Cap on NIL Wages for College Basketball Players
One thing some fans do not understand about the NIL cap is that it does not cap wages for college basketball players. As a result of the house settlement, each team will have a set amount of money it can pay players each season.
This will be similar to a salary cap in professional sports leagues like the NBA, NFL and NHL. However, it does not limit the player’s earning potential.
Players are still able to sign NIL deals with brands outside of what they receive from their school. This cap is simply put in place to encourage players to pay players fairly and to stop top teams from poaching top players from other programs.
College Sports Network has you covered with the latest news, analysis, insights, and trending stories in football, basketball, and more!
| SportsCenter
BREAKING: NBA MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander signs the RICHEST annual salary in league history