Yep. They do have 1. We have 3. Almost 1/3rd of the Bottom 10 is comprised of MWC football teams. If you take out Penn State, which is the token P4 team, we are 1/3rd of the list..........but the PAC something has one also.
Forget next year, the current MWC has 5 at 106 or worse.It’s even worse than that. There are 136 FBs teams. Next year’s MWC has 6 of 9 teams that are 106 or worse. Next year’s MWC would be the lowest rated conference in all of FBS if it existed this year.
![]()
College Football Rankings 2025-26 Rankings
Get the latest College Football rankings for the 2025-26 season. Find out where your favorite team is ranked in the AP Top 25, Coaches Poll, CBS Sports Rankings, or Playoff Rankings polls and rankings.www.cbssports.com
CSU was in there last week.........but the PAC something has one also.
It’s bad. But 5/12 is 41.6% of teams. Next year’s 6 out of 9 is 66.7% of teams.Forget next year, the current MWC has 5 at 106 or worse.
I think that means we have a great shot at coming in 5th place next year!It’s bad. But 5/12 is 41.6% of teams. Next year’s 6 out of 9 is 66.7% of teams.
So next year’s MWC is roughly 60.3% worse than the current MWC when it comes to bad teams.
A 6-6 record and a ‘bowl game’ next year when our OOC is Northern Colorado, Central Michigan, Colorado State and UCONN and being in the worst FBS conference…will be celebrated as a great achievement by the current athletic department. Reality is, a Joe Glenn team would probably be 9-3 or 10-2 against that pathetic schedule.I think that means we have a great shot at coming in 5th place next year!
It is worse. If you take the mean Sagarin ratings of next year’s MWC teams, it is worse than this year’s CUSA, Missouri Valley and Big Sky.Could be worse.. the FCS Missouri Valley overtook CUSA in conference rankings (according to Sagarin), and the Big Sky is right on their heels.