ACC, at a glance.
Top 10 by power rating — 2026 season, through the latest games.
Team
Power
Record
RR50
Home Conferences FBS 2026 season
VERDICT BEGINS · 2026
ACC
The Flip
The 2026 ACC season is underway — Miami holds the early power lead, but the picture is still open.
ACC looks stronger on team quality than on season resume, which makes it a dangerous future-facing league.
#6overall
#6in FBS
+19.4RR50
+23.5upper strength
17teams
2top-25 teams
Power snapshot
Projected 2026 standing
The Flip
Miami went 13-3 in 2025 and holds the ACC's highest power rating entering 2026 — the strongest the program has looked since winning the 2001 national title. Meanwhile Clemson, who won six straight ACC titles from 2015-2021, went 7-6 last year. The power structure in the ACC just flipped.
2 top-25 teams.
The depth argument for this conference rests on how many credible opponents are clustered behind the leader. A wide talent spread separates the haves from the have-nots.
Where things stand right now.
The 2026 ACC season is underway — Miami holds the early power lead, but the picture is still open.
The New Leader
Miami at 13-3 Is the ACC's Best Story in Twenty Years
Miami went 13-3 in 2025 and enters 2026 as the conference's top-rated program. They're recruiting at an elite level and winning games at a rate the program hasn't seen since the 2001 title. The 2026 Miami-Clemson game is the conference's defining matchup — a reigning dynasty against a program reclaiming the standard.
The Fallen DynastyClemson Went 7-6 — the Worst Season Under Dabo Since 2010
Clemson won six ACC titles in a row from 2015-2021 and finished 2025 at 7-6. Dabo Swinney's program has never had a losing conference season in that stretch, but the recruiting gap with Miami and Florida State is closing. Whether 2025 was a down year or the start of a longer slide is the most important question in the ACC entering 2026.
Why it matters →
The Wild CardVirginia at 11-3 Is a Coaching Premium Nobody Expected
Virginia went 11-3 in 2025 with a recruiting class ranked #58 nationally — the biggest overperformance relative to talent in the ACC. A program that had four consecutive losing seasons from 2020-2023 is now winning eleven games. The question heading into 2026 is whether they can sustain it against a Miami program that's now actively competing for the same recruits.
Why it matters →Active arcs our read
Hot2mo ago
UNC defensive coordinator Steve Belichick resigns amid program investigation
What were the findings of the probe into UNC’s football program?
North Carolina
Hot8mo ago
Washington State vs. Kansas State (Sep 12, 2026) Live Score - ESPN
Can Colorado State secure a win against Boise State?
Boston College
Hot2wk ago
Louisville stays ranked despite Ole Miss loss
Can Louisville sustain its ranking with a tough schedule ahead?
Louisville
Hot3mo ago
Syracuse faces skepticism over its 2026 season outlook
Can Syracuse maintain its defensive momentum and improve on early predictions?
Syracuse
Hot1wk ago
Miami Hurricanes Face Florida A&M in High-Profile College Football Matchup
How will Miami perform after heavy NFL Draft losses?
Miami
Fan pulse
17% positive
46% neutral
37% negative
Florida State
4,724
↓ negative
Miami
2,674
→ neutral
California
1,533
↓ negative
SMU
918
↓ negative
Syracuse
796
↓ negative
Georgia Tech
615
→ neutral
Fan confidence — FBS percentile
Where each ACC program stands nationally in fan sentiment (100th = most positive in FBS, 0 = least). Conference median: 46th percentile.
Most volatile: Boston College
Fan confidence has swung 67 percentile points in the last 8 weeks — currently at the 60th percentile nationally.
Rivalry face-offs
The coaching premium
Recruiting class rank vs. SP+ performance — where coaches add or subtract value
Above line = coaching premium
Below line = underperforming
Gap = recruiting rank minus SP+ rank
Positive gap means the coaching staff won more than the recruiting class predicted. Data: ACC teams, 17 programs.
Standings
2026 season, in progress — sorted by power rating. Stature tag = interim Zeitgeist calibration (medium confidence).
| # | Team | Record | RR50 | Resume |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
MiamiPower Program I#12
|
3-0 | +28.6 | +95.5 |
| 2 |
SMUPower Program III#33
|
2-1 | +26.3 | +63.0 |
| 3 |
ClemsonBlue Blood#4
|
2-1 | +24.2 | +53.1 |
| 4 |
NC StateNational Program I#37
|
1-2 | +22.3 | +40.9 |
| 5 |
Virginia TechNational Program I#39
|
3-0 | +22.3 | +97.8 |
| 6 |
LouisvillePower Program III#29
|
2-1 | +21.9 | +97.3 |
| 7 |
VirginiaNational Program III#63
|
2-1 | +21.2 | +53.7 |
| 8 |
PittsburghNational Program I#34
|
3-0 | +21.1 | +94.3 |
| 9 |
DukeNational Program II#58
|
3-0 | +19.7 | +98.1 |
| 10 |
Wake ForestNational Program III#67
|
2-1 | +18.1 | +94.6 |
| 11 |
CaliforniaNational Program III#66
|
2-1 | +18.0 | +49.5 |
| 12 |
Florida StatePower Program II#20
|
1-2 | +16.8 | +78.9 |
| 13 |
Georgia TechNational Program II#49
|
1-2 | +15.9 | +41.5 |
| 14 |
North CarolinaNational Program II#53
|
2-1 | +15.8 | +96.0 |
| 15 |
StanfordNational Program III#68
|
1-2 | +15.0 | +66.1 |
| 16 |
SyracuseRegional Program II#91
|
1-2 | +13.9 | +73.5 |
| 17 |
Boston CollegeRegional Program I#82
|
2-1 | +12.6 | +52.3 |
Projected Standings · ACC · 2026
Win Projection
Odds of winning at least N conference games from current power ratings — full slate played out, not locked to results. AVG = expected wins; W–L = most-likely record.
| # | Team | W–L | PWR | AVG | ≥9 | ≥8 | ≥7 | ≥6 | ≥5 | ≥4 | ≥3 | ≥2 | ≥1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Favorites | |||||||||||||
| 1 | Miami | 7–2 | +9.0 | 6.5 | 5 | 24 | 53 | 79 | 93 | 99 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| 2 | SMU | 6–3 | +6.7 | 6.2 | 4 | 18 | 44 | 72 | 90 | 97 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| 3 | Clemson | 5–3 | +4.6 | 5.0 | 2 | 12 | 35 | 64 | 86 | 96 | 99 | ✓ | |
| Challengers | |||||||||||||
| 4 | NC State | 6–3 | +2.7 | 5.5 | 1 | 8 | 25 | 50 | 75 | 91 | 98 | ✓ | ✓ |
| 5 | Louisville | 5–4 | +2.2 | 5.3 | 1 | 6 | 20 | 45 | 71 | 89 | 97 | ✓ | ✓ |
| 6 | Pittsburgh | 5–4 | +1.4 | 5.0 | 3 | 14 | 36 | 64 | 85 | 96 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 7 | Virginia | 5–4 | +1.6 | 4.9 | 3 | 14 | 36 | 62 | 84 | 96 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 8 | Virginia Tech | 5–4 | +2.6 | 4.8 | 3 | 12 | 33 | 60 | 83 | 95 | 99 | ✓ | |
| The Field | |||||||||||||
| 9 | Duke | 5–4 | +0.1 | 4.5 | 2 | 8 | 25 | 51 | 76 | 92 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 10 | California | 4–5 | -1.6 | 4.0 | 1 | 5 | 16 | 38 | 64 | 86 | 97 | ✓ | |
| 11 | Wake Forest | 4–5 | -1.5 | 3.9 | 1 | 3 | 13 | 33 | 59 | 83 | 95 | 99 | |
| 12 | Georgia Tech | 3–5 | -3.7 | 3.4 | 1 | 6 | 20 | 46 | 74 | 92 | 99 | ||
| 13 | Florida State | 3–5 | -2.8 | 3.0 | 1 | 3 | 14 | 35 | 64 | 87 | 98 | ||
| 14 | North Carolina | 3–5 | -3.8 | 3.0 | 3 | 13 | 34 | 62 | 87 | 98 | |||
| Rebuilding | |||||||||||||
| 15 | Stanford | 3–6 | -4.6 | 3.1 | 1 | 5 | 17 | 39 | 66 | 88 | 98 | ||
| 16 | Syracuse | 3–6 | -5.7 | 3.1 | 1 | 5 | 17 | 39 | 66 | 88 | 98 | ||
| 17 | Boston College | 3–5 | -7.0 | 2.6 | 1 | 8 | 25 | 53 | 81 | 96 | |||
How they play
Six advanced-stat dimensions per team, ranked against all 134 FBS programs, 2026 season. Every column reads higher-is-better. Click a column to sort.
ScoringConvertsBig playsDefensePacePass rate
| Team | Scoring | Converts | Defense | Identity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Miami | +0.45 | 56.2% | +0.05 | Efficient offense |
| SMU | +0.32 | 51.4% | -0.09 | Efficient offense |
| Clemson | -0.06 | 32.8% | -0.08 | Can't sustain drives |
| NC State | +0.22 | 45.9% | -0.10 | No explosive plays |
| Virginia Tech | +0.38 | 51.1% | +0.03 | High-tempo |
| Louisville | +0.46 | 52.8% | -0.09 | Efficient offense |
| Virginia | +0.28 | 49.2% | +0.09 | Lockdown defense |
| Pittsburgh | +0.17 | 45.8% | +0.07 | Balanced |
| Duke | +0.25 | 41.2% | +0.02 | Balanced |
| Wake Forest | +0.30 | 45.7% | -0.19 | Balanced |
| California | +0.16 | 42.1% | -0.04 | Balanced |
| Florida State | +0.22 | 41.0% | -0.33 | Big-play offense |
| Georgia Tech | +0.11 | 43.5% | -0.11 | Balanced |
| North Carolina | +0.18 | 48.8% | +0.01 | No explosive plays |
| Stanford | +0.07 | 37.9% | -0.30 | Defense is the problem |
| Syracuse | +0.04 | 40.1% | +0.08 | High-tempo |
| Boston College | +0.01 | 40.0% | -0.04 | Balanced |
Identity is the single dimension where a team is most above or below the FBS average (pace, defense, big plays, or converting drives) — "Balanced" means nothing stands out either way. CFBD 2026 advanced stats, excludes garbage time.
Top players
ACC's highest CFB Index Scores, 2025 season.
| # | Player | Team | National |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ahmaad MosesS | SMU | #1 of 544 |
| 2 | Bryce FitzgeraldCB | Miami | #4 of 364 |
| 3 | Malachi ToneyWR | Miami | #2 of 485 |
| 4 | Sammy BrownLB | Clemson | #8 of 583 |
| 5 | Terry WebbIDL | SMU | #6 of 330 |
| 6 | Isaiah SmithEDGE | SMU | #10 of 420 |
| 7 | Rasheem BilesLB | Pittsburgh | #14 of 583 |
| 8 | Clev LubinEDGE | Louisville | #14 of 420 |
| 9 | Caden FordhamLB | NC State | #15 of 583 |
| 10 | Jeffrey M'BaIDL | SMU | #11 of 330 |
Where ACC stands nationally
Conference strength by RR50 (round-robin adjusted power).
1
SEC
SEC
+23.0
2
B10
Big Ten
+21.8
3
IND
FBS Independents
+20.5
4
P12
Pac-12
+20.0
5
B12
Big 12
+20.0
6
ACC
ACC
+19.4
7
AAC
American Athletic
+17.6
8
SB
Sun Belt
+17.2
9
CUSA
Conference USA
+16.7
10
MAC
Mid-American
+16.2
ACC title odds
Best available American odds · sportsbook consensus.
| # | Team | Odds |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
/logo_primary.png){kind=logo}
Miami (FL)
|
-250 |
| 2 |
SMU
|
+520 |
| 3 |
Louisville
|
+500 |
| 4 |
Virginia
|
+1500 |
| 5 |
Pittsburgh
|
+2000 |
| 6 |
Clemson
|
+2300 |
| 7 |
Virginia Tech
|
+1600 |
| 8 |
California
|
+6000 |
| 9 |
Duke
|
+4000 |
| 10 |
Georgia Tech
|
+6000 |