ACC, at a glance.
Top 10 by power rating — 2026 season, through the latest games.
Home Conferences FBS 2026 season
VERDICT BEGINS · 2026
The 2026 ACC season is underway — Miami holds the early power lead, but the picture is still open.
ACC is more top-heavy than deep. Miami gives the league punch, but the middle tier falls away faster than the top leagues.
Top 10 by power rating — 2026 season, through the latest games.
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.




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.
The 2026 ACC season is underway — Miami holds the early power lead, but the picture is still open.
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 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 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 →Can James Franklin sustain Virginia Tech's early momentum?
How will these new series impact both programs' schedules?
What is the outcome of the ongoing investigation into UNC's football program?
Can Louisville sustain its ranking despite the narrow defeat?
What are the allegations against the North Carolina football program?
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 72nd percentile nationally.
Positive gap means the coaching staff won more than the recruiting class predicted. Data: ACC teams, 17 programs.
2026 season, in progress — sorted by power rating. Stature tag = interim Zeitgeist calibration (medium confidence).
| # | Team | Record | RR50 | Resume |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
MiamiPower Program I#12
|
2-0 | +29.2 | +92.4 |
| 2 |
SMUNational Program I#34
|
2-0 | +26.2 | +94.8 |
| 3 |
ClemsonBlue Blood#4
|
1-1 | +25.4 | +39.5 |
| 4 |
Virginia TechNational Program I#41
|
2-0 | +22.0 | +94.6 |
| 5 |
NC StateNational Program I#37
|
1-1 | +21.5 | +32.0 |
| 6 |
PittsburghNational Program I#33
|
2-0 | +21.4 | +94.9 |
| 7 |
VirginiaNational Program III#63
|
2-0 | +20.9 | +97.0 |
| 8 |
LouisvillePower Program III#30
|
1-1 | +20.2 | +81.0 |
| 9 |
DukeNational Program II#58
|
2-0 | +18.6 | +97.9 |
| 10 |
CaliforniaNational Program III#66
|
1-1 | +17.9 | +36.4 |
| 11 |
Wake ForestNational Program III#69
|
2-0 | +17.3 | +96.7 |
| 12 |
Georgia TechNational Program II#45
|
0-2 | +16.6 | +16.2 |
| 13 |
Florida StatePower Program II#18
|
1-1 | +16.3 | +79.8 |
| 14 |
StanfordNational Program III#67
|
1-1 | +15.4 | +90.0 |
| 15 |
North CarolinaNational Program II#54
|
2-0 | +14.4 | +98.2 |
| 16 |
SyracuseRegional Program II#90
|
1-1 | +13.7 | +73.1 |
| 17 |
Boston CollegeRegional Program I#74
|
1-1 | +13.4 | +53.3 |
Projected Standings · ACC · 2026
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 | +9.8 | 6.7 | 6 | 27 | 57 | 82 | 95 | 99 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| 2 | SMU | 6–3 | +6.8 | 6.3 | 4 | 19 | 46 | 73 | 90 | 98 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| 3 | Clemson | 5–3 | +5.9 | 5.2 | 3 | 16 | 43 | 71 | 90 | 98 | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Challengers | |||||||||||||
| 4 | NC State | 6–3 | +2.1 | 5.4 | 1 | 7 | 24 | 50 | 75 | 91 | 98 | ✓ | ✓ |
| 5 | Pittsburgh | 5–4 | +1.9 | 5.1 | 4 | 16 | 39 | 67 | 87 | 97 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 6 | Virginia | 5–4 | +1.5 | 5.0 | 4 | 15 | 37 | 64 | 85 | 96 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 7 | Louisville | 5–4 | +0.8 | 5.0 | 4 | 15 | 37 | 63 | 85 | 96 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 8 | Virginia Tech | 5–4 | +2.6 | 4.7 | 2 | 10 | 29 | 56 | 80 | 94 | 99 | ✓ | |
| The Field | |||||||||||||
| 9 | Duke | 4–5 | -0.8 | 4.3 | 1 | 6 | 20 | 45 | 71 | 90 | 98 | ✓ | |
| 10 | California | 4–5 | -1.6 | 4.0 | 1 | 4 | 16 | 37 | 64 | 85 | 96 | ✓ | |
| 11 | Wake Forest | 4–5 | -2.2 | 3.7 | 3 | 11 | 30 | 56 | 80 | 95 | 99 | ||
| 12 | Georgia Tech | 3–5 | -2.8 | 3.5 | 1 | 7 | 24 | 51 | 77 | 94 | 99 | ||
| 13 | Stanford | 3–6 | -4.0 | 3.3 | 1 | 6 | 20 | 43 | 70 | 90 | 98 | ||
| 14 | Florida State | 3–5 | -3.2 | 2.9 | 3 | 12 | 33 | 61 | 86 | 98 | |||
| Rebuilding | |||||||||||||
| 15 | Syracuse | 3–6 | -5.7 | 3.2 | 1 | 5 | 17 | 39 | 67 | 88 | 98 | ||
| 16 | Boston College | 3–5 | -6.0 | 2.8 | 2 | 10 | 29 | 58 | 84 | 97 | |||
| 17 | North Carolina | 3–5 | -5.0 | 2.8 | 2 | 10 | 28 | 57 | 83 | 97 | |||
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.
| Team | Scoring | Converts | Defense | Identity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Miami | +0.55 | 62.2% | +0.10 | Efficient offense |
SMU | +0.48 | 55.8% | -0.03 | Efficient offense |
Clemson | -0.19 | 28.2% | -0.19 | Can't sustain drives |
Virginia Tech | +0.37 | 51.0% | +0.16 | High-tempo |
NC State | +0.31 | 49.5% | -0.02 | No explosive plays |
Pittsburgh | +0.21 | 45.3% | -0.02 | Balanced |
Virginia | +0.37 | 54.4% | +0.18 | Lockdown defense |
Louisville | +0.49 | 54.6% | -0.14 | Efficient offense |
Duke | +0.18 | 37.5% | -0.09 | Balanced |
California | +0.04 | 34.4% | -0.18 | Can't sustain drives |
Wake Forest | +0.42 | 47.4% | -0.16 | Balanced |
Georgia Tech | +0.04 | 41.4% | -0.15 | Balanced |
Florida State | +0.24 | 41.0% | -0.27 | Defense is the problem |
Stanford | +0.17 | 39.3% | -0.26 | Defense is the problem |
North Carolina | +0.30 | 51.5% | +0.03 | Grind-it-out |
Syracuse | +0.14 | 42.4% | +0.16 | High-tempo |
Boston College | +0.13 | 37.8% | -0.15 | 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.
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 |
Conference strength by RR50 (round-robin adjusted power).
Best available American odds · sportsbook consensus.
| # | Team | Odds |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Miami (FL)
|
-225 |
| 2 |
SMU
|
+520 |
| 3 |
Louisville
|
+700 |
| 4 |
Virginia
|
+1400 |
| 5 |
Pittsburgh
|
+2000 |
| 6 |
Clemson
|
+2300 |
| 7 |
Virginia Tech
|
+2200 |
| 8 |
California
|
+4000 |
| 9 |
Duke
|
+6500 |
| 10 |
Georgia Tech
|
+5000 |