| 2000 | Clemson9–3 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #15 (of 116 teams · 34.7 pts/g · 416 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #35 (of 116 teams · 21.1 pts/g allowed · 253 points) | #15 (of 116 teams · +13.6 /g · +163 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| Median | of 9 ACC teams in 2000 | 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–10 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–25 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.) | — (No team has a rank for this) | #67 (Scoring offense: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range #5–#112. 1 of 9 in the top 10.) | — (No team has a rank for this) | #62 (Scoring defense: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range #1–#115. 1 of 9 in the top 10.) | #65 (Point margin: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range #1–#114. 1 of 9 in the top 10.) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) |
| 2000 | Duke0–11 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #112 (of 116 teams · 14.1 pts/g · 155 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #115 (of 116 teams · 39.1 pts/g allowed · 430 points) | #114 (of 116 teams · -25.0 /g · -275 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2000 | Florida State11–2 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #5 — top 10 (of 116 teams · 39.3 pts/g · 511 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #1 — top 10 (of 116 teams · 10.5 pts/g allowed · 136 points) | #1 — top 10 (of 116 teams · +28.9 /g · +375 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2000 | Georgia Tech9–3 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #21 (of 116 teams · 32.2 pts/g · 386 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #24 (of 116 teams · 19.8 pts/g allowed · 237 points) | #16 (of 116 teams · +12.4 /g · +149 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2000 | Maryland5–6 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #79 (of 116 teams · 22.4 pts/g · 247 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #62 (of 116 teams · 25.8 pts/g allowed · 284 points) | #76 (of 116 teams · -3.4 /g · -37 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2000 | NC State8–4 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #25 (of 116 teams · 31.6 pts/g · 379 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #80 (of 116 teams · 28.2 pts/g allowed · 338 points) | #51 (of 116 teams · +3.4 /g · +41 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2000 | North Carolina6–5 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #67 (of 116 teams · 24.4 pts/g · 269 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #63 (of 116 teams · 25.8 pts/g allowed · 284 points) | #65 (of 116 teams · -1.4 /g · -15 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2000 | Virginia6–6 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #90 (of 116 teams · 20.2 pts/g · 242 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #53 (of 116 teams · 24.3 pts/g allowed · 292 points) | #79 (of 116 teams · -4.2 /g · -50 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2000 | Wake Forest2–9 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 9 ACC teams in 2000. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #103 (of 116 teams · 16.4 pts/g · 181 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #97 (of 116 teams · 32.9 pts/g allowed · 362 points) | #106 (of 116 teams · -16.4 /g · -181 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |