And here's Boston College, for which I only need to do one chart. After the chart, I'll use their case to explain a couple of things about how I look at the charts. In the chart, the red, blue, and grey markers and lines are for the NCAA's ARPI, Massey, and my 5 Iteration ARPI respectively. In this particular chart you can hardly see the grey. They are pretty consistent with each other for Boston College, although as you can see, there is a tendency for the ARPI to underrate it in some cases. That's a result of the RPI's difficulty rating teams from the different conferences well in relation to each other. This is exactly what I expect, given the ACC's having an ARPI performance percentage of 113.4%. In general, I consider Massey's blue markers and lines to be the best representation of true rank. They're not close to perfect, but they're a little better than my 5 Iteration ARPI and more better than the NCAA's ARPI. What's most interesting to me about this chart is the orange markers and lines. These show Boston College's rank in terms of what it contributes to its opponents' Strengths of Schedule under the NCAA's ARPI formula. As you can see, in most cases it's strength of schedule contribution is far less than it should be since ideally its actual rank and its rank as a contributor to opponents' strength of schedule would be the same. In 2017, for example, its ARPI rank was 54, its Massey rank was 52, and its 5 Iteration rank was 51. Yet under the ARPI, its rank as a contributor to opponents' strength of schedule was 123. That's a difference of 69 rank positions.