Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

Cal88 said:

---

Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

---

Sagarin SOS:

5. UCLA
6. USC
11. Washington
30. Utah
50. Arizona St.
66. Oregon St.
68. Arizona
73. Furd
89. Cal
126. Colorado
135. Washington St.
215. Oregon

Sagarin Predictor:

5. Washington
17. Furd
27. Utah
30. Washington St.
35. USC
36. Colorado
40. Oregon
42. Arizona St.
50. Cal
69. Arizona
81. UCLA
88. Oregon St.

UCBerkGrad said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

---

Sagarin SOS:

5. UCLA
6. USC
11. Washington
30. Utah
50. Arizona St.
66. Oregon St.
68. Arizona
73. Furd
89. Cal
126. Colorado
135. Washington St.
215. Oregon

Sagarin Predictor:

5. Washington
17. Furd
27. Utah
30. Washington St.
35. USC
36. Colorado
40. Oregon
42. Arizona St.
50. Cal
69. Arizona
81. UCLA
88. Oregon St.

---

What does the Saragrin Predictor mean?
Where we are now?
Where we will end up?
One important point is that the PAC-12 leader (Garbers) has effectively played a little more than half the time at QB due to Beau experimentation with 3 QBs.

UCBerkGrad said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

---

Sagarin SOS:

5. UCLA
6. USC
11. Washington
30. Utah
50. Arizona St.
66. Oregon St.
68. Arizona
73. Furd
89. Cal
126. Colorado
135. Washington St.
215. Oregon

Sagarin Predictor:

5. Washington
17. Furd
27. Utah
30. Washington St.
35. USC
36. Colorado
40. Oregon
42. Arizona St.
50. Cal
69. Arizona
81. UCLA
88. Oregon St.

---

LOL at that Oregon strength of schedule. How is that even possible? Does this include FCS teams? I guess it must since there aren't anywhere near 215 FBS teams.

Sebastabear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

---

Sagarin SOS:

5. UCLA
6. USC
11. Washington
30. Utah
50. Arizona St.
66. Oregon St.
68. Arizona
73. Furd
89. Cal
126. Colorado
135. Washington St.
215. Oregon

Sagarin Predictor:

5. Washington
17. Furd
27. Utah
30. Washington St.
35. USC
36. Colorado
40. Oregon
42. Arizona St.
50. Cal
69. Arizona
81. UCLA
88. Oregon St.

---

LOL at that Oregon strength of schedule. How is that even possible? Does this include FCS teams? I guess it must since there aren't anywhere near 215 FBS teams.

---

Their scheduling is a disgrace. And something UW was also doing for years until this season.

Sebastabear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

---

Sagarin SOS:

5. UCLA
6. USC
11. Washington
30. Utah
50. Arizona St.
66. Oregon St.
68. Arizona
73. Furd
89. Cal
126. Colorado
135. Washington St.
215. Oregon

Sagarin Predictor:

5. Washington
17. Furd
27. Utah
30. Washington St.
35. USC
36. Colorado
40. Oregon
42. Arizona St.
50. Cal
69. Arizona
81. UCLA
88. Oregon St.

---

LOL at that Oregon strength of schedule. How is that even possible? Does this include FCS teams? I guess it must since there aren't anywhere near 215 FBS teams.

---

Massey Ratings which is similar to Sagarin in that it's computer/data-based (albeit using many different models) has Oregon's SOS at #129 of the #130 FBS teams. Only Southern Miss has had an easier schedule.

Massey's P12 ranks:

#10. Washington
#17. Furd
#30. Wazzu
#34. Utah
#42. USC
#48. Cal
#49. Colorado
#50. Arizona State
#58. Oregon
#77. Arizona
#91. UCLA
#104. Oregon State

https://www.masseyratings.com/cf/fbs/ratings

Sebastabear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

---

Sagarin SOS:

5. UCLA
6. USC
11. Washington
30. Utah
50. Arizona St.
66. Oregon St.
68. Arizona
73. Furd
89. Cal
126. Colorado
135. Washington St.
215. Oregon

Sagarin Predictor:

5. Washington
17. Furd
27. Utah
30. Washington St.
35. USC
36. Colorado
40. Oregon
42. Arizona St.
50. Cal
69. Arizona
81. UCLA
88. Oregon St.

---

LOL at that Oregon strength of schedule. How is that even possible? Does this include FCS teams? I guess it must since there aren't anywhere near 215 FBS teams.

---

The Sagarin ratings include FCS schools, so he has 255 teams rated.

PtownBear1 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

---

Sagarin SOS:

5. UCLA
6. USC
11. Washington
30. Utah
50. Arizona St.
66. Oregon St.
68. Arizona
73. Furd
89. Cal
126. Colorado
135. Washington St.
215. Oregon

Sagarin Predictor:

5. Washington
17. Furd
27. Utah
30. Washington St.
35. USC
36. Colorado
40. Oregon
42. Arizona St.
50. Cal
69. Arizona
81. UCLA
88. Oregon St.

---

LOL at that Oregon strength of schedule. How is that even possible? Does this include FCS teams? I guess it must since there aren't anywhere near 215 FBS teams.

---

Their scheduling is a disgrace. And something UW was also doing for years until this season.

---

Their weak ass scheduling is fine by me, since we will be their first true road test of the season.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Furd beats them by 21+

Sagarin and other comupter rankings aren't that relevant at week 3, it's a pretty rough estimate until midseason.

It's pretty nutty when you not only have the worst strength of schedule in the FBS but over 80 FCS schools have a tougher schedule than you.

ducky23 said:

---

PtownBear1 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

---

Sagarin SOS:

5. UCLA
6. USC
11. Washington
30. Utah
50. Arizona St.
66. Oregon St.
68. Arizona
73. Furd
89. Cal
126. Colorado
135. Washington St.
215. Oregon

Sagarin Predictor:

5. Washington
17. Furd
27. Utah
30. Washington St.
35. USC
36. Colorado
40. Oregon
42. Arizona St.
50. Cal
69. Arizona
81. UCLA
88. Oregon St.

---

LOL at that Oregon strength of schedule. How is that even possible? Does this include FCS teams? I guess it must since there aren't anywhere near 215 FBS teams.

---

Their scheduling is a disgrace. And something UW was also doing for years until this season.

---

Their weak ass scheduling is fine by me, since we will be their first true road test of the season.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Furd beats them by 21+

---

Well it gives them an unfair advantage. 1.) Players are less likely to get injured going against smaller, slower athletes. 2.) They start the season only having to win 3 games for bowl eligibility

PtownBear1 said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

PtownBear1 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Given how early in the season this is, he should also qualify these rankings with the strength of schedule to date.

---

Sagarin SOS:

5. UCLA
6. USC
11. Washington
30. Utah
50. Arizona St.
66. Oregon St.
68. Arizona
73. Furd
89. Cal
126. Colorado
135. Washington St.
215. Oregon

Sagarin Predictor:

5. Washington
17. Furd
27. Utah
30. Washington St.
35. USC
36. Colorado
40. Oregon
42. Arizona St.
50. Cal
69. Arizona
81. UCLA
88. Oregon St.

---

LOL at that Oregon strength of schedule. How is that even possible? Does this include FCS teams? I guess it must since there aren't anywhere near 215 FBS teams.

---

Their scheduling is a disgrace. And something UW was also doing for years until this season.

---

Their weak ass scheduling is fine by me, since we will be their first true road test of the season.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Furd beats them by 21+

---

Well it gives them an unfair advantage. 1.) Players are less likely to get injured going against smaller, slower athletes. 2.) They start the season only having to win 3 games for bowl eligibility

---

I'm going to assume your use of "unfair" was sarcasm... If your opponent doesn't affect your home field attendance numbers (and changes revenue), then why not do this?

I thought the stats posted by the OP were telling (thanks for posting). So far Garbers has been efficient and the run game stinks. Why? Maybe because of the defenses (stop the run) or because Garbers can play and our run game has issues. The other thing is lack of big plays. Time will tell, but my sense is Cal will do as well as its defense plays.