[OutsiderFan]

I know some of you don't want to hear this, but here's why:

In the afterglow of their Duck demolition, college football pundits have way overvalued Utah.  If you look at the statistics, they really aren't a top team.  In fact, the key stat that determines the winner of most games, rushing differential, they are terrible.  How bad, well, Utah's rush differential is +.57 YPC.  Ca.l's is +.5 YPC.  When you consider that Ca.l passes the ball better, and even defends the pass better than Utah, this meager advantage is more than wiped out.  Ca.l leads the country in forced turnovers and is Top 5 in the country is sacks.

Last night's Washington win at USC demonstrated why these numbers are meaningful.  USC scored 12 points at home against Washington.  Ca.l scored 30 at Washington and sacked Browning six times in that game.  No, Ca.l is not elite, particularly on the offensive line.  However, the fact they were able to score like they did on Washington and create so many big plays on defense is a clear indicator of how good Goff is at QB, how good the Ca.l receivers are, and how opportunistic the defense is. 

I can't wait to see Wilner's post after he witnesses his #1 Utah team go down to defeat in front of his eyes against a team he didn't even put in his Top 25 this week, a team in his own backyard he should be able to know better than anyone else voting in the AP poll.

[OutsiderFan]

I know some of you don't want to hear this, but here's why:

In the afterglow of their Duck demolition, college football pundits have way overvalued Utah.  If you look at the statistics, they really aren't a top team.  In fact, the key stat that determines the winner of most games, rushing differential, they are terrible.  How bad, well, Utah's rush differential is +.57 YPC.  Ca.l's is +.5 YPC.  When you consider that Ca.l passes the ball better, and even defends the pass better than Utah, this meager advantage is more than wiped out.  Ca.l leads the country in forced turnovers and is Top 5 in the country is sacks.

Last night's Washington win at USC demonstrated why these numbers are meaningful.  USC scored 12 points at home against Washington.  Ca.l scored 30 at Washington and sacked Browning six times in that game.  No, Ca.l is not elite, particularly on the offensive line.  However, the fact they were able to score like they did on Washington and create so many big plays on defense is a clear indicator of how good Goff is at QB, how good the Ca.l receivers are, and how opportunistic the defense is. 

I can't wait to see Wilner's post after he witnesses his #1 Utah team go down to defeat in front of his eyes against a team he didn't even put in his Top 25 this week, a team in his own backyard he should be able to know better than anyone else voting in the AP poll.

[thunder_chik]

Utah will win at home, at altitude, but will not cover the spread.  It will be close.

[thunder_chik]

Utah will win at home, at altitude, but will not cover the spread.  It will be close.

[martyup]

Outsiderfan, you speak with forked tongue.

[martyup]

Outsiderfan, you speak with forked tongue.

[Treebound]

Sorry OF,
I think Goff is a very good quarterback, but I don't think that O-line will be enough.  I think altitude will also factor into the outcome.  Has Utah EVER hosted ESPN?  The Utes and the Ute Fans will come armed for bear!  This game will be won or lost in the trenches.  UCB has yet to play a quality opponent and I think they lose it in a close one.  That being said, good luck and I plan on watching this one!

[Treebound]

Sorry OF,
I think Goff is a very good quarterback, but I don't think that O-line will be enough.  I think altitude will also factor into the outcome.  Has Utah EVER hosted ESPN?  The Utes and the Ute Fans will come armed for bear!  This game will be won or lost in the trenches.  UCB has yet to play a quality opponent and I think they lose it in a close one.  That being said, good luck and I plan on watching this one!

[washingtonismoney]

  UCB has yet to play a quality opponent and I think they lose it in a close one.

Are we sure UW isn't one?

[washingtonismoney]

  UCB has yet to play a quality opponent and I think they lose it in a close one.

Are we sure UW isn't one?

[BostonCard]

We will see.  I've been one of Cal's biggest critics on the board, but I have to admit that the relative success of the Cal offense against UW compared to USC is worth reassessing Cal's offense.  Still waiting for them to actually play the game, at which point we will find out if Cal is for real or just a pretender.

While Cal passes the ball better than Utah, I think you overstate the advantage.  It's worth noting that the nation's leader in ESPN's QBR stat is... Travis Wilson (Goff is 9th, behind, among others, some guy named Hogan, who is fifth).

http://espn.go.com/college-football/qbr

Cal is very good (or very lucky) at gaining turnovers.  Utah, however, doesn't commit many.  So, a lot will hinge on whether Cal gains 3 - 4 turnovers as it has in the season to date (18 turnovers gained in 5 games), or if Utah gives up 1, as it has the season to date (4 turnovers lost in 4 games).  On the other side of the ledger, Utah is second (to Cal) in turnovers gained with 11 in 4 games, while Cal is tied for second to last in the Pac-12 in turnovers lost (10 in 5 games), which seems like it should neutralize Cal's turnover advantage, which has been instrumental to its winning.  Of course turnovers are an infrequent occurrence, so anything can happen.

Ultimately, given performances to date, you have to give the edge to Utah.  Utah has played (and beaten) Michigan, who has not lost to anyone else, and crushed Oregon, who has issues, but who has only lost to Michigan State otherwise.  Cal has played FCS Grambling, San Diego State (only wins were against San Diego and Fresno State; they also lost to South Alabama!), Texas by a missed extra point (whose only win has been against Rice and who just lost to TCU 50-7 and Notre Dame 38-3), Washington, who now counts as Cal's only "good win", and Washington State (who lost to Portland State).  Moreover, three of those wins were by less than a touchdown.  Given that these are hardly world-beating teams, a 1 point win over Texas and 6 point wins over UW and WSU are not exactly stellar.

Part of me hopes you are right.  I would love to see an epic Big Game for the Pac-12 North and the possibility of going to the College Football Playoff.  I might even endure insufferable Cal fan for it.

As for Wilner, he predicted Cal would go 7-5 this season.  That looks like it might be a bit on the low side when all is said and done, but is hardly egregious.  He called a 5-0 start and predicted wins against OSU and UCLA.  USC, Oregon, and ASU are all looking better, but more for what those teams have done than anything Cal has done.

If Cal beats Utah, then you guys will deserve to gloat a bit with Wilner, but I don't think you will.  Good luck, sort of; I'll be rooting for the Utes.

BC

[BostonCard]

We will see.  I've been one of Cal's biggest critics on the board, but I have to admit that the relative success of the Cal offense against UW compared to USC is worth reassessing Cal's offense.  Still waiting for them to actually play the game, at which point we will find out if Cal is for real or just a pretender.

While Cal passes the ball better than Utah, I think you overstate the advantage.  It's worth noting that the nation's leader in ESPN's QBR stat is... Travis Wilson (Goff is 9th, behind, among others, some guy named Hogan, who is fifth).

http://espn.go.com/college-football/qbr

Cal is very good (or very lucky) at gaining turnovers.  Utah, however, doesn't commit many.  So, a lot will hinge on whether Cal gains 3 - 4 turnovers as it has in the season to date (18 turnovers gained in 5 games), or if Utah gives up 1, as it has the season to date (4 turnovers lost in 4 games).  On the other side of the ledger, Utah is second (to Cal) in turnovers gained with 11 in 4 games, while Cal is tied for second to last in the Pac-12 in turnovers lost (10 in 5 games), which seems like it should neutralize Cal's turnover advantage, which has been instrumental to its winning.  Of course turnovers are an infrequent occurrence, so anything can happen.

Ultimately, given performances to date, you have to give the edge to Utah.  Utah has played (and beaten) Michigan, who has not lost to anyone else, and crushed Oregon, who has issues, but who has only lost to Michigan State otherwise.  Cal has played FCS Grambling, San Diego State (only wins were against San Diego and Fresno State; they also lost to South Alabama!), Texas by a missed extra point (whose only win has been against Rice and who just lost to TCU 50-7 and Notre Dame 38-3), Washington, who now counts as Cal's only "good win", and Washington State (who lost to Portland State).  Moreover, three of those wins were by less than a touchdown.  Given that these are hardly world-beating teams, a 1 point win over Texas and 6 point wins over UW and WSU are not exactly stellar.

Part of me hopes you are right.  I would love to see an epic Big Game for the Pac-12 North and the possibility of going to the College Football Playoff.  I might even endure insufferable Cal fan for it.

As for Wilner, he predicted Cal would go 7-5 this season.  That looks like it might be a bit on the low side when all is said and done, but is hardly egregious.  He called a 5-0 start and predicted wins against OSU and UCLA.  USC, Oregon, and ASU are all looking better, but more for what those teams have done than anything Cal has done.

If Cal beats Utah, then you guys will deserve to gloat a bit with Wilner, but I don't think you will.  Good luck, sort of; I'll be rooting for the Utes.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Treebound link=topic=13112.msg133608#msg133608 date=1444409795]  UCB has yet to play a quality opponent and I think they lose it in a close one.

Are we sure UW isn't one?
[/quote]

They lost to Cal, so they can't be very good ;) [using Wilner's circular logic]

I think Washington obviously showed they can be good, and that they have a good defense.  To some extent, I think they were extra motivated to go up against Sark, who left them for a team "where he can win championships" (but not with Sark as a coach, I guess), and of course they benefited from some "curious" play-calling but Sarkisian (like going for a long field goal trailing by 5 with about 3 min left and choosing to try to force the passing game instead of riding their more effective running backs.)  But yeah, it now looks likely that Washington will be a bowl team, at 3-2 with games against Arizona, Oregon State and Washington State to play (and Oregon looking vulnerable).

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Treebound link=topic=13112.msg133608#msg133608 date=1444409795]  UCB has yet to play a quality opponent and I think they lose it in a close one.

Are we sure UW isn't one?
[/quote]

They lost to Cal, so they can't be very good ;) [using Wilner's circular logic]

I think Washington obviously showed they can be good, and that they have a good defense.  To some extent, I think they were extra motivated to go up against Sark, who left them for a team "where he can win championships" (but not with Sark as a coach, I guess), and of course they benefited from some "curious" play-calling but Sarkisian (like going for a long field goal trailing by 5 with about 3 min left and choosing to try to force the passing game instead of riding their more effective running backs.)  But yeah, it now looks likely that Washington will be a bowl team, at 3-2 with games against Arizona, Oregon State and Washington State to play (and Oregon looking vulnerable).

BC

[washingtonismoney]

I do think the UW-59er game corroborates claims that the  59er defense is not all that much improved. Huskies' yards-per-play against quality opponents:

@BSU: 3.14
vs. Cal: 4.71
@SC: 4.3

[washingtonismoney]

I do think the UW-59er game corroborates claims that the  59er defense is not all that much improved. Huskies' yards-per-play against quality opponents:

@BSU: 3.14
vs. Cal: 4.71
@SC: 4.3

[CrazedZooChimp]

[quote author=Treebound link=topic=13112.msg133608#msg133608 date=1444409795]  UCB has yet to play a quality opponent and I think they lose it in a close one.

Are we sure UW isn't one?
[/quote]

Oh, I'm not sure I would give them too much credit for Sarkisian being incompetent.

Their close loss to BSU wasn't bad, though.

The real question for me is how do we think Utah compares to WSU, Cal's most recent game?  I think the Utes are a hell of a lot better, and this game is on the road.  That's what makes me the most skeptical of the Bears chances.  But, hey, it's the Pac-12, who knows what will happen.

[CrazedZooChimp]

[quote author=Treebound link=topic=13112.msg133608#msg133608 date=1444409795]  UCB has yet to play a quality opponent and I think they lose it in a close one.

Are we sure UW isn't one?
[/quote]

Oh, I'm not sure I would give them too much credit for Sarkisian being incompetent.

Their close loss to BSU wasn't bad, though.

The real question for me is how do we think Utah compares to WSU, Cal's most recent game?  I think the Utes are a hell of a lot better, and this game is on the road.  That's what makes me the most skeptical of the Bears chances.  But, hey, it's the Pac-12, who knows what will happen.

[fullmetal]

If Utah can't hang with kal, then I will take it as validation of my skepticism regarding Michigan.

[fullmetal]

If Utah can't hang with kal, then I will take it as validation of my skepticism regarding Michigan.

[CTcard]

In fact, the key stat that determines the winner of most games, rushing differential, they are terrible.  How bad, well, Utah's rush differential is +.57 YPC.  Ca.l's is +.5 YPC.  When you consider that Ca.l passes the ball better, and even defends the pass better than Utah, this meager advantage is more than wiped out.  Ca.l leads the country in forced turnovers and is Top 5 in the country is sacks.

I agree that Utah is being over-rated as the latest flavor of the week, and much of my concern about Utah is how they fare in advanced stats that are based primarily upon yds/allowed vs yds/given up. Still, there are some issues in your logic above.

First, I would contest whether there is any "key stat that determines the winner of most games" - at least in a predictive manner.

Logically, you can't treat yds/rush differential quantitatively then blithely state generically state c.a.l. is better at passing. One ought to have the full numbers. 

Including last night's game, here is the yds/play differential, Pac 12.
1. $C          2.41
2. Stanford  1.94
3. UCLA      1.33
4. c.a.l.      1.17
5. UW        1.15
6. Oregon    0.85
7. Arizona    0.67
8. ASU        0.49
9. Colorado  0.27
10. WSU    0.24
11. Utah    0.07
12. OSU    -0.17

It's pretty easy to see why one might be worried about Utah here. On the other hand, one can also see that $C easily won last night's game.
Of course these should be adjusted for strength of competition, though how to do that is not simple in either concept or execution. 

My impression is that the step up in competition is much bigger for c.a.l. than Utah. Add to that home field. Given the somewhat hidden issues Utah has, I would say c.a.l. has a reasonable chance at the game, but less than 50%. That doesn't necessarily mean it will be a close game. Given the way these offenses (and defenses) perform, one gets the impression that something will snowball and it could end up a blowout either way.

[CTcard]

In fact, the key stat that determines the winner of most games, rushing differential, they are terrible.  How bad, well, Utah's rush differential is +.57 YPC.  Ca.l's is +.5 YPC.  When you consider that Ca.l passes the ball better, and even defends the pass better than Utah, this meager advantage is more than wiped out.  Ca.l leads the country in forced turnovers and is Top 5 in the country is sacks.

I agree that Utah is being over-rated as the latest flavor of the week, and much of my concern about Utah is how they fare in advanced stats that are based primarily upon yds/allowed vs yds/given up. Still, there are some issues in your logic above.

First, I would contest whether there is any "key stat that determines the winner of most games" - at least in a predictive manner.

Logically, you can't treat yds/rush differential quantitatively then blithely state generically state c.a.l. is better at passing. One ought to have the full numbers. 

Including last night's game, here is the yds/play differential, Pac 12.
1. $C          2.41
2. Stanford  1.94
3. UCLA      1.33
4. c.a.l.      1.17
5. UW        1.15
6. Oregon    0.85
7. Arizona    0.67
8. ASU        0.49
9. Colorado  0.27
10. WSU    0.24
11. Utah    0.07
12. OSU    -0.17

It's pretty easy to see why one might be worried about Utah here. On the other hand, one can also see that $C easily won last night's game.
Of course these should be adjusted for strength of competition, though how to do that is not simple in either concept or execution. 

My impression is that the step up in competition is much bigger for c.a.l. than Utah. Add to that home field. Given the somewhat hidden issues Utah has, I would say c.a.l. has a reasonable chance at the game, but less than 50%. That doesn't necessarily mean it will be a close game. Given the way these offenses (and defenses) perform, one gets the impression that something will snowball and it could end up a blowout either way.

[Treebound]

Sorry Wim, For all the reasons listed by others, I don't think UW is a top quality win.  sc played very well against us.  They blew themselves up with poor coaching and qb play last night.  We have ESPN on nonstop here at work and they were still touting Kessler as late as yesterday.  Not so much, now...  His Voldemort moment (unfinished business 2.0) has slipped by.  Bring on CMac for his first of two trips to the NY athletic club (unless you take the Bleacher Report BS to heart).

UW, UCB, Oregon can all be dangerous if they are clicking and you make poor coaching choices and player mistakes.  I think we are better than that this year.  But NW showed what happens if you don't come in strong and execute.  We (hopefully) are smarter than that, now, but that's why we play the games. 

Oh, and one other point I forgot to mention:  UCB came very close to losing AT HOME to WSU!  How does one rectify that "quality win?"

[Treebound]

Sorry Wim, For all the reasons listed by others, I don't think UW is a top quality win.  sc played very well against us.  They blew themselves up with poor coaching and qb play last night.  We have ESPN on nonstop here at work and they were still touting Kessler as late as yesterday.  Not so much, now...  His Voldemort moment (unfinished business 2.0) has slipped by.  Bring on CMac for his first of two trips to the NY athletic club (unless you take the Bleacher Report BS to heart).

UW, UCB, Oregon can all be dangerous if they are clicking and you make poor coaching choices and player mistakes.  I think we are better than that this year.  But NW showed what happens if you don't come in strong and execute.  We (hopefully) are smarter than that, now, but that's why we play the games. 

Oh, and one other point I forgot to mention:  UCB came very close to losing AT HOME to WSU!  How does one rectify that "quality win?"

[needle]

Utah has played in quite a few big games over the last couple of years. That sort of experience is something Kal just doesn't have.

I really like the Utes to win this one. But if Kal covers the spread, I will begrudgingly admit that they are a threat to win the Pac-12 North.

I suspect they won't.

[needle]

Utah has played in quite a few big games over the last couple of years. That sort of experience is something Kal just doesn't have.

I really like the Utes to win this one. But if Kal covers the spread, I will begrudgingly admit that they are a threat to win the Pac-12 North.

I suspect they won't.

[BostonCard]

Since we don't have a game to predict this week, why don't we have a friendly prediction game for the cal-Utah game?  It won't count towards the standings, but it might be fun for bragging rights.

I'll go with Utah 45, Cal 24

BC

[BostonCard]

Since we don't have a game to predict this week, why don't we have a friendly prediction game for the cal-Utah game?  It won't count towards the standings, but it might be fun for bragging rights.

I'll go with Utah 45, Cal 24

BC

[washingtonismoney]

UTAH 38
59ers: 24

[washingtonismoney]

UTAH 38
59ers: 24

[Farm93]

I saw the start of the thread earlier and immediately thought Utah by 17 thanks to the well established advantages of playing home games at altitude.

Utah 45, UCB 28.

It will be over in the third, and then Utah will increase the point spread in the fourth as they will be motivated, by CFP ambitions, to collect some impression and style points. 

[Farm93]

I saw the start of the thread earlier and immediately thought Utah by 17 thanks to the well established advantages of playing home games at altitude.

Utah 45, UCB 28.

It will be over in the third, and then Utah will increase the point spread in the fourth as they will be motivated, by CFP ambitions, to collect some impression and style points. 

[thunder_chik]

I predict Utes 28, Kal 24.
Utah D will pick off Goff at least once.

Utah is a balanced O - 52% rushing, 48% passing in terms of total yards for the season.
Kal, on the other hand, is 28%/72%.  Their receivers are going to get awfully tired, awfully quickly running at altitude.

[thunder_chik]

I predict Utes 28, Kal 24.
Utah D will pick off Goff at least once.

Utah is a balanced O - 52% rushing, 48% passing in terms of total yards for the season.
Kal, on the other hand, is 28%/72%.  Their receivers are going to get awfully tired, awfully quickly running at altitude.

[OutsiderFan]

Goff 41
Utah 31

[OutsiderFan]

Goff 41
Utah 31

[SeattleTree]

Utes  41
Bears 34

[SeattleTree]

Utes  41
Bears 34

[pefloresjr]

Utah 34
Cal 24

I think Utah is better but Cal is a very dangerous team that can beat you if they get hot.  If Utah pulls a UCLA and spends too much time admiring themselves in the mirror, Cal could score a few more touchdowns and beat them. 

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

Utah 34
Cal 24

I think Utah is better but Cal is a very dangerous team that can beat you if they get hot.  If Utah pulls a UCLA and spends too much time admiring themselves in the mirror, Cal could score a few more touchdowns and beat them. 

Cheers,
Pete F.