Same games, four forecasts
Positive margin means the designated home team wins; negative means the away team wins. Signed error = actual minus forecast. Neutral-site “home” is bookkeeping only.
Definitions, coverage and reproducibility
Home field only: +2.5 on campus, 0 at neutral sites. Roster: the exact frozen v0.1 grade differential plus that same venue treatment. Original grade anchors reproduce all eight roster contributions; no ordinal-rank subtraction or new mapping is used. Full: exact frozen fair home margin, with all nine components reconciled and zero discrepancy in every game.
Market: original DraftKings spread via ESPN, captured September 3, 2026 at 18:16:50 UTC. It is a decision-time quote, not a closing line. A home spread of −3 corresponds to expected home margin +3. Neutral games use the original comparison-team orientation.
MAE averages absolute errors; RMSE is the square root of mean squared error; mean signed error retains direction; median absolute error is the middle absolute error. Every head-to-head comparison uses games where both forecasts and the actual margin exist. Missing values remain missing. No betting rules or returns are constructed for these baselines.
Reproduce with npm run research:baselines. The checked JSON includes raw errors, matched subsets, receipts and contributor differences. These retrospective baselines are not prospective forecasts.
Game by game
Each forecast cell shows home margin / signed error / absolute error. Full − roster is the net added point adjustment; “effect” compares their absolute errors.
Where the aggregate difference came from
The added group reduced total absolute error by 8.5 points across eight games. Notre Dame contributed 9 points of improvement and Miami 6; Georgia Tech cost 5.5 and Baylor–Auburn cost 3.5. The other contributions are shown below. We tested the full added group, not a search over component combinations.
Against the captured market, full v0.1 accumulated 25 more absolute-error points. Miami accounts for 13, Georgia Tech 5, Notre Dame 4 and FSU 4. Full v0.1 beat the market only in Baylor–Auburn and Louisville–Ole Miss. Roster and home-field-only each beat the market in 3 of 8.
Do not enlarge every favorite’s margin: Miami, LSU, UCLA and Notre Dame separated more than forecast; Georgia Tech lost despite a substantial projected edge, Auburn won despite the full bridge favoring Baylor, Ole Miss won by less than forecast, and FSU lost despite a projected home edge. Direction and mechanism differ.
Eight games cannot establish empirical correlation, causal contribution or calibrated point magnitudes. The overlap below is conceptual, identified from repeated information in the original assessments.
Nine components, distinct evidence?
Roster grade: Retain roster + home field as a transparent research candidate; mapping remains unvalidated.
Intended information: Overall assembled roster quality.
Source: Frozen preseason grade or frozen unranked program dossier; v0.1 grade anchors; rosterBaselineAssessment.
Possible duplication: Roster synthesis already incorporates player quality, depth and positional strength.
Point basis: Editorial grade anchors, not fitted football-point estimates.
Ranked tier: Remove as a separate bonus in a future simplified candidate; retain frozen history.
Intended information: Extra separation among frozen Capital Rank tiers.
Source: Preseason snapshot rank; frozen v0.1 tier schedule; rosterBaselineAssessment.
Possible duplication: Rank and roster grade summarize much of the same resource evidence. Ordinal spacing is not football-point spacing.
Point basis: Editorial tier steps. Unranked tier is zero under the original rule, not an artificial rank.
Quarterback: Retain evidence collection; require passing, rushing and protection separation before any future numerical adjustment.
Intended information: Passing and quarterback-specific advantage.
Source: quarterbackAssessment in each frozen forecast; underlying program unitAssessments.quarterback/sourceReferences.
Possible duplication: Quarterback quality also influences roster grade, skill production, staff execution and integration.
Point basis: Editorial signed adjustment capped at 2 points; no empirical magnitude justification.
Skill positions: Consolidate generic talent into roster evidence; reserve new matchup claims for distinct, documented mechanisms.
Intended information: Receiver and backfield matchup advantage.
Source: skillPositionAssessment; program unitAssessments.skillPositions and sourceReferences.
Possible duplication: Player talent is already in roster grade; passing outcomes also depend on quarterback and scheme.
Point basis: Editorial, capped at 1.5 points.
Trenches / defense: Split evidence into protection, disruption and coverage; consolidate talent into roster; no point bonus yet.
Intended information: Line play and defensive execution beyond general roster quality.
Source: trenchesDefenseAssessment; program unitAssessments.trenchesAndDefense and sourceReferences.
Possible duplication: Broad label mixes line talent, secondary play and cohesion, also counted by roster and continuity.
Point basis: Editorial, capped at 2 points.
Staff / scheme: Consolidate staff and integration into one qualitative execution question until distinct effects can be tested.
Intended information: Coaching execution and schematic advantage.
Source: staffSchemeAssessment; program staffAssessment and sourceReferences.
Possible duplication: Coordinator retention/turnover also drives continuity. FSU gets +0.5 staff and +1 continuity from closely related coordinator evidence.
Point basis: Editorial, capped at 1.5 points.
Continuity / integration: Consolidate with staff; record concrete continuity evidence rather than stack narrative bonuses.
Intended information: Cost of roster and coordinator changes.
Source: continuityIntegrationAssessment; program continuityAssessment and sourceReferences.
Possible duplication: Returning staff, quarterback experience and roster integration reappear in staff, quarterback and roster narratives.
Point basis: Editorial, capped at 2 points.
Known availability: Retain a sourced availability checklist; require an explicit baseline date and avoid double counting. No new point scale.
Intended information: Confirmed material absence not reflected in the frozen roster.
Source: knownAvailability and unknownAvailability; confirmed repository evidence required by v0.1 availability rule.
Possible duplication: Can duplicate a roster grade already reflecting the absence; zero is not evidence that everyone is healthy.
Point basis: Editorial, capped at 1 point. All eight frozen adjustments are zero.
Home field: Retain unchanged across all research candidates.
Intended information: Campus venue advantage.
Source: Original official-facts venue classification and frozen methodology.
Possible duplication: Separate venue treatment; no team-specific adjustment.
Point basis: Accepted +2.5 campus / 0 neutral assumption; not calibrated by these eight games.
These are recommendations for a later test. No original rule, Capital Rank, assessment, official position or settlement changes.
Colorado / Georgia Tech
Bobby Dodd Stadium at Hyundai Field, Atlanta, Georgia · campus, +2.5 · added group worsened absolute error by 5.50 points.
DraftKings via ESPN · Sep 3, 2026, 6:16 PM UTC · Georgia Tech -6.5 · not closing
Original assessment text and receipt references
roster: Georgia Tech's B roster grade starts 3.5 points above Colorado's C+ grade. Neither researched, unranked dossier receives a Capital Rank tier adjustment.
quarterback: Alberto Mendoza's efficient but 102-snap sample earns Georgia Tech a small edge over talented sophomore Julian Lewis, whose Power Four starting sample is also limited.
skill: Justice Haynes and Malachi Hosley give Georgia Tech the more proven backfield, while Colorado's transfer-heavy receiver roles remain unsettled.
trenches: Georgia Tech owns more returning line and linebacker structure. Colorado's offensive-line cohesion and all-transfer defensive starting group remain major unknowns.
staff: Brent Key's established developmental and physical identity is an advantage over Colorado's simultaneous coordinator changes, despite Georgia Tech also installing two new coordinators.
integration: Georgia Tech has meaningful replacement risk, but Colorado's roughly 43 transfers, new systems and almost entirely new defensive two-deep create the larger integration burden.
availability: No confirmed game-specific absence is recorded in the repository evidence.
Frozen forecast SHA-256: c822a3b6946ad5be521e50f6caf5ae30bd2ff4713d5271a33a82f7c17424582b
Outcome: 2026-w01-colorado-at-georgia-tech-outcome · market reveal: 2026-w01-colorado-at-georgia-tech-reveal-01
Original market source page (may now display different information; the recorded capture governs).
Frozen forecast and source trailMiami / Stanford
Stanford Stadium, Stanford, California · campus, +2.5 · added group improved absolute error by 6.00 points.
DraftKings via ESPN · Sep 3, 2026, 6:16 PM UTC · Miami -24.5 · not closing
Original assessment text and receipt references
roster: Miami's frozen No. 7 A- profile carries an 8-point grade advantage and a 1.5-point rank-tier advantage over Stanford's researched, unranked C+ roster.
quarterback: Darian Mensah is the stronger high-end centerpiece. Davis Warren gives Stanford useful experience but not the same stored ceiling.
skill: Mark Fletcher and Malachi Toney form an excellent Miami skill core; Stanford's dossier describes a more modest line and skill-talent ceiling.
trenches: Miami's four new offensive-line starters reduce its advantage, but Stanford does not hold enough stored trench strength to erase the overall roster gap.
staff: Miami retains both coordinators around Mario Cristobal. Stanford has institutional continuity but a lower established competitive baseline under Tavita Pritchard.
integration: Stanford's returning production and Week 0 resilience offset Miami's rebuilt offensive line enough to make continuity neutral in the numeric bridge.
availability: No confirmed game-specific absence is recorded in the repository evidence.
Frozen forecast SHA-256: b2c057a6a2747bdfb2aaead0e4c5b882a2d5c95212ddf795eb8eb656b55b3f48
Outcome: 2026-w01-miami-at-stanford-outcome · market reveal: 2026-w01-miami-at-stanford-reveal-01
Original market source page (may now display different information; the recorded capture governs).
Frozen forecast and source trailBaylor / Auburn
Mercedes-Benz Stadium, Atlanta, Georgia · neutral, 0 · added group worsened absolute error by 3.50 points.
DraftKings via ESPN · Sep 3, 2026, 6:16 PM UTC · Auburn -7.5 · not closing
Original assessment text and receipt references
roster: Both researched, unranked programs carry B roster grades and receive no rank-tier points, leaving the baseline level.
quarterback: DJ Lagway's elite physical ceiling and Byrum Brown's system fit offset one another in the frozen bridge; neither receives a point adjustment.
skill: Baylor's experienced offensive line and added backs and receivers earn a small advantage over Auburn's less settled supporting cast.
trenches: Auburn returns only one offensive and two defensive starters after major exits, while Baylor retains more offensive-line experience.
staff: Baylor retains Jake Spavital and Dave Aranda's defensive teaching base; Auburn begins Alex Golesh's first season with a new offensive structure.
integration: Both teams used the portal heavily, but Auburn's near-total role turnover creates the larger first-game integration penalty.
availability: No confirmed game-specific absence is recorded in the repository evidence.
Frozen forecast SHA-256: e02467983e0ccfdd45cb5da1b9b04012482e7c29cfa99ad7ac24b26bf2b71c37
Outcome: 2026-w01-baylor-vs-auburn-outcome · market reveal: 2026-w01-baylor-vs-auburn-reveal-01
Original market source page (may now display different information; the recorded capture governs).
Frozen forecast and source trailClemson / LSU
Tiger Stadium, Baton Rouge, Louisiana · campus, +2.5 · added group improved absolute error by 3.50 points.
DraftKings via ESPN · Sep 3, 2026, 6:16 PM UTC · LSU -10 · not closing
Original assessment text and receipt references
roster: LSU's frozen No. 8 A- roster holds a 2.5-point grade advantage and a 1.5-point rank-tier advantage over Clemson's researched, unranked B+ profile.
quarterback: Sam Leavitt's major upside receives the edge over Christopher Vizzina's promising but one-start sample.
skill: LSU's deeper portal acquisition and resource-backed ceiling earn a modest skill advantage over Clemson's less proven offensive support.
trenches: Clemson's raw talent and defensive coaching offset LSU's roster ceiling because both dossiers flag meaningful front reconstruction or lost-star risk.
staff: Lane Kiffin's offensive record and retained defensive coordinator provide a small edge, tempered by his first season as LSU head coach.
integration: LSU's more than 40 additions and new regime create a larger integration penalty than Clemson's new-quarterback transition.
availability: No confirmed game-specific absence is recorded in the repository evidence.
Frozen forecast SHA-256: d3682d9703623044f40d0a8f9ddc4bde7f273b5558ebdebcc1fcdeaedb059021
Outcome: 2026-w01-clemson-at-lsu-outcome · market reveal: 2026-w01-clemson-at-lsu-reveal-01
Original market source page (may now display different information; the recorded capture governs).
Frozen forecast and source trailUCLA / California
California Memorial Stadium, Berkeley, California · campus, +2.5 · added group improved absolute error by 1.00 points.
DraftKings via ESPN · Sep 3, 2026, 6:16 PM UTC · UCLA -1.5 · not closing
Original assessment text and receipt references
roster: UCLA's B roster starts 2 points above California's B- roster. Both programs are researched and unranked, so neither receives tier points.
quarterback: Nico Iamaleava's traits and Jaron-Keawe Sagapolutele's productive freshman season balance to no numeric quarterback adjustment.
skill: UCLA's broader roster-talent ceiling earns a small edge over California's upgraded but still integration-dependent portal group.
trenches: Both dossiers require live proof: UCLA's prior pass rush was a major weakness, while California's trench structure is unproven under a new staff.
staff: Bob Chesney's established coaching record earns UCLA a small edge over California's complete staff transition under Tosh Lupoi.
integration: More than 40 UCLA transfers and more than 30 California transfers create comparable extreme integration loads.
availability: No confirmed game-specific absence is recorded in the repository evidence.
Frozen forecast SHA-256: ac000d3314e4f1f3e2db8365c06f647ad7d6aefcbb63afdaee9c2bb706aee0a5
Outcome: 2026-w01-ucla-at-california-outcome · market reveal: 2026-w01-ucla-at-california-reveal-01
Original market source page (may now display different information; the recorded capture governs).
Frozen forecast and source trailOle Miss / Louisville
Nissan Stadium, Nashville, Tennessee · neutral, 0 · added group worsened absolute error by 1.50 points.
DraftKings via ESPN · Sep 3, 2026, 6:16 PM UTC · Ole Miss -6.5 · not closing
Original assessment text and receipt references
roster: Ole Miss's frozen No. 13 A- roster holds a 2.5-point grade advantage and a 1-point rank-tier advantage over Louisville's researched, unranked B+ roster.
quarterback: Proven Ole Miss quarterback Trinidad Chambliss receives the edge over Ohio State transfer Lincoln Kienholz's projection into a new starting role.
skill: Louisville's Isaac Brown and Ole Miss's Kewan Lacy give both offenses premium backfield answers, producing no numeric adjustment.
trenches: Ole Miss's strong defensive front and Louisville's early left-tackle injury and line reshuffle favor the Rebels.
staff: Jeff and Brian Brohm's continuity and play-calling history offset part of Ole Miss's roster edge during Pete Golding's first game as head coach.
integration: Louisville's stable staff earns a small continuity edge despite its new quarterback; Ole Miss is replacing Lane Kiffin and both tackles.
availability: The stored Louisville dossier flags an early left-tackle injury and associated line reshuffle, but contains no separate confirmed game-status report.
Frozen forecast SHA-256: bab50a0d087c08b5d158f4574fdd10a923595824ff0f325faa015ae9750fe31d
Outcome: 2026-w01-louisville-vs-ole-miss-outcome · market reveal: 2026-w01-louisville-vs-ole-miss-reveal-01
Original market source page (may now display different information; the recorded capture governs).
Frozen forecast and source trailWisconsin / Notre Dame
Lambeau Field, Green Bay, Wisconsin · neutral, 0 · added group improved absolute error by 9.00 points.
DraftKings via ESPN · Sep 3, 2026, 6:16 PM UTC · Notre Dame -20.5 · not closing
Original assessment text and receipt references
roster: Notre Dame's frozen No. 3 A+ roster holds a 7.5-point grade advantage and a 2.5-point championship-tier advantage over Wisconsin's researched, unranked B roster.
quarterback: C.J. Carr is a central strength in an exceptional returning core; Wisconsin's Colton Joseph offers system fit but carries consistency and durability questions.
skill: Notre Dame must replace its leading backs, limiting the skill adjustment, but its overall supporting structure remains stronger.
trenches: Notre Dame's elite offensive line and top-end secondary create the largest unit advantage in the matchup.
staff: Marcus Freeman's established structure with Mike Denbrock and Chris Ash earns a small edge over Wisconsin's attempted correction under Luke Fickell.
integration: Notre Dame owns the top returning-production profile; Wisconsin is integrating 33 transfers after a 4-8 baseline.
availability: No confirmed game-specific absence is recorded in the repository evidence.
Frozen forecast SHA-256: 4b2fec8d4609c4e67ec7c4e1a3d037526d2fbae11233be09095af9537be598f3
Outcome: 2026-w01-wisconsin-vs-notre-dame-outcome · market reveal: 2026-w01-wisconsin-vs-notre-dame-reveal-01
Original market source page (may now display different information; the recorded capture governs).
Frozen forecast and source trailSMU / Florida State
Bobby Bowden Field at Doak S. Campbell Stadium, Tallahassee, Florida · campus, +2.5 · added group worsened absolute error by 0.50 points.
DraftKings via ESPN · Sep 3, 2026, 6:16 PM UTC · SMU -3 · not closing
Original assessment text and receipt references
roster: SMU's frozen No. 22 B roster holds a 2-point grade advantage and a 0.5-point rank-tier advantage over Florida State's researched, unranked B- roster.
quarterback: Kevin Jennings' strong established play earns SMU an edge over veteran Florida State quarterback Ashton Daniels.
skill: Duce Robinson and multipurpose back Samuel Singleton give Florida State a small skill-position counterweight.
trenches: Florida State's secondary concerns and SMU's secondary questions balance to no numeric adjustment.
staff: Mike Norvell retains both coordinators, earning a small edge over SMU's redistributed coordinator responsibilities.
integration: Florida State's staff continuity and already-stored Week 0 evidence provide a modest advantage over SMU's coordinator turnover.
availability: No confirmed game-specific absence is recorded in the repository evidence.
Frozen forecast SHA-256: 15ce581cb4ccf1af5f6a98e2921349ce9485b6658ede14349de434845f52bcca
Outcome: 2026-w01-smu-at-florida-state-outcome · market reveal: 2026-w01-smu-at-florida-state-reveal-01
Original market source page (may now display different information; the recorded capture governs).
Frozen forecast and source trailThe next test
Carry roster plus home field as an unvalidated research candidate: it is recoverable and easier to audit. Keep home-field-only and the captured market as comparators. Freeze a fixed version, inputs, eligible games and a common capture protocol before kickoff; report every eligible game and missing case. Evaluate margin error on matched samples, without invented baseline wagers.
Staff and integration should become one qualitative question. Remove a separate rank-tier bonus from a future simplified candidate and consolidate generic skill/line talent into roster evidence. Keep quarterback, protection, disruption and availability research separate until distinct information and defensible magnitudes exist.
Read the quarterback pilot and prospective questions →Full prospective validation specification