Stanford · Week 5 analysis

Where the team stands

Stanford ranks No. 130 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of -14.84 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 129; this update moves it -1 places and -2.20 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 5 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 2–3. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: -7.872. Prior-season margin: +0.190.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: -0.0366; EPA/play net: -0.0595; success-rate net: -0.0313; explosiveness net: +0.0274. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 2 eligible games. Excluded games contribute no fabricated EP observation. Opponent results can move a rating even during a bye.

The result and the reconstructed expectation

Stanford lost to Wake Forest by 54 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of -17.81; the result was -36.19 points relative to that expectation.

This is a newly reconstructed forecast under the frozen EP model. It is not represented as a prediction published before the game, and it does not replace the original published grade.

Next scheduled test

The next scheduled opponent at this snapshot is Notre Dame on 2026-10-10. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 197 versus 519; Net passing yards: 148 versus 322; Rushing yards: 49 versus 197; First downs: 13 versus 26

Completions–attempts: 21-33 versus 22-30; Rush attempts: 34 versus 37; Yards per pass: 4.5 versus 10.7; Yards per rush: 1.4 versus 5.3

Read production alongside workload: more attempts can raise a yardage total without raising efficiency. The model uses opponent-adjusted rate signals, not this box score alone.

Defense and possession

The opponent scored 57 points and recorded 519 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 1 versus 4; Tackles for loss: 2 versus 9; Third downs: 6-17 versus 10-13; Fourth downs: 0-3 versus 0-0

Turnovers: 1 versus 1; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 1; Interceptions thrown: 1 versus 0; Penalties–yards: 7-50 versus 8-52; Possession time: 31:14 versus 28:46

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 2–3. The expected final record is 3.5–8.5 over 12 scheduled games.

Expected wins add recorded results to the estimated win probabilities of remaining games. They are not a list of certain winners. Probabilities use a symmetric approximation from historical development residuals; independent calibration has not been established.

The comparison around the ranking

Nearby in this same snapshot: No. 129 Ball State (-14.58); No. 131 Colorado State (-15.14).

PSR compares predictive strength rather than sorting teams by wins. A team can win and move down, or lose and move up, as its performance and opponents change the adjusted evidence.

How to read this assessment

This is a fresh assessment under the frozen EP model, using this period's eligible inputs. Earlier published releases remain preserved separately; the reconstructed archive is not presented as a prediction published before those games.

Scoring margin, prior-season margin, first-down efficiency, EPA per play, success rate and explosiveness contribute together. Correlated signals should not be interpreted as independent proof of an advantage, and a model disagreement with a betting line is not proof of profit.