see the link below
sitting here in August picking game outcomes in November seems like a fruitless (if not kinda stupid) exercise. But this is America, and this is college football.
There are three things off the top of my head that I'll submit for your consideration when it comes to projecting the season.
First is "Growth." How much will a team grow (or shrink, or stay flat) over the course of the year? How much will individual players grow (or shrink, or stay flat) over the course of the year?
Schwessy grew a lot over last year. So did Femi when he moved to DE. Ucla's O and D did get better, imo, over the course of the season, in an absolute sense. But so did other teams that started at a higher point to begin with. Example: Ohio State
In general, I think the trend over the last 7 years is that Ucla has gotten stronger as the season has gone on. Best game of the 2018 season was v sc at the end of the year, when Joshua Kelley ran for almost 300 yards.
I think a fair amount of Ucla's upward trajectory over the course of the last few seasons is conditioning. I've been very impressed with Ucla's overall level of conditioning. Ucla played in some brutally hot daytime games in 2022 (Bowling Green and Utah) and thrived. Ucla played in some BRUTALLY hot games in 2024 (Hawai'i and LSU) and helf their own. Where conditioning really shows up in the end of the season is ability to run the ball and rush the passer. Ucla wasn't great at those things in 2024, but they were never great at those things at any time in the season.
Condition level of the team (esp OL and DL) will be a CSF when it comes to the team's overall growth.
And then there is the QB position. Most important position in sports. I don't think it's reasonable to expect NI to be a 100% effective QB in G1 v Utah. So will he get better, stay the same, or regress over the course of the year? That's a big factor in projecting Ws and Ls in November.
(BTW, this consideration applies to the other teams, too. What if Dylan Railoa (sp?) really puts it together by mid-season when Nebby plays Ucla? It's probably a different calculus than the one anyone would make now.)
Second factor is "Attrition." Ucla lost a billion left tackles last year (unlike previous years). If that happens again, what does that mean for the Ws and Ls? Probably not good.
What if NI gets his leg twisted because the OL is janky to start the year and he misses some games or is clearly only 50% in some he does play?
(BTW, this applies to the other teams as well. What if Maryland's FR QB gets hurt and they have to play Justyn Martin v Ucla? Or Drew Allar gets hurt? It will probably help to play teams the week after they play tOSU or Oregon.)
The third factor is what I'll call "Setting." This is the most controversial take. My sense is that Ucla, post pandemic, plays better in a "hostile" setting than it does in an "apathetic" setting. When Ucla plays at LSU, at Rutgers, at Nebby, at sc, at Penn State, it tends to rise to the occasion and play above expectations. It doesn't necessarily win, but it surprises. But when it plays Freneck State at home (2021, 2024), it comes out sleepy and disengaged and not giving an eff, and struggles. Ucla seems to be winning games v sc on the road and losing at home in recent years.
I don't think this is necessarily limited to Ucla. Most FB players have an "us v them" mindset, and going on the road and shutting up their fans and their players is so, so, so sweet. Much sweeter than playing at home. At the RB, a Ucla player looks into the stands, and they're empty. And the fans that are there are on their phones and not even paying attention to what's going on on the field. womp-womp.
So I kinda expect Ucla to under perform at home and over perform/try/exert on the road. Meaning, games tagged as "easy home wins" might not be so easy and "blow out road losses" might be games where Ucla covers the spread.
Finally, rather than thinking about Ws and Ls, I find it more interesting to consider what the fanbases' and the recruits' reactions to:
1. Easy wins (2 or more scores margin)
2. close wins (less than or equal to one score margin)
3. ugly wins (Ucla v Hawai'i 2024, Ucla v Illinois 2003, etc.)
4. close losses (less than or equal to one score)
5. ugly losses (lose by 2 or more TDs)
If Ucla beats Utah 6-3 on 8/30, I'd consider this an ugly win. And i don't think anyone is jumping on the DF/Ucla bandwagon afterwards. If anything, I think Ucla will lose some following. (Remember the hype train Dr. Pepper commercial?)
Perversely, if Ucla loses 30 to 27 and looks competent on O, I think the Ucla faithful will keep the faith (mostly). They'll give the team another chance. (But they'll expect Ucla to issue a beat down to UNLV and New America the next two games.)
This is LA, and Ucla fans are acutely sensitive to style points. The broskis admit that staying within 2 TDs of tOSU will be a moral victory for Ucla.
For those scoring at home:
1. Easy win = neutral or up reaction
2. close win = neutral or up reaction
3. ugly win = negative reaction
4. close loss = anywhere from negative to up
5. ugly loss = negative reaction
6. 8 to 13 point loss (the gap in my framework above) = apathy, meaning down. 5 or 6 losses in the 8 to 13 point range would be a cratering of the fanbase. The takeaway would be "just not competitive", except for the tOSU and PSU games, where Ucla will be a massive dog.