CFB 360 is currently a work in progress! Learn more about our unbiased ranking engine & upcoming Player Recruiting Hub

Composite projection engine

Matchup Simulator

Away team (Team A)
SAC logo
Home team (Team B)
EMU logo
ABC| Sat 1:30 PM MT

Color clash detected โ€” Sacramento State is shown in their alternate road accent for contrast.

SAC logoSacramento State
1-2 ยท 47.4 PWR
69%

EMU win probability

Projected line: EMU -3.5

EMU logoEastern Michigan
1-2 ยท 53.0 PWR

Positional unit index โ€” 0 to 100 scale

50 = FBS average ยท 72+ = Top 25 level ยท 90+ = elite national top five. Week 3 weighting: 60% preseason roster talent + 40% live 2026 game EPA.

39QB vs QB39

Even matchup โ€” both units index the same

40WR Room vs WR Room41

-0.4 EMU advantage โ€” 1-point index gap over Sacramento State (explosive pass rate and yards per target). EMU Below average.

40RB Room vs RB Room39

+0.4 SAC advantage โ€” 1-point index gap over Eastern Michigan (yards per carry, line yards and rush EPA). SAC Below average.

36Run Blocking vs Run Defense46

-4.2 EMU advantage โ€” 10-point index gap over Sacramento State (line yards against stuff rate). EMU FBS average.

42Offensive Line vs Pass Rush43

-0.4 EMU advantage โ€” 1-point index gap over Sacramento State (pass-block win rate against pressure rate). EMU FBS average.

40Pass Game vs Coverage46

-2.5 EMU advantage โ€” 6-point index gap over Sacramento State (passing EPA against coverage efficiency). EMU FBS average.

46Pass Rush vs Offensive Line44

+0.8 SAC advantage โ€” 2-point index gap over Eastern Michigan (pressure differential in the trenches). SAC FBS average.

46Coverage vs Pass Game40

+2.5 SAC advantage โ€” 6-point index gap over Eastern Michigan (coverage grade against target efficiency). SAC FBS average.

Projections use opponent-adjusted efficiency, SOS, and unit-level grades derived from live 2026 team data.