That's all well and good, but it just doesn't ring true to me. One of the things about college football is the players aren't there for very long, so year-to-year things can change a lot.
You want consistency? Arizona has consistently won all of their games. You want better? Arizona went into Oregon's house and straight-up beat 'em.
I know you talk about the Arizona rest, but Oregon has better recruits, a supposed "Heisman-candidate" QB, one of the best home field advantages in the country, better facilities, and so on. Arizona had to overcome those things.
I'd get it if Arizona wasn't undefeated, like if we're talking 8-2 vs 8-2, and you like Oregon's losses better, etc. But at the moment there's not much that says Oregon is a better team to me. They needed a ref-assist to put away Wazzu, and they got flat-out beat at home by Arizona.
Sure, Zona needed a lucky hail mary to beat Cal, but Cal beat Wazzu, and again, Zona has that nice "0" in the L column.
Obviously your rankings are your own but it just seems weird to me, that's all.