Final OFEI Rank

[GTJoeBrew]

GT ended the season with the highest Offensive Fremeau Efficiency Index since it began to be recorded (I think in 2007). Here's the link. We jumped from .968 to .999 after the bowl game.

For reference, here's what each column stands for:

• OFEI: Offensive FEI, the opponent-adjusted efficiency of the given team's offense.
• OE: Offensive Efficiency, the raw unadjusted efficiency of the given team's offense, a measure of its actual drive success against expected drive success based on field position.
• FD: First Down rate, the percentage of offensive drives that result in at least one first down or touchdown.
• AY: Available Yards, yards earned by the offense divided by the total number of yards available based on starting field position.
• Ex: Explosive Drives, the percentage of each offense's drives that average at least 10 yards per play.
• Me: Methodical Drives, the percentage of each offense's drives that run 10 or more plays.
• Va: Value Drives, the percentage of each offense's drives beginning on its own side of the field that reach at least the opponent's 30-yard line.
• OSOS: Offensive Strength of Schedule, the likelihood that an elite offense (two standard deviations better than average) would have an above-average OE rating against each of the defenses faced by the given team.

I'm a little surprised that it has Florida State at the number 1 OSOS.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

We ended up #3 overall. #1 O, #51 D and #31 ST. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei

The D should be better next year (please!!).

 

[awbuzz]

Thanks for also popping in the definitions.

 

[prifle2]

Thanks for the information..

It really boiled down to our offense and Oregons offense as 1-2 in most of those categories, until you factor in strength of opposition's defense and that's what moves us up to number one.. but even with the raw data, we had the number 2 overall offensive efficiency rating

 

[4shotB]

We ended up #3 overall. #1 O, #51 D and #31 ST. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei

The D should be better next year (please!!).

It's amazing how atrociously bad we were on D in previous years. So much so that I was thinking that our #51 ranked D was pretty good this year. and compared to their predecessors, they were. I will say this, #51 or not, they did have a knack for big plays.

 

[BerryGT]

I contacted Brian Fremeau about the ratings and he told me that a score of 1.000 would mean you are 100% better than average and that no offense, defense or overall team has ever scored higher than our offense since he started the rating in 2003. Pretty incredible.

 

[GTJoeBrew]

I contacted Brian Fremeau about the ratings and he told me that a score of 1.000 would mean you are 100% better than average and that no offense, defense or overall team has ever scored higher than our offense since he started the rating in 2003. Pretty incredible.

Wow, thanks for that.

 

[Minawreck]

It's amazing how atrociously bad we were on D in previous years. So much so that I was thinking that our #51 ranked D was pretty good this year. and compared to their predecessors, they were. I will say this, #51 or not, they did have a knack for big plays.

any efficiency rating is going to struggle with turnover creations by the D because they are more or less random events. This is what gave our D the feeling of being better than the D's of year's past.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

any efficiency rating is going to struggle with turnover creations by the D because they are more or less random events. This is what gave our D the feeling of being better than the D's of year's past.

Agreed that fumbles are considered more or less random; the recovery rate in the long term averages about 50% and the number per year tends to regress to 0. But the number of interceptions carry over from year to year. I think the impact of the turnovers caused by the D are included in the stats as they resulted in D stops and the O not scoring.

#51 isn't very good (sucks!) for a whole year rating. But after 4 or 5 games we were near 100. so the end of the season was a lot better. One thing Connolly (S&P+) is going to do next year is have the average ratings for the last 8 games. So we'll be able to better see how teams are playing currently rather than just a whole season average. http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2014/12/30/7464777/college-football-ratings-redesign-sandp-plus

 

[AE 87]

Agreed that fumbles are considered more or less random; the recovery rate in the long term averages about 50% and the number per year tends to regress to 0. But the number of interceptions carry over from year to year. I think the impact of the turnovers caused by the D are included in the stats as they resulted in D stops and the O not scoring.

#51 isn't very good (sucks!) for a whole year rating. But after 4 or 5 games we were near 100. so the end of the season was a lot better. One thing Connolly (S&P+) is going to do next year is have the average ratings for the last 8 games. So we'll be able to better see how teams are playing currently rather than just a whole season average. http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2014/12/30/7464777/college-football-ratings-redesign-sandp-plus

Perhaps @BerryGT could contact Fremeau again to calculate GT's DFEI for the games after UNC.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Perhaps @BerryGT could contact Fremeau again to calculate GT's DFEI for the games after UNC.

It's Connolly that does S&P+ who is going to do the 8 week moving average.

Anyway, another Connolly article: http://www.footballstudyhall.com/20...tech-mississippi-state-stats-recap/in/6603654

"I'm still not sure people realize how good Georgia Tech was this year. The universal reaction after this game was "I can't believe State couldn't stop them! They had a month!" But the Jackets came into the game with the No. 1 offense in the country according to Off. F/+. In terms of F/+ ratings, they beat No. 5 Georgia, No. 9 Clemson, and No. 12 Mississippi State, and they lost to No. 10 FSU by two. They had down moments, sure, this was a damn strong team, one good enough offensively to overcome a decent but not amazing defense.

MSU was still the higher-ranked team heading into the game, and the Bulldogs losing by 15 points was still obviously disappointing. (And it certainly fit into the "What the hell, SEC West?" narrative.) But let's make sure to pause and give Tech some respect here. The Ramblin' Wreck had a hell of a year."

 

[AE 87]

It's Connolly that does S&P+ who is going to do the 8 week moving average.

...

Right. I was asking about the same sort of thing for DFEI.

 

[BerryGT]

Perhaps @BerryGT could contact Fremeau again to calculate GT's DFEI for the games after UNC.

You can look at the season on a game by game basis on Fremeau's BCF Toys site.
http://www.bcftoys.com/2014-game-factors/
Each unit is rated based on their performance each game and ranked. As you can see our defensive performances were much better after the UNC game. Our best defensive performance during the first half was against Miami, which ranked as the 711 best, was still worse than our worst during the 2nd half of the season, a 619th ranked performance against FSU.