Football Outsiders Ratings

[Cam]

I am sure some of these stats have been posted elsewhere, but I thought maybe I could create a thread to encourage discussion. For those who don't know, Football Outsiders is a website that runs a program that tries to computationally evaluate the efficiency of teams in all phases of the game (offense, defense, special teams, offensive line, etc.). It eliminates drives at the end of halves or games where teams will take a knee or just try to run clock. It also takes into account your opponents (does not include FCS, to the benefit of uga) and everything is adjusted week-to-week based on performance. For this reason, they don't release the ratings until halfway through the season, which happens to be now.

Current Rankings in Order (Overall, Offense, Defense):
Clemson: 2, 21, 3
Miami: 14, 58, 13
Pitt: 31, 22, 99
UNC: 32, 49, 85
VT: 37, 77, 17
GT: 43, 13, 97
Duke: 58, 92, 24
UVA: 66, 71, 86
uga: 67, 68, 66
Vanderbilt: 73rd, 113, 47
Georgia Southern: 84, 80, 91
Boston College: 97, 122, 20

Seems fairly accurate. We've beaten the teams lower than of us and we've lost to teams ahead of us. I am a little surprised that VT's offense and Pitt's defense are rated so low, but I do not don't totally disagree. It's also encouraging to see our offense at 13th statistically and I hope that we can reach 2014 levels (rated 3rd). Details on how they rate teams are given in the description on the website if you are curious.

 

[mj claz]

We are better than Pitt on offense and defense, yet 12 spots lower overall?

 

[alentrekin]

TAMU/OSU is an exaggerated case of GT/PITT.

If I had to guess, strength of schedule weights heavier somehow in FEI than in the component indices.

 

[4shotB]

We are better than Pitt on offense and defense, yet 12 spots lower overall?

I think head to head competition should outweigh any kind of computation. I don't trust any kind of poll that ranks team A higher than team B given that B beat A. I do think the Pitt/Gt game is an even matchup with each winning half the time in a 10 game series.

 

[AE 87]

I think head to head competition should outweigh any kind of computation. I don't trust any kind of poll that ranks team A higher than team B given that B beat A. I do think the Pitt/Gt game is an even matchup with each winning half the time in a 10 game series.

It's not a poll but rankings based on statistics. Regardless, I get what you're saying, but sometimes the better team loses.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

I think head to head competition should outweigh any kind of computation. I don't trust any kind of poll that ranks team A higher than team B given that B beat A. I do think the Pitt/Gt game is an even matchup with each winning half the time in a 10 game series.

You left off the most important ranking - special teams GT is 26th. (We were 31st last year.) If we can replace Butker with an equally accurate FG kicker, we should be as good or better next year. (Butker isn't that accurate on a percentage basis compared to others.)

But to your point, I understand why you like head to head competitions to decide who is better. But a ranking like this can only rank who is better on average on a neutral field. You recognize this when you point out that in the Pitt/GT area, we'd probably win 5 of 10. So just because Pitt won the game, it doesn't follow that Pitt would win the next 9 games (as you said).

As to VT being so low in offense, I think it is because they have had so many turnovers - they have had 14 turnovers on O which is tied for 113-120th in D1. You can't move the ball efficiently when you are always turning it over. Of course, the VT D has been good at getting the ball back 13 times ....... http://www.cfbstats.com/2016/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category12/sort04.html

For me, the bottom line is that GT has been a middling team overall. And in the middle, any win becomes tough.

 

[JDjacket]

It's interesting you point out VTs TO margin. They lost the turnover battle in their first two games and went 1-1 ( win was against FCS). They won the TO battle in their next 3 games and won ( UNC 2 INT + 2 fumbles... granted hurricane ). They lost the TO battle against cuse and lost.

Winning the TO battle is important in football in general but will be extra important vs them. Also VT committing turnovers will have their impact reduced bc their D is good enough to either get a stop or force TO of their own. Their offense seems to need more chances to score

As for the scoring #s they're putting up. They e had some special teams TDs plus a lot of short field (40 yards or less) TDs. So punting will. E important...

 

[Cam]

You left off the most important ranking - special teams GT is 26th. (We were 31st last year.) If we can replace Butker with an equally accurate FG kicker, we should be as good or better next year. (Butker isn't that accurate on a percentage basis compared to others.)

You're right. And with Bulovas and Harvin coming in next year, I would feel like we are set for 4 great years in the kicking department. For those interested, here is how we rank compared to opponents in special teams:

13 Georgia Southern
22 North Carolina
26 Georgia Tech
33 Virginia Tech
45 Miami
46 Pittsburgh
56 Vanderbilt
58 Clemson
61 Duke
73 Boston College
101 Virginia
122 uga

Yes, folks. Statistically, uga is a dumpster fire. You can thank Richt for leaving them with an empty cupboard. They need top 5 classes to compete. /s

 

[00Burdell]

If I looked at Duke's schedule and didn't know the score of any of the games they played so far, I'd be pretty off base in what I would assume their record to be if I used these ratings. Seems something is missing.

 

[ilovetheoption]

Shoot, didn't see this post before I posted on the Ted Roof thread. Yeah, this is my favorite stat.

 

[Cam]

I should mention I just posted FEI ratings. The site uses stats by two different guys, then combines them for their official site ratings. If curious, go check them out. I might post it later.

 

[AE 87]

We are better than Pitt on offense and defense, yet 12 spots lower overall?

I'm not sure, but I think the stats may be calculated independently now. They have a GE (game efficiency) stat which weights performance against better teams higher, and it may use OFEI and DFEI as inputs. In other words, the OFEI and DFEI are already opponent adjusted based on an expectation of an average team versus SOS, but there may be a further adjustment based on a team vs team analysis in determining the team FEI.

Just a guess, based on the table headings and definitions.

 

[Boomergump]

As bad a year as many feel we have had on offense, we are the strongest on that side of the ball in the ACC. Interesting. It's funny, I don't feel as though we have had a particularly great offensive season at all. Perhaps we just haven't had the ball enough, hence the defensive stat.

 

[Old South Stands]

You left off the most important ranking - special teams GT is 26th. (We were 31st last year.) If we can replace Butker with an equally accurate FG kicker, we should be as good or better next year. (Butker isn't that accurate on a percentage basis compared to others.)

But to your point, I understand why you like head to head competitions to decide who is better. But a ranking like this can only rank who is better on average on a neutral field. You recognize this when you point out that in the Pitt/GT area, we'd probably win 5 of 10. So just because Pitt won the game, it doesn't follow that Pitt would win the next 9 games (as you said).

As to VT being so low in offense, I think it is because they have had so many turnovers - they have had 14 turnovers on O which is tied for 113-120th in D1. You can't move the ball efficiently when you are always turning it over. Of course, the VT D has been good at getting the ball back 13 times ....... http://www.cfbstats.com/2016/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category12/sort04.html

For me, the bottom line is that GT has been a middling team overall. And in the middle, any win becomes tough.

Butker isn't the most accurate. Just prior to the big kick against Georgia in 2014 , one of the TV announcers was saying that CPJ had thought he'd have an all-American type of breakout season, but it didn't happen. Then right after that, Butker makes the kick. One thing that can be said for Butker, he is 'clutch'. And he also booms it on kickoffs. His kickoff performance caused CPJ to call him a legitimate weapon.

 

[Cam]

As bad a year as many feel we have had on offense, we are the strongest on that side of the ball in the ACC. Interesting. It's funny, I don't feel as though we have had a particularly great offensive season at all. Perhaps we just haven't had the ball enough, hence the defensive stat.

It's somewhat interesting that the S&P ratings have GT at #58 in offense. We rank no lower than 30th in any of their individual statistics (Rushing 10, Passing 28, Standard Downs 30, Passing Downs 22, Success Rate 17, and Explosiveness 28), but we're given a poor rating for whatever reason. Additionally, looking a bit at last year, it's interesting seeing that Navy was the #1 in FEI and #20 in S&P on offense. I'm not sure which rating (or the combined) is most accurate. Probably the one that makes GT look better.

 

[Longestday]

I love FEI... but as I was writing another post I realized that Navy beat Memphis today and VT beat Miami today. Memphis and Miami had major advantages in FEI.

 

[AE 87]

I love FEI... but as I was writing another post I realized that Navy beat Memphis today and VT beat Miami today. Memphis and Miami had major advantages in FEI.

I watched some of vpi d'ohU, and the latter has suffered a lot of injuries.

 

[Cam]

I thought I would update this after last weekend's chaos. I'll include all of our opponents and our favorite service academy for the current FEI rankings.
Current Rankings in Order (Overall, Offense, Defense, Special Teams):
Clemson (4, 23, 11, 44)
Miami (19, 65, 20, 22)
North Carolina (24, 30, 91, 12)
Pittsburgh (25, 16, 100, 80)
Virginia Tech (26, 70, 28, 32)
Georgia Tech (51, 20, 111, 27)
Navy (52, 2, 121, 68)
Georgia (57, 90, 32, 119)
Duke (58, 71, 64, 73)
Vanderbilt (64, 114, 42, 49)
Virginia (76, 99, 81, 76)
Georgia Southern (83, 95, 85, 18)
Boston College (103, 126, 33, 52)

Some things to note is that we beat everyone lower than us and lost to every team above us except Virginia Tech. Miami is still considered a pretty great team statistically despite the decline this season. Also, Navy's offense is clicking, with the second highest offensive efficiency, just behind Western Michigan. Also worth noting they are 121st in defensive efficiency, sharing some of the same woes as us. On the other end, Boston College's offense is only better than Kansas and Rutgers.

 

[smathis30]

For what its worth, i do my own statistical analytics, and I also have Miami really far up in the rankings too. Just remeber that they are like 6 points away from being 9-1, and will likely finish the season 8-4. (which would be 6 points away from 11-1). The games that make them look a lot better than normal are their kicking of App state's *** (who is really good, despite being a sunbelt team) and in reality, outplaying FSU in their loss to them, being the only team to slow down UNC in non-hurricane weather, and absolutely whomping Pitt. I also have their defense as 22nd overall (4th in the ACC behind Clemson, Louisville, and VT) while playing a relatively decent SOS.