Ted Roof's job

Jmonty71

Jmonty71

Banned
Messages
2,156
Just an update to FEI. We are now 117 out of 128 schools. Schools better than us. Buffalo, New Mexico, Middle Tennessee, South Alabama, Kansas, South Florida, Georgia State, Temple, SMU, Vandy and Wake Forrest. Now go ahead and tell me that those schools are recruit better and have better talent. I could of listed a lot more. Heck, even Kansas plays in the offense happy Big 12 and has a better FEI rank than we do. That's sad. It really is.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef
 
Augusta_Jacket

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,099
Location
Augusta, Georgia
Jmonty71 said:
Just an update to FEI. We are now 117 out of 128 schools. Schools better than us. Buffalo, New Mexico, Middle Tennessee, South Alabama, Kansas, South Florida, Georgia State, Temple, SMU, Vandy and Wake Forrest. Now go ahead and tell me that those schools are recruit better and have better talent. I could of listed a lot more. Heck, even Kansas plays in the offense happy Big 12 and has a better FEI rank than we do. That's sad. It really is.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef
Click to expand...

I like DFEI for the most part, but I am not sure that the formula is always fair. For example, even though DFEI supposedly takes in to account opponents offense strentgh, San Diego St is # 15 yet has the #122 SoS ranking. With a schedule that easy, they darn well SHOULD have great stats on D. Of the teams you listed, only two have stronger SoS than GT (47) (Kansas 16, Vandy 37) and SMU, at 50, is in the same range as GT. The rest have SoS starting at 70 and running north into the 130's. So while there isn't much doubt our D needs a good bit of work, comparing them to non P5 schools can be problematic. After all, we scored at will against Vandy, and held them in check all game long.
 
AE 87

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,026
Augusta_Jacket said:
I like DFEI for the most part, but I am not sure that the formula is always fair. For example, even though DFEI supposedly takes in to account opponents offense strentgh, San Diego St is # 15 yet has the #122 SoS ranking. With a schedule that easy, they darn well SHOULD have great stats on D. Of the teams you listed, only two have stronger SoS than GT (47) (Kansas 16, Vandy 37) and SMU, at 50, is in the same range as GT. The rest have SoS starting at 70 and running north into the 130's. So while there isn't much doubt our D needs a good bit of work, comparing them to non P5 schools can be problematic. After all, we scored at will against Vandy, and held them in check all game long.
Click to expand...

Yeah. There are strengths and weaknesses of all statistical measures. I agree with your observations. Fwiw, it seems to me that some of the footballoutsiders stats are worse in adjusting to schedule strength than they used to be, and I attribute it to them wanting to make the SEC teams look as good as their popular rankings.
 
18in32

18in32

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
68
Augusta_Jacket said:
I like DFEI for the most part, but I am not sure that the formula is always fair. For example, even though DFEI supposedly takes in to account opponents offense strentgh, San Diego St is # 15 yet has the #122 SoS ranking. With a schedule that easy, they darn well SHOULD have great stats on D. Of the teams you listed, only two have stronger SoS than GT (47) (Kansas 16, Vandy 37) and SMU, at 50, is in the same range as GT. The rest have SoS starting at 70 and running north into the 130's. So while there isn't much doubt our D needs a good bit of work, comparing them to non P5 schools can be problematic. After all, we scored at will against Vandy, and held them in check all game long.
Click to expand...
I have done NO research on this issue... but strength of schedule is measured (usually) by opponents' cumulative win-loss records, not by analysis of opponents' offensive yard gained or points-per-possession or whatever (or defensively, the inverse). So while I'm sure there's a loose correlation between win-loss record and offensive strength, it is far too weak to suggest that (for example) San Diego State's defensive strength is overblown (at least more than is already accounted for by the DFEI model, whatever it is) because they have played a relatively weak schedule.
 
Jmonty71

Jmonty71

Banned
Messages
2,156
Augusta_Jacket said:
I like DFEI for the most part, but I am not sure that the formula is always fair. For example, even though DFEI supposedly takes in to account opponents offense strentgh, San Diego St is # 15 yet has the #122 SoS ranking. With a schedule that easy, they darn well SHOULD have great stats on D. Of the teams you listed, only two have stronger SoS than GT (47) (Kansas 16, Vandy 37) and SMU, at 50, is in the same range as GT. The rest have SoS starting at 70 and running north into the 130's. So while there isn't much doubt our D needs a good bit of work, comparing them to non P5 schools can be problematic. After all, we scored at will against Vandy, and held them in check all game long.
Click to expand...
Even the SoS in itself can be misleading. Does it determine that the other teams were good on offense or does it determine if they just had a stout defense? So, even using that can skew numbers. Which is why breaking down PPD / 3rd down conv and such to me, makes more sense.
 
Augusta_Jacket

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,099
Location
Augusta, Georgia
18in32 said:
I have done NO research on this issue... but strength of schedule is measured (usually) by opponents' cumulative win-loss records, not by analysis of opponents' offensive yard gained or points-per-possession or whatever (or defensively, the inverse). So while I'm sure there's a loose correlation between win-loss record and offensive strength, it is far too weak to suggest that (for example) San Diego State's defensive strength is overblown (at least more than is already accounted for by the DFEI model, whatever it is) because they have played a relatively weak schedule.
Click to expand...

Here are the OFEI ranks for SDSUs opponents. 27, 53, 75, 90, 125, 126, 79, & 98. They won the game against the 27th ranked OFEI team 45-40. Cal had 4 turnovers, including a pick-6, that was the difference in that game. Again, I think DFEI is a useful stat, but like any stat, has it's flaws.
 
Augusta_Jacket

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,099
Location
Augusta, Georgia
Jmonty71 said:
Even the SoS in itself can be misleading. Does it determine that the other teams were good on offense or does it determine if they just had a stout defense? So, even using that can skew numbers. Which is why breaking down PPD / 3rd down conv and such to me, makes more sense.
Click to expand...

But you didn't post about PPD/3rd down conversions. You posted a link calling attention to our bad DFEI rank. Quit moving the goal posts.
 

up state jacket

Banned
Messages
1,403
Jmonty71 said:
Even the SoS in itself can be misleading. Does it determine that the other teams were good on offense or does it determine if they just had a stout defense? So, even using that can skew numbers. Which is why breaking down PPD / 3rd down conv and such to me, makes more sense.
Click to expand...
You seem to have the answers and also seem to be a pretty smart guy. Why don't you apply for the job? I'm sure your current job has adequately prepared you for the tough task at hand. Good luck.
 
iceeater1969

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,664
up state jacket said:
You seem to have the answers and also seem to be a pretty smart guy. Why don't you apply for the job? I'm sure your current job has adequately prepared you for the tough task at hand. Good luck.
Click to expand...
I may not agree w him but at least he quoted some numbers so let's not get too snarky.
Now being snarky to the guy named ATOMIC - hat would be appropriate !

We will know after uga.
 

up state jacket

Banned
Messages
1,403
iceeater1969 said:
I may not agree w him but at least he quoted some numbers so let's not get too snarky.
Now being snarky to the guy named ATOMIC - hat would be appropriate !

We will know after uga.
Click to expand...
It's no secrete my feelings towards Paul Johnson and his offense, but what you will not find a thread or comment made by me on how he should run his offense. You know why? Because I have no clue how to or would attempt to at the level of Paul Johnson. He is a professional coach and I am not. This cat is beating a dead horse with anti Roof comments and statistical numbers and how he would run the defense and who should and shouldn't be playing. If Roof's personal decisions and how he wants to play causes him to get fired then he should be the first in line for the job. In other words, we get you dislike Ted Roof and your analysis is greatly appreciated and I understand Tech's defense doesn't rank very well in most areas that are statistcally measured in today's college football. When was the last time they did measure positively in defensive categories that are measured by statistical data?
 

tmhunter52

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,449
With three more games on the schedule, and with the possibility of ending the season at or near the bottom of many FBS defensive stats and the possibility of a second "bowl-less" post season in a row, this thread length and longevity could challenge that of the famous, former non-commit, Donavaughan Campbell.
 
Ash

Ash

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
779
I was just chatting with an Auburn grad co-worker. After I wished his team luck in Athens he asked how Tech was going to do this weekend. I mentioned our issues on the defensive side of the ball. He said "Let me guess...Ted Roof's scheme is only effective inside the 10 yard line?"
 
Top