Comment from discussion FEI's most efficient offenses of the past 10 yrs: (1) 2011 Wisconsin (2) 2008 Oklahoma (3) 2013 FSU (4) 2014 Oregon (5) 2008 Florida.
We had some debates throughout the year on how this year's offense compared to our other (few) reliable offenses of the past. This list is spots 50-75 of all years of of OFEI. It embedded oddly straight to the main thread even though I copied from the specific reddit comment. Regardless, you can see all 1-100 if you scroll down.
It turns out, 2010 was far and away our most efficient offense since OFEI started tracking in 2007. This wasn't surprising to me, as I advocated against the "recency bias" if you will of our infatuation of our new offense. But this is less to try and prove a point, and more to reflect (somewhat sadly) on how incredible our 2010 offense was and how special that season could have been if we had a classically great Bud Foster defense that year. For reference, we ranked close behind Clemson's 2015 offense, and actually 20 spots ahead of Clemson 2016 offense. I would love to see how those 1999-2000 offenses with Michael Vick would rank on this list.
Offensive FEI detail
FEI is a college football rating system based on opponent-adjusted drive efficiency. Approximately 20,000 possessions are contested annually in FBS vs. FBS games. First-half clock-kills and end-of-game garbage drives and scores are filtered out. Offensive Efficiency (OE) is the value generated by a team's offense per non-garbage possession relative to national average scoring rates by starting field position. OFEI is value generated per possession adjusted for the strength of opponent defenses faced.
Available Yards Percentage (OAY) is the total number of yards earned by the offense divided by the number of yards available to be earned based on starting field position. Value Drive Rate (OVD) is the percentage of offensive drives that begin at least 50 yards from the end zone and reach the opponent's 30-yard line. First Down Rate (OFD) is the percentage of offensive drives that result in a touchdown or at least one first down. Touchdown Rate (OTD) is the percentage of offensive drives that result in a touchdown. Touchdown Rate After First Down (OTF) is the percentage touchdowns scored on offensive drives that earn at least one first down. Turnover Rate (OTO) is the percentage of offensive drives that result in a fumble or interception.
http://www.bcftoys.com/2016-ofei/
Comments
Where did this years offense rank?
We ranked #61 this past season, so not even sniffing the top 100 of the last 10 years.
is that adjusted for opponents? Who did we play in 2010? Did we beat any teams with a defense in the top 50?
Yes it is adjusted for opponents, I put an explanation of the OFEI metric in quotes at the bottom of the post.
Our offense this year is actually a notch below the Tyrod offenses in S&P+ too, ranked only at 51. Liberty, Syracuse, Tennessee (turnovers factor in) and GT were just genuinely terrible games that dragged down our rating.
Anyways, we were legitimately good from 2009-2011, just never put it all together. I think a lot of frustration comes from (a) not producing in big games and (b) having obvious shortcomings that would have made us even better if utilized properly.
Agreed, I think 2004-2007 and 2009-2011 are the two periods where we COULD have won a title (outside of Vick years, obviously). I think not having a r-Sr. Tyrod in 2011 was the difference between an undefeated season and a shot at a title. Little things went wrong each of those seasons and ruined everything.
I think we at least split our games against Clemson in 2011 if we had Tyrod. ...we beat the ever loving shit out of Michigan though.
I have a hard time seeing that offense as special when they got totally squashed by Stanford in the OB and managed to lose home games to Boise and JMU. Yeah they put up decent numbers against ACC competition (if you assume BC and UNC had elite defenses that year - bit of a stretch). But the ACC was still a really weak conference in 2010. And whenever that squad came up against reputable competition from outside the conference it came up short.
You've been on quite the negativity streak the last few posts I've seen. This stuff is oppenent-adjusted. Also, that Stanford defense was no slouch. There are a few reasons that offense was special. We didn't have a great offensive system but we had talent at receiver, 3 legitimate All-ACC/All-American starters at tailback, Tyrod making incredible plays and extending drives and we put up numbers and made impressive comebacks. If we had been operating under a better offensive framework, think of how much better it could have been, and we were 9th in the country that year in OFEI.
Fact of the matter is over 10 years, with 120+ FBS teams each year, we had the 56th(?) most efficient offense in that timeframe and it was adjusted for opponent's
Recruiting threads and the NewStienCain offense tend to bring that out of me.
I know it's adjusted for opponents. And yes, there was a lot of NFL talent on the field that year. But I think that offense would have struggled in any other conference. Not because there wasn't talent, there was. But it seemed to rely heavily on Tyrod making something out of nothing once the original play call or the offensive line blew apart.
I'll go back to my corner and frown now.
.
POTY right there. Outstanding
I have two reactions to this which help this make sense:
1. So many of our points in 2016 seemed to come off of short fields generated by our opportunistic defense. Our 2010 offense had that ability to just drive down the field.
2. Any system that favors "efficiency" is going to put more weight on a good running game than a good passing game. Sure we had Tyrod, but our run game in 2010 was what made that offense elite. There's no comparison to the slightly above average passing attack we had in 2016.
So all in all I'm not really surprised by these numbers. That's not to say we shouldn't be excited about the shiny new offense. Going from the dumpster fire that was the offense from 2012-2015 to something that was fun to watch in 2016 is a pretty huge accomplishment in only one season on the job for Fuente.
Our passing attack in 2010 was actually really strong and super efficient. Tyrod's
QB efficiency was through the roof both 2009 and 2010. Also Jerod may have broken Tyrod's single season TD record and taken the yards record as well, but he threw the ball a lot more and Tyrod wasn't as pigeon-holed in the passing game as Jerod was. When teams took away our easy stuff last year we (Jerod) struggled mightily to adjust. All that to say, I'm way happier with our current offense because we have a offense that works without needing an NFL starter like Tyrod to be effective. Now we have a real offense that knows what it wants to do, can be adjusted to personnel, and can be taught and executed more easily. But I certainly believe these figures when they tell me we were more efficient in 2010, which as we all know, was an outlier of the former staff.
I didn't mean to imply Tyrod wasn't an efficient quarterback, I just mean to say I think our rushing game was more so a strength of that team. My point being that if our 2016 team's strength was passing, it's going to get underweighted by this metric as I suspect it values rushing yards more.
FEI is actually a drive-based metric, so it only looks at how successful a drive was (measured in yards gained/points scored) compared to the expected result given a starting field position and quality of opponent. So if I'm understanding it correctly rushing/passing splits shouldn't matter.
PCs suck. Just win!
](https://postimg.org/image/3jomysj07/))
The talent on that 2010 team is ridiculous looking back. I hope Fuente gets a team that deep at some point. He'd put in some serious work.
A senior Tyrod Taylor, Danny Coale, Jarret Boykin, Dyrell Roberts, Andre Smith, an above average offensive line... and then those backs. Good God those backs. Ryan Wilson. Darren Evans. David Wilson.
Ryan who?
Sorry, it's late and I am TKPing way too much.
Buenas noches mis amigos.
Ryan Wilson
The 2011 Wisconsin offense was filthy. Dominating running game with a mobile quarterback from central VA under center.
That offense is Beamer's dream offense.