Final 2008 FEI Ratings

by Brian Fremeau

The Fremeau Efficiency Index principles and methodology can be found here [1]. Like DVOA, FEI rewards playing well against good teams, win or lose, and punishes losing to poor teams more harshly than it rewards defeating poor teams. Unlike DVOA, it is drive-based, not play-by-play based, and it is specifically engineered to measure the college game.

FEI is the opponent-adjusted value of Game Efficiency, a measurement of the success rate of a team scoring and preventing opponent scoring throughout the non-garbage-time possessions of a game. Like DVOA, it represents a team's efficiency value over average. Strength of Schedule is calculated from a privileged perspective (explained here [2]) and represents the likelihood that an elite team (top 5) would post an undefeated record against the given team's opponents to date.

The following ratings are calculated based on data from all FBS games played through Thursday, January 8. Only games between FBS teams are considered.

Adjusted Offensive Efficiency and Adjusted Defensive Efficiency are the opponent-adjusted values of Offensive Efficiency and Defensive Efficiency, explained here [3]. Like FEI, the multiple-order adjustments are weighted according to both the strength of the opponent and the relative significance of the result; efficiency against a team's best competition faced is given more relevance weight. AOE and ADE represent a team's value over/under average. Positive AOE and negative ADE are the most valuable.

The Final FEI Ratings for all 120 FBS teams can be found here [4]. Expanded FEI Ratings data can be found here [5].

Defense Wins Championships

The BCS Championship game had all the elements of a classic, but none of the polish. Goal-line defensive stands, massive momentum swings, aggressive (sometimes too aggressive) tackling, several superstars with solid performances and several did-you-see-that game-defining plays. Unfortunately, the broadcast team wasn't paying attention, the referee crew was rusty, and the game never reached its full potential. Nevertheless, the Florida Gators were the best college football team for one night and for all of 2008, and their success can be mostly attributed to their all-world, life-affirming, inspirational, transcendent, radiant star: the Gators defense.

In the Football Outsiders BCS Championship Preview [6], I noted that short and long field position drives may be the key to the game's outcome, tipping the scales in favor of Florida. I was partially right, but not for the particular reasons I had envisioned. Unlike much of their 2008 season, Florida played the entire first half against Oklahoma at a significant field position disadvantage. Disregarding a kneel-down possession from their own 3-yard line, the Gators' average starting field position on its four first-half drives was its own 12-yard line; Oklahoma began its five first-half possessions on average from its own 40-yard line. That field position advantage and extra possession should be worth an extra touchdown according to national efficiency averages (6.53 points to be exact), but the explosive Oklahoma offense only managed a 7-7 tie at halftime.

Florida thwarted the highest-scoring offense in college football history on their shortest fields of the night, an area the Gators have excelled at protecting all season long. On 32 opponent possessions begun 60 or fewer yards from the goal line, Florida gave up only four touchdowns, forced 11 punts, collected three interceptions and turned the opponent over on downs three times. (The much-revered USC defense gave up seven touchdowns on 22 such drives in 2008). In the championship, in fact, Oklahoma came away with zero points on two golden opportunities following egregious Tim Tebow first-half interceptions. Tebow led the late game-clinching fourth-quarter drives with precision passing and strong running, but the defense's ability to protect short fields after his first half miscues put him in position to be a hero in the end.

Oklahoma's offensive frustrations were also tied to the flow (or lack thereof) of the game. Injury timeouts, officiating delays, and even a bizarre two-timeout-then-punt sequence all contributed to the game's stunted rhythm. Florida's ball-control had something to do with it as well, limiting the Sooners to only ten total drives in the game, two fewer than any other Oklahoma game this season and well below their average pace. There were fewer total possessions in the BCS Championship than in any other bowl game in 2008, but it didn't faze the Gators. Florida was victorious in all four games it played this season in which they possessed the ball ten times or fewer.

Great defense not only won Florida its championship, but it prevailed over offense more often than not this season. Eight games were contested in 2008 between FEI top-10 offenses and defenses, and the top defenses won six of those showdowns, hold the offenses under 30 points five times and under 20 points three times.

Several top-10 FEI defenses populated the ACC, a conference that befuddled FEI all season long and throughout bowl season. The league exceeded national expectations in the postseason (7-3 against the spread in bowls), but did little to boost its actual credibiity (4-6 straight-up). An FEI offseason project is required to fully investigate a love affair of a particular conference, but the simple explanation is that as developed, FEI rewards tightly contested wins and losses. Five of the conference's six bowl losses were by a touchdown or less, just like virtually every league game in the regular season. North Carolina tallied four losses on the year by a combined nine points, played 11 of 12 games against FEI top-50 teams, and stomped No. 14 Georgia Tech, No. 20 Rutgers, and No. 26 Connecticut. Is the Tarheels' profile disproportionately boosted by its early-season domination of teams that turned their season around? FEI doesn't factor in when the games were played, perhaps to a fault. But since many interconference games are played early in the year, is there a sound, viable alternative?

The other major storyline of 2008 was the Utah Utes, a team that has received well-deserved attention and recognition for its undefeated season and dismantling of Alabama in the Sugar Bowl. The win boosted their FEI rating as much as any team in the final standings, but they still don't move into the conversation of elite teams according to this system. This system, like any computer ranking system, is cold and calculating. But that doesn't make it necessarily any more "right" about Utah or the other top teams in 2008 than any other individual's opinion. A human opinion (mine) created the algorithm that produced the FEI rating, and the ratings for Utah, North Carolina, and even Florida are simply observations of data processed by the algorithm.

Does a formula, any formula, reveal something about the teams that we might not observe as fans of the game? I created FEI not as mathematician seeking a thesis subject, but as a fan looking for a more objective and true evaluation of data fromt the game I love. As a fan of college football, I saw an ultra-motivated Utah team in the Sugar Bowl that would give fits to any team in college football this year, including the Gators, Trojans, and Longhorns. As an analyst, I'm trying to reach more tangible conclusions about not just that particular game, but every game played by Utah and the other 119 FBS teams in 2008. As I illustrated with "The Cloud" [8] in the final pre-bowl FEI ratings column, college football teams are perhaps not best categorized linearly, despite our inclinations as analysts, writers, and fans to rank them that way. We want to argue over "Who's Number One?," even when, or especially when, the answer is complicated. And so before we rev up next year's debate over "Who's Number One?," Football Outsiders will continue to develop new statistical strategies to best answer that question. See you next season.