FEI Week 13 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 Sunday, November 23. Only games between FBS teams are considered.

Rank	Team	Record	FEI	Last Week	vs. Top 10	vs. Top 40	GE	GE Rank	SOS	SOS Rank
1	Florida	9-1	0.314	1	0-0	3-1	0.461	1	0.403	64
2	Penn State	10-1	0.284	3	0-0	4-1	0.353	5	0.370	57
3	Texas	10-1	0.277	4	1-0	3-1	0.364	3	0.253	39
4	Oklahoma	9-1	0.273	7	0-1	3-1	0.360	4	0.244	38
5	USC	9-1	0.259	5	0-0	3-1	0.397	2	0.468	78
6	North Carolina	6-4	0.249	2	2-0	6-3	0.102	21	0.160	12
7	Georgia Tech	6-3	0.228	10	2-1	4-3	0.098	23	0.139	9
8	Alabama	11-0	0.227	8	0-0	3-0	0.294	8	0.429	70
9	Florida State	6-3	0.221	13	0-2	4-3	0.099	22	0.166	14
10	Boston College	7-3	0.214	11	1-2	5-3	0.075	32	0.116	4
11	Texas Tech	8-1	0.195	6	1-1	2-1	0.238	12	0.243	37
12	Ohio State	9-2	0.189	9	0-2	3-2	0.168	17	0.211	31
Rank	Team	Record	FEI	Last Week	vs. Top 10	vs. Top 40	GE	GE Rank	SOS	SOS Rank
13	Mississippi	6-4	0.176	16	1-1	1-3	0.121	19	0.166	13
14	Virginia Tech	6-4	0.174	12	2-2	2-3	0.043	41	0.137	8
15	Iowa	7-4	0.171	15	1-0	2-3	0.169	16	0.279	44
16	Ball State	10-0	0.163	14	0-0	0-0	0.317	6	0.748	115
17	Pittsburgh	7-3	0.160	17	0-0	3-2	0.078	30	0.350	50
18	Missouri	8-2	0.158	18	0-1	0-2	0.242	11	0.385	61
19	Cincinnati	8-2	0.157	26	0-1	4-2	0.060	35	0.222	33
20	Clemson	4-5	0.149	27	1-3	3-4	0.006	56	0.130	6
21	Wake Forest	6-5	0.147	20	1-1	4-3	0.016	53	0.174	16
22	Georgia	8-2	0.131	25	0-2	1-2	0.049	38	0.191	21
23	Connecticut	6-4	0.130	22	0-1	2-4	0.061	33	0.276	41
24	Utah	11-0	0.129	23	0-0	2-0	0.261	9	0.653	106
25	West Virginia	6-3	0.125	29	0-0	2-1	0.077	31	0.465	77

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.

Rank	Team	Record	AOE	AOE Rank	ADE	ADE Rank	OE	OE Rank	DE	DE Rank
1	Florida	9-1	0.452	5	-0.452	4	0.545	10	-0.663	1
2	Penn State	10-1	0.521	3	-0.402	11	0.528	11	-0.498	6
3	Texas	10-1	0.523	2	-0.411	10	0.915	2	-0.198	31
4	Oklahoma	9-1	0.642	1	-0.333	18	0.891	3	-0.162	36
5	USC	9-1	0.396	8	-0.441	6	0.473	13	-0.614	2
6	North Carolina	6-4	0.146	34	-0.509	1	-0.137	74	-0.300	17
7	Georgia Tech	6-3	0.380	9	-0.287	22	0.045	45	-0.280	19
8	Alabama	11-0	0.284	19	-0.417	8	0.110	39	-0.602	3
9	Florida State	6-3	0.275	21	-0.322	19	0.021	50	-0.204	30
10	Boston College	7-3	0.210	25	-0.464	3	-0.130	70	-0.490	7
11	Texas Tech	8-1	0.520	4	-0.271	25	0.960	1	0.096	79
12	Ohio State	9-2	0.191	27	-0.393	14	0.036	47	-0.429	9
Rank	Team	Record	AOE	AOE Rank	ADE	ADE Rank	OE	OE Rank	DE	DE Rank
13	Mississippi	6-4	0.281	20	-0.293	21	0.124	37	-0.265	20
14	Virginia Tech	6-4	0.003	63	-0.362	16	-0.265	93	-0.244	24
15	Iowa	7-4	0.139	35	-0.441	5	0.054	44	-0.457	8
16	Ball State	10-0	0.296	16	-0.272	24	0.768	5	-0.249	23
17	Pittsburgh	7-3	0.356	11	-0.138	41	0.224	26	0.004	69
18	Missouri	8-2	0.369	10	-0.075	52	0.736	6	0.066	75
19	Cincinnati	8-2	0.091	50	-0.370	15	-0.067	61	-0.230	25
20	Clemson	4-5	0.029	58	-0.477	2	-0.278	97	-0.384	11
21	Wake Forest	6-5	-0.122	81	-0.437	7	-0.370	108	-0.216	28
22	Georgia	8-2	0.413	6	-0.067	53	0.152	34	-0.091	50
23	Connecticut	6-4	0.081	51	-0.415	9	-0.069	62	-0.355	12
24	Utah	11-0	0.098	48	-0.206	33	0.211	28	-0.320	15
25	West Virginia	6-3	0.174	30	-0.218	31	-0.056	59	-0.316	16

The Week 13 FEI Ratings for all 120 FBS teams can be found here [4]. Expanded FEI Ratings data can be found here [5].

Don't Count On Anything

At this point last season, the eventual national champions hadn't yet lost their second game. LSU had survived their mid-season triple-overtime loss to Kentucky and had re-ascended to the top of the BCS standings, only to fall to Arkansas Thanksgiving weekend, again in triple-overtime. This year has been marked more by crazy blowouts than crazy upsets, but we might be in for both this weekend.

Tie-breaking controversies loom in the Big 12 South, three non-BCS-conference undefeated teams are looking for a shot, and there has been more "resume" versus "deserve" debate than in any year I can remember. But I wonder, as I did several weeks ago, why are we taking an undefeated finish by the top teams as some sort of given?

The nation pretty much agrees that six great teams still playing football are worth discussing: Alabama, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and USC. (Penn State and Utah have concluded their regular seasons). All six are undefeated or have suffered only one loss, all have looked like the greatest team on the planet at least once this year, and all may rightly pose a strong argument for a college football playoff. Alabama and Florida have a showdown date next weekend, but none can look past this week, even though FEI projects each of them to win. As we have seen with Projected Win Expectations (PWE), that doesn't mean they all will.

In fact, according to this week's PWE, the projected likelihood that all six will win is only 41.1 percent. Florida and Oklahoma have the toughest tests, and both are on the road. An Oklahoma State victory over the Sooners would throw the biggest wrench into the BCS, but if you're really rooting for chaos, root for Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, and Baylor. Has anyone thought about breaking a four-way tie in the Big 12 South?

Special Attention

The Michigan Wolverines mercifully concluded their season on Saturday with a 42-7 drubbing at the hands of Ohio State. Like the Penn State game back in Week 8, the Wolverines fought competitively into halftime before being overwhelmed and dominated down the stretch. Michigan's year-long struggles were exposed on both sides of the ball, and their season postscript will likely focus on an underperforming defense and an overhauled and underaged offense learning (slowly) along the way.

What might be overlooked is special teams. The Wolverines punt unit was capable, though well-practiced, kicking more often per game than all but one other team in the country (Central Florida). The field goal, kickoff, punt return and kickoff return teams were unremarkable, at least as far as conventional stats go. But something in the Ohio State game box score made me take another look: Michigan fumbled a first quarter punt return and a fourth quarter kickoff return against the Buckeyes.

In a 35-point blowout loss, those types of miscues are largely inconsequential. The Buckeyes scored a short-field touchdown after the fourth quarter cough-up, and the Wolverines forced back-to-back three-and-outs to escape the first fumble unscathed. So what? If Michigan fans haven't been counting along, these were the seventh and eighth fumbles lost by special teams return units on the season. That total is four more than any other team in the nation in 2008, and three more than any other team in 2007. Only one Michigan opponent returned the favor even once on special teams all season, and it was a long time ago -- Utah fumbled away the very first punt of Michigan's forgettable season just 90 seconds into the opening quarter in Week 1.

How damaging were those turnovers? Michigan gave up 104 more points than it scored in 2008, and the eight special teams turnovers directly led to seven scores and 45 total opponent points. The opponent's field position alone was worth 31 points to an average offense; had Michigan retained possession, their eight drives headed the other way would have been worth 16 points to an average offense, a 47-point swing in field position scoring expectation. Only twice this year did Michigan return a punt for a score of their own, once each against Purdue and Northwestern, but the Wolverines gave back a special teams fumble in each of those games as well.

On top of the turnovers, Michigan frequently flirted with special teams disaster by mishandling kicks, often pinning themselves deep after gathering in the ball. Michigan failed to return a kickoff to the 20-yard line 13 times in 2008, and those drives netted one field goal and one safety on the season. Overall in field position, Michigan dug itself a 36.7-point expecation hole relative to its opponents this year, about three points per game. The only teams worse off in 2008 were Washington State (1-10) and Eastern Michigan (1-9).

Notre Dame suffered a similar field position deficit last season, and of course, a similar record. When you are in the midst of rebuilding, it certainly doesn't help to be so snake-bitten in such a fundamental area. Taking care of the ball in the return game probably won't top the to-do list of Rich Rodriguez, but maybe it should.