FEI is the Fremeau Efficiency Index, created by Brian Fremeau. Brian Fremeau is an author at Football Outsiders,ESPN and BCFToys. FEI is an advanced statistical measure for college football that tracks drive efficiency instead of per-play success.
S+P is created by Bill Connelly. Bill Connelly is an author at SBNation, RockMNation, Football Study Hall and Football Outsiders. S+P is an advanced statistical measure which combines success rate, explosiveness per play and opponent adjustments.
PAC-12 play:
Washington State at Arizona State
|
OVERALL |
When Washington State has the ball |
When Arizona State has the ball |
| Category |
Washington State
|
Arizona State
|
WSU Off |
ASU Def |
WSU Def |
ASU Off |
| F/+ Rk |
74 (-5.2%) |
19 (20.5%) |
21 (9.8%) |
28 (8.7%) |
94 (-7.7%) |
18 (11.3%) |
| S&P+ |
67 (197.9) |
29 (221.4) |
46 (104.3) |
30 (111.7) |
88 (93.6) |
34 (109.7) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
42 (111.2) |
35 (111.9) |
82 (95.7) |
40 (112.7) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
113 (83.2) |
41 (108.1) |
75 (98.1) |
73 (98.8) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
31 (117.5) |
32 (115.3) |
75 (96.3) |
22 (124.7) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
44 (109.5) |
45 (107.1) |
95 (92.6) |
42 (110.4) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
38 (114.0) |
30 (120.7) |
55 (105.6) |
35 (118.1) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
58 (103.3) |
26 (120.6) |
72 (98.0) |
25 (116.3) |
|
OVERALL |
When Washington State has the ball |
When Arizona State has the ball |
| Category |
Washington State
|
Arizona State
|
WSU Off |
ASU Def |
WSU Def |
ASU Off |
| F/+ Rk |
74 (-5.2%) |
19 (20.5%) |
21 (9.8%) |
28 (8.7%) |
94 (-7.7%) |
18 (11.3%) |
| FEI Rk |
53 (.044) |
14 (.214) |
14 (.502) |
28 (-.345) |
97 (.318) |
13 (.507) |
| Field Position |
124 (.439) |
27 (.524) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
102 (-.107) |
42 (.060) |
30 (.281) |
33 (-.199) |
116 (.464) |
53 (.067) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
35 (.708) |
77 (.678) |
96 (.717) |
32 (.713) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
27 (.525) |
51 (.424) |
103 (.533) |
39 (.499) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
47 (.159) |
75 (.139) |
110 (.198) |
61 (.130) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
6 (.221) |
49 (.130) |
108 (.179) |
61 (.139) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
28 (.463) |
50 (.352) |
119 (.526) |
53 (.404) |
| Special Team rank |
126 (-4.979) |
53 (.390) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
115 (-.439) |
29 (.288) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
116 (-.273) |
47 (-.033) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
71 (-.159) |
82 (-.183) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
128 (.403) |
48 (-.144) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
122 (.087) |
99 (-.067) |
|
|
|
|
As before, it's hard to tell what WSU is going to be like with Luke Falk taking his second start - but chances are good they're going to throw the ball a whole lot. ASU matches up well against the run but is slightly behind in passing. ASU is very good at getting turnovers, however. On defense ASU isn't likely going to run, but boy is Taylor Kelly going to pass - having a 30 point advantage against WSU and very good drive efficiency. WSU is surprisingly good at getting long drives and should have some long drives this game, but probably won't convert them. The Cougars are also one of the worst teams in the league at special teams, being bad to completely horrible at a number of spots. ASU has a small chance to get good punt returns. I'd expect a fairly convincing - though perhaps not easy - ASU win.
Arizona at Utah
|
OVERALL |
When Arizona has the ball |
When Utah has the ball |
| Category |
Arizona
|
Utah
|
UA Off |
Utah Def |
UA Def |
Utah Off |
| F/+ Rk |
32 (14.0%) |
29 (14.9%) |
37 (6.3%) |
13 (14.0%) |
39 (6.8%) |
72 (-3.0%) |
| S&P+ |
47 (208.3) |
50 (205.6) |
49 (103.7) |
35 (110.0) |
47 (104.6) |
79 (95.6) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
78 (97.0) |
19 (122.0) |
44 (108.7) |
72 (98.5) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
77 (97.6) |
38 (110.4) |
35 (111.8) |
68 (100.7) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
82 (95.6) |
13 (129.3) |
55 (103.5) |
73 (97.6) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
78 (97.3) |
11 (122.7) |
50 (104.8) |
70 (99.8) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
79 (97.3) |
41 (114.7) |
38 (116.8) |
86 (95.4) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
24 (117.6) |
54 (104.6) |
48 (107.3) |
65 (101.7) |
|
OVERALL |
When Arizona has the ball |
When Utah has the ball |
| Category |
Arizona
|
Utah
|
UA Off |
Utah Def |
UA Def |
Utah Off |
| F/+ Rk |
32 (14.0%) |
29 (14.9%) |
37 (6.3%) |
13 (14.0%) |
39 (6.8%) |
72 (-3.0%) |
| FEI Rk |
16 (.209) |
13 (.215) |
28 (.318) |
4 (-.670) |
29 (-.341) |
72 (-.095) |
| Field Position |
11 (.553) |
14 (.544) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
30 (.094) |
44 (.056) |
23 (.336) |
23 (-.380) |
74 (.072) |
106 (-.345) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
4 (.797) |
41 (.621) |
86 (.693) |
92 (.624) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
17 (.541) |
30 (.384) |
66 (.453) |
111 (.371) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
41 (.164) |
23 (.086) |
70 (.134) |
113 (.077) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
29 (.164) |
88 (.164) |
73 (.150) |
74 (.128) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
23 (.478) |
17 (.275) |
64 (.379) |
103 (.303) |
| Special Team rank |
46 (.593) |
6 (2.701) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
83 (-.122) |
6 (.605) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
55 (-.052) |
4 (.179) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
85 (-.186) |
57 (-.136) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
41 (-.154) |
10 (-.277) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
17 (-.250) |
98 (-.068) |
|
|
|
|
One of the key matchups for the South; both teams must win to keep their slim chances of going to the championship alive. I was shocked to see how poor Arizona's offense was. They're horrible at per play metrics but very strong at actually converting drives, somehow. They've got a lot of luck on their side. Utah has massive advantages on defense against Arizona, though if Arizona is going to have success it's likely via the run. Arizona's defense is fairly decent too, but they only have a 10 point advantage over Utah, so I'd expect Utah to do somewhat okay on offense and keep getting field position value against the Wildcats. Oddly enough Utah may have the most success passing the ball.
FEI thinks that these teams are basically even, with both teams having a significantly large advantage on defense. As in other games, special teams for Utah is probably the big difference here, getting major advantages when punting and returning punts and having one of the best FG kickers in the country. Since it's at Utah I think they'll squeak out a very close, gritty win. This game probably won't get a lot of points, but will get a lot of hits.
Stanford at California
|
OVERALL |
When Stanford has the ball |
When California has the ball |
| Category |
Stanford
|
California
|
FURD Off |
Cal Def |
FURD Def |
Cal Off |
| F/+ Rk |
33 (13.1%) |
47 (5.5%) |
65 (-1.5%) |
67 (-1.4%) |
11 (14.6%) |
33 (7.3%) |
| S&P+ |
22 (225.1) |
65 (199.8) |
61 (99.3) |
87 (93.6) |
10 (125.8) |
41 (106.2) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
70 (99.7) |
104 (90.4) |
1 (151.1) |
38 (114.9) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
90 (92.8) |
69 (100.8) |
4 (143.6) |
54 (106.3) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
49 (105.8) |
111 (85.1) |
4 (153.3) |
29 (118.9) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
65 (101.4) |
93 (93.4) |
4 (139.3) |
49 (106.3) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
84 (95.7) |
111 (82.4) |
2 (171.0) |
9 (141.9) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
48 (106.0) |
49 (106.3) |
39 (112.3) |
74 (98.4) |
|
OVERALL |
When Stanford has the ball |
When California has the ball |
| Category |
Stanford
|
California
|
FURD Off |
Cal Def |
FURD Def |
Cal Off |
| F/+ Rk |
33 (13.1%) |
47 (5.5%) |
65 (-1.5%) |
67 (-1.4%) |
11 (14.6%) |
33 (7.3%) |
| FEI Rk |
37 (.105) |
41 (.094) |
66 (-.060) |
61 (-.035) |
13 (-.473) |
26 (.333) |
| Field Position |
34 (.513) |
84 (.487) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
49 (.038) |
77 (-.033) |
86 (-.197) |
109 (.379) |
22 (-.370) |
33 (.261) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
60 (.673) |
121 (.772) |
59 (.660) |
15 (.746) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
70 (.442) |
118 (.573) |
21 (.358) |
32 (.509) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
93 (.102) |
105 (.187) |
12 (.072) |
23 (.180) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
80 (.122) |
100 (.171) |
79 (.155) |
30 (.164) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
59 (.390) |
114 (.514) |
7 (.241) |
43 (.421) |
| Special Team rank |
69 (-.027) |
79 (-.228) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
77 (-.074) |
72 (-.032) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
70 (-.106) |
43 (-.019) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
45 (-.119) |
21 (-.044) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
100 (.020) |
96 (.005) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
15 (-.257) |
108 (-.030) |
|
|
|
|
Despite their struggles in the win/loss column Stanford's defense is still one of the best in the nation, and Cal's offense is merely good. Cal only has a 30 point disadvantage in passing so they might get some yards - but chances are good they're pretty well bottled up for most of the game. Cal's defense matches up almost perfectly with Stanford's offense save in one major area - passing the ball, where Stanford has a 20 point advantage. I'd expect Devon Cajuste and Kevin Hogan to both have good games. FEI sees this as a much more even battle on Stanford's offense and a closer battle with Cal's offense, but Stanford still wins in both. Probably another 7-10 point win for Stanford, which is like a 40 point blowout for the Ducks.
USC at UCLA
|
OVERALL |
When USC has the ball |
When UCLA has the ball |
| Category |
USC
|
UCLA
|
USC Off |
UCLA Def |
USC Def |
UCLA Off |
| F/+ Rk |
21 (19.8%) |
17 (21.4%) |
22 (9.7%) |
43 (6.2%) |
25 (9.2%) |
10 (15.0%) |
| S&P+ |
24 (223.3) |
30 (220.8) |
28 (112.7) |
38 (109.4) |
34 (110.6) |
29 (111.4) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
35 (116.3) |
29 (114.9) |
40 (109.9) |
26 (119.6) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
67 (101.4) |
48 (106.8) |
66 (101.2) |
23 (123.7) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
17 (128.7) |
24 (122.2) |
33 (115.2) |
26 (119.9) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
68 (100.5) |
33 (112.3) |
49 (105.0) |
23 (120.6) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
6 (153.8) |
31 (119.3) |
22 (127.3) |
43 (110.3) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
19 (121.1) |
37 (112.7) |
23 (121.0) |
26 (115.7) |
|
OVERALL |
When USC has the ball |
When UCLA has the ball |
| Category |
USC
|
UCLA
|
USC Off |
UCLA Def |
USC Def |
UCLA Off |
| F/+ Rk |
21 (19.8%) |
17 (21.4%) |
22 (9.7%) |
43 (6.2%) |
25 (9.2%) |
10 (15.0%) |
| FEI Rk |
11 (.228) |
7 (.244) |
22 (.376) |
43 (-.236) |
24 (-.389) |
5 (.694) |
| Field Position |
45 (.506) |
52 (.502) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
18 (.143) |
41 (.060) |
18 (.442) |
66 (.011) |
46 (-.133) |
32 (.268) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
48 (.690) |
70 (.672) |
99 (.723) |
6 (.780) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
29 (.515) |
57 (.440) |
60 (.444) |
37 (.499) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
30 (.177) |
9 (.063) |
15 (.076) |
33 (.173) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
13 (.195) |
123 (.219) |
106 (.176) |
47 (.150) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
40 (.424) |
49 (.347) |
43 (.339) |
48 (.412) |
| Special Team rank |
45 (.614) |
61 (.143) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
27 (.319) |
57 (.083) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
13 (.111) |
106 (-.215) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
26 (-.061) |
19 (-.038) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
105 (.046) |
68 (-.084) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
111 (-.025) |
63 (-.165) |
|
|
|
|
Another critical South matchup. UCLA wins out and they're in, but their last two games are tough - this and Stanford. This one should be fun. S+P says UCLA and USC matchup well when USC has the ball, but looking into it you find that USC will have trouble running and passing. USC only has a 2 point lead when passing the ball. USC does, however, make massive gains on 3rd and long, so expect some broken coverage against UCLA here and there. UCLA's offense will likely stall if put into obvious passing situations but should also have big advantages running.
Interestingly enough, UCLA is one of the best in the nation at stopping explosive drives, so that might limit what USC can do. UCLA and USC are very closely ranked by FEI in general, and both have about a .300 point advantage on offense. If FEI is more right this will be a race. If S+P is right UCLA should win it handily. USC does have some advantages in returning kicks, but USC is horrible against defending kickoffs; if anyone gets a big return, bet on UCLA.
Oregon State at Washington
|
OVERALL |
When Oregon State has the ball |
When Washington has the ball |
| Category |
Oregon State
|
Washington
|
OSU Off |
UW Def |
OSU Def |
UW Off |
| F/+ Rk |
65 (-0.3%) |
62 (0.6%) |
52 (2.7%) |
48 (4.5%) |
72 (-2.8%) |
90 (-5.5%) |
| S&P+ |
79 (191.6) |
82 (190.8) |
73 (97.3) |
75 (96.9) |
84 (94.3) |
91 (93.9) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
56 (104.8) |
55 (103.4) |
66 (99.5) |
77 (97.0) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
31 (116.9) |
63 (102.0) |
122 (77.5) |
61 (103.5) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
79 (96.0) |
54 (104.5) |
29 (116.7) |
91 (93.5) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
53 (105.3) |
65 (100.3) |
83 (96.2) |
67 (101.0) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
66 (100.4) |
43 (111.8) |
45 (109.1) |
109 (85.0) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
87 (93.0) |
92 (91.7) |
100 (89.6) |
86 (93.4) |
|
OVERALL |
When Oregon State has the ball |
When Washington has the ball |
| Category |
Oregon State
|
Washington
|
OSU Off |
UW Def |
OSU Def |
UW Off |
| F/+ Rk |
65 (-0.3%) |
62 (0.6%) |
52 (2.7%) |
48 (4.5%) |
72 (-2.8%) |
90 (-5.5%) |
| FEI Rk |
55 (.043) |
45 (.073) |
39 (.206) |
31 (-.323) |
70 (.053) |
89 (-.211) |
| Field Position |
110 (.473) |
16 (.539) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
79 (-.039) |
50 (.037) |
61 (.010) |
36 (-.240) |
79 (.086) |
92 (-.236) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
47 (.692) |
63 (.661) |
36 (.615) |
104 (.600) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
68 (.443) |
46 (.418) |
70 (.457) |
94 (.397) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
52 (.150) |
10 (.065) |
30 (.092) |
89 (.104) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
106 (.103) |
86 (.161) |
89 (.165) |
50 (.148) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
64 (.378) |
53 (.360) |
89 (.433) |
81 (.343) |
| Special Team rank |
74 (-.112) |
26 (1.160) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
4 (.701) |
38 (.216) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
100 (-.191) |
36 (-.002) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
47 (-.123) |
22 (-.053) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
112 (.109) |
63 (-.105) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
64 (-.163) |
76 (-.126) |
|
|
|
|
Both teams need one more win to get bowl eligible, and this is Oregon State's easier chance. S+P has these teams separated by only a point. OSU should be able to run the ball somewhat effectively (a 15 point advantage) but will be hurt passing the ball and on passing downs. Washington should be able to run effectively but will be completely shut down on passing downs. I'd expect a lower scoring game with a lot of punts for this one. FEI also favors both defenses, though UW has a slightly bigger advantage on offense. UW also has much better average field position and better special teams, especially on punt returns. OSU has a better field goal kicker if it comes down to that, but this being on the road likely means UW gets their 7th win.
The best of the rest:
Kansas State at West Virginia
|
OVERALL |
When Kansas State has the ball |
When West Virginia has the ball |
| Category |
Kansas State
|
West Virginia
|
KSU Off |
WV Def |
KSU Def |
WV Off |
| F/+ Rk |
26 (17.8%) |
28 (15.9%) |
30 (7.7%) |
33 (8.5%) |
37 (7.3%) |
39 (6.2%) |
| S&P+ |
28 (221.7) |
19 (232.9) |
36 (109.6) |
18 (117.0) |
29 (112.2) |
18 (115.9) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
44 (110.2) |
17 (123.5) |
27 (117.8) |
21 (121.3) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
39 (113.3) |
27 (116.1) |
17 (127.3) |
43 (111.3) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
43 (108.9) |
10 (131.4) |
42 (110.5) |
11 (134.4) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
54 (105.1) |
19 (119.4) |
37 (111.3) |
15 (124.5) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
27 (125.3) |
19 (132.1) |
12 (138.4) |
47 (108.0) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
30 (115.0) |
18 (126.1) |
24 (120.7) |
9 (130.5) |
|
OVERALL |
When Kansas State has the ball |
When West Virginia has the ball |
| Category |
Kansas State
|
West Virginia
|
KSU Off |
WV Def |
KSU Def |
WV Off |
| F/+ Rk |
26 (17.8%) |
28 (15.9%) |
30 (7.7%) |
33 (8.5%) |
37 (7.3%) |
39 (6.2%) |
| FEI Rk |
28 (.137) |
36 (.107) |
30 (.309) |
41 (-.255) |
40 (-.257) |
46 (.126) |
| Field Position |
18 (.537) |
103 (.479) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
13 (.168) |
54 (.027) |
17 (.450) |
50 (-.155) |
61 (-.054) |
71 (-.082) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
42 (.696) |
52 (.651) |
45 (.630) |
38 (.704) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
22 (.534) |
41 (.410) |
47 (.420) |
62 (.456) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
29 (.177) |
62 (.127) |
24 (.086) |
46 (.160) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
60 (.139) |
14 (.079) |
72 (.148) |
69 (.136) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
14 (.500) |
41 (.336) |
33 (.316) |
49 (.412) |
| Special Team rank |
12 (1.881) |
41 (.800) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
79 (-.098) |
8 (.536) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
2 (.290) |
124 (-.328) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
11 (.025) |
4 (.098) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
108 (.087) |
61 (-.107) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
37 (-.202) |
83 (-.107) |
|
|
|
|
Seriously, this is one of the better matchups this week. And on paper it's actually a pretty close one. S+P likes West Virginia quite a bit, especially on defense- and really especially on passing, where they have a 20+ point margin. KState will have a tough time moving the ball. West Virginia's offense and KState's defense are very close to each other, though West Virginia also enjoys a 20 point advantage passing. If Kansas State gets behind they may stay behind forever. FEI favors Kansas State more, but only so much; they're more efficient on offense and can get more explosive drives, and West Virginia has a problem finishing drives. Both teams are great at kickoff returns. WV is horrible at kickoffs and not great at punts, which might make up for the difference. If KState can score early they've got a shot, but otherwise I think them being on the road and how they match up will be in West Virginia's favor.
North Carolina at Duke
|
OVERALL |
When North Carolina has the ball |
When Duke has the ball |
| Category |
North Carolina
|
Duke
|
UNC Off |
Duke Def |
UNC Def |
Duke Off |
| F/+ Rk |
67 (-2.1%) |
25 (18.4%) |
27 (8.1%) |
22 (10.0%) |
98 (-8.1%) |
48 (3.8%) |
| S&P+ |
80 (191.6) |
45 (209.7) |
55 (101.2) |
46 (104.7) |
104 (90.4) |
43 (105.0) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
33 (117.2) |
59 (101.5) |
99 (91.8) |
54 (105.7) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
38 (113.4) |
89 (94.4) |
91 (93.5) |
37 (115.1) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
23 (122.7) |
39 (112.9) |
105 (88.6) |
70 (98.7) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
38 (111.4) |
62 (101.3) |
79 (97.4) |
47 (107.1) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
20 (132.4) |
58 (105.0) |
116 (79.4) |
62 (101.4) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
102 (90.3) |
36 (113.3) |
76 (97.0) |
35 (111.7) |
|
OVERALL |
When North Carolina has the ball |
When Duke has the ball |
| Category |
North Carolina
|
Duke
|
UNC Off |
Duke Def |
UNC Def |
Duke Off |
| F/+ Rk |
67 (-2.1%) |
25 (18.4%) |
27 (8.1%) |
22 (10.0%) |
98 (-8.1%) |
48 (3.8%) |
| FEI Rk |
58 (.032) |
18 (.183) |
16 (.455) |
12 (-.519) |
92 (.294) |
42 (.153) |
| Field Position |
42 (.507) |
8 (.559) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
100 (-.106) |
23 (.125) |
38 (.188) |
39 (-.287) |
123 (.580) |
58 (.023) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
71 (.661) |
32 (.609) |
110 (.746) |
49 (.689) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
59 (.458) |
36 (.399) |
112 (.556) |
53 (.474) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
45 (.161) |
5 (.045) |
128 (.254) |
82 (.107) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
33 (.161) |
103 (.173) |
115 (.193) |
53 (.146) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
57 (.392) |
29 (.300) |
115 (.515) |
56 (.395) |
| Special Team rank |
109 (-1.479) |
2 (3.144) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
122 (-.762) |
25 (.342) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
122 (-.306) |
22 (.064) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
74 (-.162) |
14 (-.012) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
51 (-.139) |
6 (-.324) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
14 (-.257) |
53 (-.184) |
|
|
|
|
Yay basketball season, or something. UNC's offense and Duke's defense are almost perfectly matched up. If NC has success it'll be on longish drives where they run the ball a lot. Duke does get a lot of turnovers and NC turns it over quite a bit, so that success might be muted. Duke on offense, however, is going to rip through Carolina's defense fairly well. Duke has big advantages running the ball and on standard downs, and does complete drives well. FEI thinks that NC's offense and Duke's defense are top 20 but otherwise agrees with the relative matchups. Duke is also #2 in special teams in the nation, mostly from great punting, punt returns and kickoff returns. UNC could lose a fumble or do something very stupid when returning a punt, getting Duke really excellent field position.
Minnesota at Nebraska
|
OVERALL |
When Minnesota has the ball |
When Nebraska has the ball |
| Category |
Minnesota
|
Nebraska
|
UM Off |
NU Def |
UM Def |
NU Off |
| F/+ Rk |
35 (12.8%) |
23 (18.7%) |
51 (2.8%) |
32 (8.5%) |
42 (6.6%) |
38 (6.3%) |
| S&P+ |
38 (212.9) |
26 (223.0) |
47 (104.2) |
37 (109.7) |
40 (108.7) |
26 (113.3) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
48 (107.5) |
38 (110.9) |
33 (113.3) |
19 (121.9) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
41 (112.7) |
77 (98.0) |
32 (113.0) |
19 (124.7) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
59 (102.9) |
17 (127.2) |
38 (113.5) |
34 (115.9) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
48 (107.0) |
39 (110.8) |
31 (112.8) |
28 (116.9) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
53 (105.6) |
51 (107.4) |
44 (111.7) |
21 (129.7) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
42 (109.7) |
27 (120.3) |
44 (108.7) |
32 (113.3) |
|
OVERALL |
When Minnesota has the ball |
When Nebraska has the ball |
| Category |
Minnesota
|
Nebraska
|
UM Off |
NU Def |
UM Def |
NU Off |
| F/+ Rk |
35 (12.8%) |
23 (18.7%) |
51 (2.8%) |
32 (8.5%) |
42 (6.6%) |
38 (6.3%) |
| FEI Rk |
39 (.096) |
25 (.146) |
48 (.108) |
26 (-.363) |
38 (-.270) |
40 (.174) |
| Field Position |
12 (.552) |
3 (.564) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
31 (.081) |
15 (.164) |
68 (-.071) |
11 (-.320) |
26 (-.240) |
48 (.108) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
84 (.635) |
8 (.535) |
13 (.567) |
56 (.676) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
71 (.438) |
17 (.348) |
32 (.385) |
33 (.507) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
87 (.106) |
81 (.149) |
52 (.115) |
43 (.162) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
55 (.144) |
9 (.070) |
44 (.125) |
100 (.108) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
84 (.337) |
27 (.295) |
26 (.295) |
31 (.451) |
| Special Team rank |
9 (2.338) |
7 (2.647) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
67 (.018) |
87 (-.186) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
33 (.010) |
1 (.375) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
7 (.053) |
33 (-.078) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
28 (-.186) |
30 (-.183) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
20 (-.238) |
66 (-.154) |
|
|
|
|
As you might expect, Minnesota has an advantage against the now very bad Nebraska running defense. Nebraska has the advantage everywhere else, though. Nebraska's offense also has an advantage running the ball, so I would expect some old school big-10 action in this game. Nebraska is very efficient via FEI on defense, and that likely means they'll get a turnover or two. FEI doesn't like Nebraska's offense one bit. So S+P has a lot of running, FEI has a lot of defense, and special teams has two top 10 teams that are both great at returning kicks. I don't know what is going to happen in this game, but whatever it is it'll likely alternate between being boring and being absurdly amazing.
Ole Miss at Arkansas
|
OVERALL |
When Ole Miss has the ball |
When Arkansas has the ball |
| Category |
Ole Miss
|
Arkansas
|
MISS Off |
ARK Def |
MISS Def |
ARK Off |
| F/+ Rk |
4 (32.9%) |
30 (14.6%) |
16 (11.9%) |
34 (8.4%) |
4 (19.2%) |
29 (7.9%) |
| S&P+ |
4 (252.6) |
20 (230.6) |
11 (122.3) |
20 (115.2) |
4 (130.3) |
20 (115.4) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
11 (128.3) |
18 (122.6) |
4 (145.4) |
22 (120.4) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
45 (110.1) |
8 (135.5) |
10 (129.9) |
22 (124.2) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
7 (142.1) |
36 (113.8) |
2 (165.4) |
35 (115.6) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
13 (125.2) |
26 (116.5) |
3 (139.6) |
29 (115.5) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
16 (135.8) |
20 (131.4) |
5 (161.1) |
18 (133.3) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
2 (140.3) |
15 (128.6) |
13 (133.8) |
17 (123.0) |
|
OVERALL |
When Ole Miss has the ball |
When Arkansas has the ball |
| Category |
Ole Miss
|
Arkansas
|
MISS Off |
ARK Def |
MISS Def |
ARK Off |
| F/+ Rk |
4 (32.9%) |
30 (14.6%) |
16 (11.9%) |
34 (8.4%) |
4 (19.2%) |
29 (7.9%) |
| FEI Rk |
3 (.268) |
34 (.109) |
23 (.359) |
37 (-.273) |
5 (-.667) |
37 (.230) |
| Field Position |
6 (.562) |
56 (.499) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
6 (.220) |
37 (.064) |
44 (.154) |
67 (-.063) |
2 (-.669) |
35 (.229) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
33 (.710) |
33 (.611) |
16 (.578) |
54 (.681) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
43 (.490) |
43 (.415) |
5 (.317) |
41 (.491) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
18 (.190) |
68 (.133) |
6 (.049) |
70 (.117) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
86 (.120) |
29 (.111) |
34 (.118) |
3 (.234) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
39 (.425) |
54 (.361) |
4 (.216) |
35 (.434) |
| Special Team rank |
25 (1.170) |
103 (-1.080) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
92 (-.224) |
108 (-.393) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
120 (-.290) |
128 (-.374) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
16 (-.033) |
25 (-.060) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
11 (-.271) |
3 (-.376) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
5 (-.365) |
120 (.040) |
|
|
|
|
Ole Miss has not been mathematically eliminated from winning the SEC West - they need Auburn to beat Bama and them to win out their last two games. Ole Miss is actually very good at offense by F+, and has big advantages passing the ball on a good Arkansas defense. They are likely to get crushed when running, however. Arkansas is good across the board on offense - but Ole Miss has one of the best defenses in the country, and this doesn't look good no matter what. FEI agrees almost entirely. Arkansas is even horrible in special teams with one exception - punting the ball. Which is good, because they're going to be punting a whole lot. Ole Miss also has the 5th best kick returns in the country going against the 120th best kicking game in Arkansas. None of this bodes well for the Hogs.
Louisville at Notre Dame
|
OVERALL |
When Louisville has the ball |
When Notre Dame has the ball |
| Category |
Louisville
|
Notre Dame
|
UL Off |
ND Def |
UL Def |
ND Off |
| F/+ Rk |
16 (22.5%) |
24 (18.7%) |
43 (4.5%) |
29 (8.7%) |
5 (17.9%) |
23 (9.5%) |
| S&P+ |
15 (236.6) |
23 (224.3) |
24 (113.5) |
43 (107.2) |
12 (123.0) |
16 (117.1) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
32 (117.9) |
53 (104.2) |
25 (119.6) |
15 (125.3) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
18 (125.9) |
34 (111.8) |
26 (116.7) |
26 (120.8) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
42 (112.6) |
87 (95.0) |
20 (123.5) |
19 (127.7) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
17 (123.8) |
52 (104.2) |
25 (116.8) |
14 (124.9) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
58 (102.4) |
62 (102.4) |
28 (124.2) |
23 (126.5) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
14 (124.8) |
24 (120.7) |
10 (135.6) |
21 (120.4) |
|
OVERALL |
When Louisville has the ball |
When Notre Dame has the ball |
| Category |
Louisville
|
Notre Dame
|
UL Off |
ND Def |
UL Def |
ND Off |
| F/+ Rk |
16 (22.5%) |
24 (18.7%) |
43 (4.5%) |
29 (8.7%) |
5 (17.9%) |
23 (9.5%) |
| FEI Rk |
19 (.183) |
26 (.145) |
51 (.065) |
21 (-.410) |
3 (-.700) |
31 (.299) |
| Field Position |
92 (.483) |
35 (.513) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
29 (.098) |
27 (.100) |
102 (-.276) |
49 (-.172) |
1 (-.697) |
34 (.240) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
94 (.622) |
49 (.648) |
1 (.475) |
23 (.734) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
113 (.364) |
44 (.418) |
4 (.291) |
13 (.555) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
65 (.126) |
50 (.115) |
22 (.083) |
36 (.169) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
118 (.092) |
50 (.131) |
8 (.067) |
44 (.153) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
104 (.300) |
66 (.381) |
6 (.233) |
9 (.524) |
| Special Team rank |
64 (.108) |
59 (.307) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
24 (.348) |
106 (-.370) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
101 (-.197) |
50 (-.038) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
10 (.034) |
35 (-.094) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
115 (.118) |
52 (-.137) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
58 (-.178) |
56 (-.181) |
|
|
|
|
While Louisville is known for their running attack they may have more success passing the ball against a fairly meh Notre Dame defense. Notre Dame's offense matches up almost perfectly with Louisville's defense, with the irish having small advantages everywhere save on passing downs. Louisville is also one of the best at getting turnovers - something that should worry Everett Golson. FEI sees the Louisville offense as not good at all, however, and Notre Dame's defense being fairly maligned. The UL defense is as good as ever. Neither team has a lot going on on special teams save in one place - Louisville kickoff returns. This is probably going to be a good one to watch, particularly if you like Notre Dame losing.
Wisconsin at Iowa
|
OVERALL |
When Wisconsin has the ball |
When Iowa has the ball |
| Category |
Wisconsin
|
Iowa
|
UW Off |
IU Def |
UW Def |
IU Off |
| F/+ Rk |
13 (24.9%) |
54 (2.6%) |
24 (9.3%) |
45 (5.1%) |
8 (15.7%) |
66 (-1.9%) |
| S&P+ |
10 (245.5) |
66 (198.0) |
15 (119.5) |
53 (102.6) |
9 (126.0) |
83 (95.4) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
17 (122.8) |
51 (105.1) |
16 (123.7) |
96 (92.3) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
8 (136.0) |
45 (107.5) |
22 (118.5) |
101 (88.9) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
64 (100.8) |
60 (101.9) |
12 (129.7) |
78 (96.2) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
10 (128.9) |
54 (103.1) |
22 (117.7) |
101 (90.4) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
63 (101.3) |
52 (106.9) |
15 (135.0) |
68 (100.0) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
13 (125.0) |
71 (98.1) |
11 (135.4) |
69 (100.4) |
|
OVERALL |
When Wisconsin has the ball |
When Iowa has the ball |
| Category |
Wisconsin
|
Iowa
|
UW Off |
IU Def |
UW Def |
IU Off |
| F/+ Rk |
13 (24.9%) |
54 (2.6%) |
24 (9.3%) |
45 (5.1%) |
8 (15.7%) |
66 (-1.9%) |
| FEI Rk |
21 (.178) |
54 (.044) |
34 (.252) |
36 (-.276) |
11 (-.531) |
61 (-.026) |
| Field Position |
54 (.500) |
85 (.487) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
4 (.249) |
39 (.063) |
22 (.398) |
34 (-.284) |
4 (-.612) |
52 (.084) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
52 (.683) |
11 (.558) |
4 (.509) |
62 (.670) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
20 (.539) |
16 (.347) |
3 (.274) |
58 (.458) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
2 (.298) |
16 (.077) |
14 (.075) |
84 (.107) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
91 (.115) |
56 (.135) |
2 (.047) |
28 (.165) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
22 (.483) |
11 (.258) |
2 (.161) |
58 (.392) |
| Special Team rank |
76 (-.133) |
87 (-.439) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
20 (.396) |
91 (-.222) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
26 (.051) |
59 (-.080) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
92 (-.196) |
69 (-.157) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
117 (.154) |
86 (-.014) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
71 (-.140) |
39 (-.201) |
|
|
|
|
Seriously, this is one of the more important games. Bah. Well, the good news is that...oh, wait, there's no good news. Melvin Gordon is going up against the 45th ranked rushing defense in the country, something that Nebraska was, roughly, before he drove them into the dirt. As you might expect so long as Wisconsin stays out of passing downs they're in great shape. Wisconsin's defense is dominant across the board. I don't see Iowa scoring more than 14 points unless it's off of turnovers, which also favor Wisconsin. FEI thinks UW's offense and IU's defense match up well but still sees Wisconsin as heavily favored.
Oklahoma State at Baylor
|
OVERALL |
When Oklahoma State has the ball |
When Baylor has the ball |
| Category |
Oklahoma State
|
Baylor
|
OKST Off |
BU Def |
OKST Def |
BU Off |
| F/+ Rk |
76 (-5.9%) |
9 (28.6%) |
83 (-4.8%) |
12 (14.6%) |
77 (-3.7%) |
14 (12.6%) |
| S&P+ |
73 (195.6) |
6 (247.7) |
82 (95.4) |
5 (127.5) |
57 (100.2) |
14 (120.2) |
| Play Efficiency |
|
|
76 (97.6) |
15 (124.5) |
47 (106.7) |
16 (123.3) |
| Rushing S&P+ |
|
|
100 (89.8) |
18 (126.2) |
30 (114.0) |
34 (115.1) |
| Passing S&P+ |
|
|
44 (108.3) |
21 (123.0) |
58 (102.3) |
15 (131.4) |
| Std. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
79 (96.8) |
13 (120.9) |
48 (105.4) |
18 (123.1) |
| Pass. Downs S&P+ |
|
|
57 (102.7) |
24 (125.8) |
53 (106.7) |
33 (119.7) |
| Drive Efficiency |
|
|
75 (98.3) |
3 (147.8) |
78 (96.7) |
11 (127.0) |
|
OVERALL |
When Oklahoma State has the ball |
When Baylor has the ball |
| Category |
Oklahoma State
|
Baylor
|
OKST Off |
BU Def |
OKST Def |
BU Off |
| F/+ Rk |
76 (-5.9%) |
9 (28.6%) |
83 (-4.8%) |
12 (14.6%) |
77 (-3.7%) |
14 (12.6%) |
| FEI Rk |
87 (-.100) |
6 (.244) |
86 (-.192) |
17 (-.447) |
82 (.189) |
18 (.429) |
| Field Position |
64 (.497) |
7 (.561) |
|
|
|
|
| Raw Efficiency |
87 (-.066) |
3 (.257) |
85 (-.195) |
13 (-.446) |
72 (.120) |
19 (.431) |
| First Down rate |
|
|
97 (.616) |
6 (.515) |
46 (.636) |
7 (.775) |
| Available Yards rate |
|
|
104 (.380) |
6 (.326) |
61 (.446) |
5 (.592) |
| Explosive Drives |
|
|
71 (.116) |
58 (.124) |
92 (.164) |
15 (.196) |
| Methodical Drives |
|
|
101 (.107) |
11 (.072) |
45 (.127) |
8 (.206) |
| Value Drives |
|
|
106 (.298) |
10 (.258) |
69 (.390) |
6 (.541) |
| Special Team rank |
13 (1.787) |
31 (.962) |
|
|
|
|
| Field Goal efficiency |
36 (.220) |
43 (.162) |
|
|
|
|
| Punt Return efficiency |
81 (-.130) |
76 (-.118) |
|
|
|
|
| Kickoff return efficiency |
9 (.049) |
20 (-.040) |
|
|
|
|
| punt efficiency |
46 (-.147) |
19 (-.225) |
|
|
|
|
| kickoff efficiency |
21 (-.234) |
92 (-.085) |
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma State: expect pain. Baylor is by all accounts going to crush OKST on both sides of the ball. There's very little interesting to say about this one.
:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/44183040/459122458.0.jpg)