Adjusted Points per Possession (since 2005)

[Louie and Bouie]

As stated on numerous occasions in statistical threads I believe the only way to compare/contrast offensive and defensive efficiency across different seasons/coaches/schemes/pace/conferences is through a statistical measurement called points per possession. I have found an advanced statistical site (highly recommended for statistical junkies) called cfbanalytics.com which does a very thorough job of sorting out advanced statistics for college football. This particular measure takes points per possession and adjusts it to account for home field advantage and strength of schedule. Thus, the actual points per possession of a team is modified to account for these issues and its relabeled adjusted points per possession. The bracketed number after the points per possession number is the national ranking among FBS schools. All seasons since Coach P was terminated are included in the following post.

As with any statistic there are flaws but the rankings under this particular statistic strongly correlate to season success in the W/L column and the highest ranked teams in these categories strongly correlate to the highest ranked teams in the nation so I submit it is a very strong indicator of team success over the course of a season.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

Season----Offensive PPP (Rank)----Defensive PPP (Rank)----SOS

Robinson

2005----------1.37 (99)----------------------2.37 (52)-----------------------35
2006----------1.58 (89)----------------------1.97 (46)-----------------------17
2007----------1.56 (102)---------------------3.26 (112)----------------------22
2008----------1.65 (97)----------------------2.71 (94)-----------------------33

Avg. offensive ranking - 97
Avg. defensive ranking - 76

Marrone

2009----------1.93 (79)----------------------2.61 (87)----------------------41
2010----------1.83 (87)----------------------2.00 (30)---------------------76
2011----------2.02 (70)----------------------2.54 (69)----------------------42
2012----------2.55 (36)----------------------2.40 (61)----------------------44

Avg. offensive ranking - 68
Avg. defensive ranking - 62

Shafer

2010----------1.62 (95)---------------------2.04 (46)---------------------35
2011----------1.45 (111)---------------------1.91 (28)----------------------43
2012----------2.13 (57)---------------------2.63 (96)--------------------- 16

Avg. offensive ranking - 88
Avg. defensive ranking - 57

Babers

2016----------1.78 (91)---------------------2.67 (91)----------------------12
2017----------1.91 (75)---------------------2.36 (70)----------------------8

Avg. offensive ranking - 83
Avg. defensive ranking - 81

 

[orange_in_VA]

Nice work. Will be interesting to see responses

 

[upperdeck]

it shows you the value of short fields and pts off turnovers/STs. we got almost none this year.

 

[GoSU96]

That is one way to look at it. I still think it is worth looking at relative production to the rest of the population and relative to recent performance over time as well at a raw yardage level. It doesn't factor all that other stuff but when multiple categories are looked at over time it does tell a story. Here's a visual starting with Gerg's last year, Marrone's last year, and every year since. For 2017 I've included before Wake Forest and then final.

The improvement this year was real and significant, and then it cratered in three games.

 

[GoSU96]

Same with the Offense

 

[OttoinGrotto]

it shows you the value of short fields and pts off turnovers/STs. we got almost none this year.

Yep. We needed the defense to do such a good job on 3rd down because we weren't forcing turnovers and Riley wasn't gaining chunks back on punt return. Once the defense got shaky on third down, we were hosed.

 

[TheCusian]

Season----Offensive PPP (Rank)----Defensive PPP (Rank)----SOS

Robinson

2005----------1.37 (99)----------------------2.37 (52)-----------------------35
2006----------1.58 (89)----------------------1.97 (46)-----------------------17
2007----------1.56 (102)---------------------3.26 (112)----------------------22
2008----------1.65 (97)----------------------2.71 (94)-----------------------33

Avg. offensive ranking - 97
Avg. defensive ranking - 76

Marrone

2009----------1.93 (79)----------------------2.61 (87)----------------------41
2010----------1.83 (87)----------------------2.00 (30)---------------------76
2011----------2.02 (70)----------------------2.54 (69)----------------------42
2012----------2.55 (36)----------------------2.40 (61)----------------------44

Avg. offensive ranking - 68
Avg. defensive ranking - 62

Shafer

2010----------1.62 (95)---------------------2.04 (46)---------------------35
2011----------1.45 (111)---------------------1.91 (28)----------------------43
2012----------2.13 (57)---------------------2.63 (96)--------------------- 16

Avg. offensive ranking - 88
Avg. defensive ranking - 57

Babers

2016----------1.78 (91)---------------------2.67 (91)----------------------12
2017----------1.91 (75)---------------------2.36 (70)----------------------8

Avg. offensive ranking - 83
Avg. defensive ranking - 81

Season----Offensive PPP (Rank)----Defensive PPP (Rank)----SOS

Robinson

2005----------1.37 (99)----------------------2.37 (52)-----------------------35
2006----------1.58 (89)----------------------1.97 (46)-----------------------17
2007----------1.56 (102)---------------------3.26 (112)----------------------22
2008----------1.65 (97)----------------------2.71 (94)-----------------------33

Avg. offensive ranking - 97
Avg. defensive ranking - 76

Marrone

2009----------1.93 (79)----------------------2.61 (87)----------------------41
2010----------1.83 (87)----------------------2.00 (30)---------------------76
2011----------2.02 (70)----------------------2.54 (69)----------------------42
2012----------2.55 (36)----------------------2.40 (61)----------------------44

Avg. offensive ranking - 68
Avg. defensive ranking - 62

Shafer

2010----------1.62 (95)---------------------2.04 (46)---------------------35
2011----------1.45 (111)---------------------1.91 (28)----------------------43
2012----------2.13 (57)---------------------2.63 (96)--------------------- 16

Avg. offensive ranking - 88
Avg. defensive ranking - 57

Babers

2016----------1.78 (91)---------------------2.67 (91)----------------------12
2017----------1.91 (75)---------------------2.36 (70)----------------------8

Avg. offensive ranking - 83
Avg. defensive ranking - 81

Great work and really helpful. I'll have some more thoughts soon.

How do they calculate SoS in general? Shafer's last year is way higher than what I found with sagarin, for example. But it does correctly show the bump in SoS over the last few years. And how do they weigh it in their PPP ranking *exactly*?


.

 

[TheCusian]

Yep. We needed the defense to do such a good job on 3rd down because we weren't forcing turnovers and Riley wasn't gaining chunks back on punt return. Once the defense got shaky on third down, we were hosed.

I'm going to dig into it and find more proof - but I have a suspicion that Dungey keeping the O on the field longer (mostly by running and better efficiency) helps our D. Mahoney/Rex don't stay on the field, giving the ball back at a higher clip, but still using tempo.

That combined with losing some key people on D, 3rd down % on D coming back to earth - and it looked like 2016 redux.

 

[reedny]

Same with the Offense

View attachment 116316

Passing tanks when Dungey's out, no surprise.

 

[Alsacs]

You can create whatever stats you want Greg Robinson was the gold standard for crappy HC.
Scott Shafer was the silver.
People can be skeptical all they want about Dino.
Fact is my eyes told me all I need to say Gerg and Shafer were garbage.

 

[Chip]

Same with the Offense

View attachment 116316

I'm more a fan of this than anything else. I know there's yards per play, and points, and they're important.

But when you're rebuilding with an offensive minded coach, you better be able to get the yards per game up first. If you can do that, the rest will eventually fall into place with the players you recruit, how you develop them, and their familiarity.

I think it's the most encouraging thing about this regime, and why I want to scream when people think they'd be ready to jump off this ship next year.

Too many years under Robinson and Shafer, we'd get 400 yards and celebrate it, it was rare. The last two years we've averaged 441 and 456 respectively. It's just going to keep going up, and it's going to turn into points, and it's going to be more points than the other team can keep up with.

 

[GoSU96]

I'm more a fan of this than anything else. I know there's yards per play, and points, and they're important.

But when you're rebuilding with an offensive minded coach, you better be able to get the yards per game up first. If you can do that, the rest will eventually fall into place with the players you recruit, how you develop them, and their familiarity.

I think it's the most encouraging thing about this regime, and why I want to scream when people think they'd be ready to jump off this ship next year.

Too many years under Robinson and Shafer, we'd get 400 yards and celebrate it, it was rare. The last two years we've averaged 441 and 456 respectively. It's just going to keep going up, and it's going to turn into points, and it's going to be more points than the other team can keep up with.

At the end of the day do you want to be more efficient, hell yes. But for this system is to be able to get plays off quickly, and that's an efficiency test on it's own. This team was hard to play on the long field. Obviously as the field tightened up most opponents were able to take advantage of the athletic mismatches they had and keep points off the board.

 

[Chip]

At the end of the day do you want to be more efficient, hell yes. But for this system is to be able to get plays off quickly, and that's an efficiency test on it's own. This team was hard to play on the long field. Obviously as the field tightened up most opponents were able to take advantage of the athletic mismatches they had and keep points off the board.

Or sometimes we just shot ourselves in the foot. There's always going to be mistakes, but I believe that rate will decrease. I read that Axe article about the biggest regrets from the season, god was that depressing. Points lost by a couple of 5 in the backfield calls. Points probably cost on the Chubb flop that should have been offsetting. Drives stopped by no calls on blatant offsides in CigarGate. That can't be a normal amount of dog s h ! t. Then throw in the dropped passes...

 

[Millhouse]

As stated on numerous occasions in statistical threads I believe the only way to compare/contrast offensive and defensive efficiency across different seasons/coaches/schemes/pace/conferences is through a statistical measurement called points per possession. I have found an advanced statistical site (highly recommended for statistical junkies) called cfbanalytics.com which does a very thorough job of sorting out advanced statistics for college football. This particular measure takes points per possession and adjusts it to account for home field advantage and strength of schedule. Thus, the actual points per possession of a team is modified to account for these issues and its relabeled adjusted points per possession. The bracketed number after the points per possession number is the national ranking among FBS schools. All seasons since Coach P was terminated are included in the following post.

As with any statistic there are flaws but the rankings under this particular statistic strongly correlate to season success in the W/L column and the highest ranked teams in these categories strongly correlate to the highest ranked teams in the nation so I submit it is a very strong indicator of team success over the course of a season.

I don't know much about this stat - but if it includes overtimes, kick returns, and turnover returns, it will be misleading. quality of kickers can change it a lot too, which might not be accurate when you're trying to just evaluate the offense

 

[Millhouse]

it shows you the value of short fields and pts off turnovers/STs. we got almost none this year.

if you want your offense to look really good, go to overtime when defenses are gassed

 

[Alsacs]

if you want your offense to look really good, go to overtime when defenses are gassed

2015 SU Orange scored 20 points in 4 OT sessions.

Sometimes people use stats when the eye test tells you all you need.
Babers has made mistakes these last 2 years but he is clearly an upgrade over the previous HC.
Just like Marrone was over Robinson.

 

[Millhouse]

shafer in 2015 2.08 points per possession
they scored 327
so (rounding) they had 157 possessions

6 tds from defense and special teams
1 td in ot against CMU
2 td in ot against UVA

I don't know if they count the defensive scores as possession

if they do, they would've had 264 offensive points in regulation on 153 possession

2.08 falls to 1.73, a 17% drop

 

[Millhouse]

Same with the Offense

View attachment 116316

 

[Trueblue25]

Three 4* recruits in 2018
Win vs the national championship favorite

Lost to lsu/miami/fsu by only a combined 20 points on the ROAD.

All this with inarguably the least depth in the acc atlantic and after inheriting a dumpster.

Dino’s putting out the flames and giving recruits a system, a coach and a program to believe in.

 

[Millhouse]

As stated on numerous occasions in statistical threads I believe the only way to compare/contrast offensive and defensive efficiency across different seasons/coaches/schemes/pace/conferences is through a statistical measurement called points per possession. I have found an advanced statistical site (highly recommended for statistical junkies) called cfbanalytics.com which does a very thorough job of sorting out advanced statistics for college football. This particular measure takes points per possession and adjusts it to account for home field advantage and strength of schedule. Thus, the actual points per possession of a team is modified to account for these issues and its relabeled adjusted points per possession. The bracketed number after the points per possession number is the national ranking among FBS schools. All seasons since Coach P was terminated are included in the following post.

As with any statistic there are flaws but the rankings under this particular statistic strongly correlate to season success in the W/L column and the highest ranked teams in these categories strongly correlate to the highest ranked teams in the nation so I submit it is a very strong indicator of team success over the course of a season.

i do agree it's highly correlated with wins and losses because it's hard to get an improvement out of your offense that will match the significance of luckier scores not from the offense

 

[TheCusian]

Here's what's wild. Based on Louie and Bouie stats, you'd think that ranking of the coaches based on O/D PPP should be:

1. Marrone
2. Shafer
3. Robinson
4. Babers

Now, rank them by win % and use the stats from the OP SoS:

1. Marrone (25-25) .500 vs AVG SoS of 50.75
2. Shafer (14-23) .378 vs AVG SoS of 31.3
3. Babers (8-16) .333 vs AVG SoS of 10
4. Robinson (5-37) .119 vs AVG SoS of 26.4

I love stats and digging into this stuff, but their are always blind spots with every tool. Louie and Bouie references that but also said that these PPP numbers were a good indicator of the W/L records. In the case of Dino Babers, I'm not so sure.

He's winning at a decent clip vs the toughest schedule with the worst Points per Possession stats?

Here's the coaches ranked by record vs FBS teams with winning records (I left out Robinson, because it's bad and I'm too lazy to look it up).

1. Marrone vs FBS Winning: 9-19 (.321)
2. Babers vs FBS Winning: 4-13 (.235)
3. Shafer vs FBS Winning: 6-20 (.230)

Now he's beating more good teams with a tougher schedule and worse Points per Possession stats than his predecessor?

I think Millhouse is right about quality of kicker playing a part. And OT, etc.

 

[Millhouse]

At the end of the day do you want to be more efficient, hell yes. But for this system is to be able to get plays off quickly, and that's an efficiency test on it's own. This team was hard to play on the long field. Obviously as the field tightened up most opponents were able to take advantage of the athletic mismatches they had and keep points off the board.

i don't expect passing efficiency to be great with a dual threat qb playing at this pace. there's a tradeoff because accuracy suffers when you're really tired. it might be worth the tradeoff if the rushing is dynamic enough. if not, i just want a qb athletic enough to keep defenses honest with 6 yard runs after pulling the handoff. sorta like nassib in 2012 actually

 

[TheCusian]

Tempo is getting us more possessions and giving the other team more possessions. 1 to 1.5 more a game over the prior coaches.

So, while we are less efficient at scoring points per possession, we're also gaining extra chances to score. IMO, I think Dungey keeps us on the field and makes it more likely for us to score AND keeps the other team off the field. Our 3rd down % on D helped a ton too.

I'd bet the points per possession excluding the last 3 games would be higher on O and lower on D. I'd bet the stats show what our eyeballs all know - we're better with Dungey than without. (I'm really amped to see what a pocket guy with quick reads and accuracy can do with the tempo multiplier - Tommy D?)