Once again, March Madness duties and behind-the-scenes work on the 2012 college football team profiles has led me to neglecting Study Hall, which begins to drive me crazy after a while. Consider this a large peace offering.
As part of last year's team profiles, I included a piece about Turnover Margins and Adjusted Turnover Margins. Basically, the adjusted turnover margins took a bit of fumbles luck into account -- it basically looked at what a team's turnover margin would have been had they recovered 50 percent of all fumbles in all games. That hinted at luck while still maintaining that a good portion of forcing and committing turnovers still relies on skill to one degree or another.
This year, I'm taking it a step further. Here are some further adjustments you will see in this year's version of the Adjusted Turnover Margin when profiles begin to roll out soon:
- Further Fumbles Adjustment. In total, defenses recovered 51.3 percent of an offense's fumbles in 2011, so instead of simply looking at a 50-50 split of all fumble recoveries, I'm applying that slight adjustment to the totals. If your opponents fumbled 40 times and you fumbled 20 times, that's 60 total fumbles, but you could have been expected to recover slightly more than an even 30.0 of them. By my quick math, it would be closer to 30.3 of them. This is a tiny adjustment, obviously, but an adjustment nonetheless.
- PBUs are sometimes dropped interceptions. In 2011, the 120 FBS teams intercepted 1,436 passes and "broke up" 5,131. That means that 21.9 percent of what we call "passes defended" were interceptions. Only, the spread from team to team was enormous. For N.C. State, 43.5 percent of their passes defended were INTs. For Akron, 6.7 percent.
I looked at this data from year to year and found that, though it would appear based somewhat on skill (N.C. State had David Amerson and Akron didn't, after all), a team's year-to-year percentages have almost no correlation. Georgia's Bacarri Rambo was second in the country in interceptions (eight), but in his three years of participation, the Bulldogs' ratio of interceptions to overall passes defended has gone from 19.6% in 2009, to 35.6% in 2010, to 27.0% in 2011. Some years, you catch them. Others, you don't.
So what that means here is that we are going to look at a team's ratio of interceptions to passes defended and apply it to the Adjusted Turnover Margin as well. Even with Amerson, we can safely assume that part of their ridiculous 27 interceptions were caused by luck, and as we know, luck is incredibly fickle.
(NOTE: this data is readily available for defenses, but not offenses, i.e. the number of passes they threw that were broken up. So for this go-round, we are only looking at the defensive numbers.) - Turnover Luck Per Game. I have found that, on average, turnovers are worth about 5.0 points. (For more on Turnover Points, start here.) So if we apply that point value to the difference between a team's turnover margin and its adjusted turnover margin, we can also take a look at how many points they tended to gain or lose from turnovers luck.
After the jump: a huge turnovers-related data dump.
Below, you will find an enormous table with the following fields:
- Total Fumbles: the total number of fumbles in a given team's games, both committed by the team and its opponent.
- Fumbles Recovered: the total number of fumbles a team recovered on both sides of the ball.
- FR%: a team's fumble recovery percentage (Total Fumbles divided by Fumbles Recovered).
- Interceptions (Offense): the number of interceptions thrown by a team on offense.
- Interceptions (Defense): the number of passes intercepted by a team on defense.
- PBU: the number of passes a team broke up on defense. (Interceptions + PBU = Passes Defended.)
- Offensive Turnovers: the number of turnovers committed by a team on offense.
- Defensive Turnovers: the number of takeaways recorded by a team on defense.
- Turnover Margin: Defensive Turnovers minus Offensive Turnovers.
- Adj. Turnover Margin: a team's turnover margin based on adjustments described above.
- Turnover Luck Per Game: (Adj. Turnover Margin * 5.0 points) / Games Played
Five Teams Who Benefited Most From Turnovers Luck
1. Michigan (+3.97 points/game)
2. Maryland (+3.97)
3. N.C. State (+3.61)
4. South Carolina (+3.61)
5. Oklahoma State (+3.40)
Five Teams Who Suffered The Most From Turnovers Luck
1. Texas A&M (-4.28 points/game)
2. SMU (-4.17)
3. Utah State (-3.77)
4. Fresno State (-3.68)
5. Duke (-3.45)
That's right, luck potentially cost Texas A&M over four points per game in a season in which they lost four games by four points or less.
Enjoy.
Team |
TOTAL
FUM.
|
FUM.
REC'D
|
FR% | Off INT | Def INT | PBU | Off TO | Def TO | TO Margin |
Adj. TO Margin |
TO Luck/
Game
|
Air Force | 55 | 26 | 47.3% | 8 | 12 | 23 | 26 | 26 | 0 | -2.9 | 1.13 |
Akron | 41 | 22 | 53.7% | 11 | 2 | 28 | 24 | 15 | -9 | -6.0 | -1.25 |
Alabama | 30 | 15 | 50.0% | 8 | 13 | 56 | 12 | 20 | 8 | 10.2 | -0.83 |
Arizona | 37 | 14 | 37.8% | 15 | 11 | 45 | 21 | 16 | -5 | 0.8 | -2.42 |
Arizona State | 48 | 27 | 56.3% | 13 | 15 | 43 | 23 | 32 | 9 | 3.8 | 2.01 |
Arkansas | 43 | 22 | 51.2% | 7 | 12 | 36 | 20 | 21 | 1 | -1.1 | 0.83 |
Arkansas State | 38 | 13 | 34.2% | 16 | 19 | 56 | 27 | 29 | 2 | 5.5 | -1.35 |
Army | 49 | 23 | 46.9% | 4 | 8 | 21 | 26 | 17 | -9 | -9.5 | 0.21 |
Auburn | 43 | 21 | 48.8% | 13 | 11 | 37 | 21 | 23 | 2 | 2.1 | -0.04 |
Ball State | 23 | 10 | 43.5% | 11 | 10 | 30 | 18 | 17 | -1 | -0.7 | -0.11 |
Baylor | 50 | 27 | 54.0% | 6 | 16 | 49 | 24 | 29 | 5 | 1.0 | 1.54 |
Boise State | 45 | 23 | 51.1% | 10 | 15 | 42 | 18 | 26 | 8 | 5.0 | 1.15 |
Boston College | 25 | 7 | 28.0% | 10 | 13 | 40 | 20 | 16 | -4 | 0.0 | -1.68 |
Bowling Green | 37 | 16 | 43.2% | 14 | 6 | 34 | 28 | 15 | -13 | -7.8 | -2.15 |
Buffalo | 27 | 15 | 55.6% | 9 | 6 | 39 | 15 | 13 | -2 | 0.3 | -0.96 |
BYU | 39 | 20 | 51.3% | 15 | 13 | 56 | 27 | 25 | -2 | -0.4 | -0.60 |
California | 46 | 27 | 58.7% | 12 | 12 | 50 | 24 | 23 | -1 | -3.6 | 1.00 |
Central Florida | 30 | 13 | 43.3% | 8 | 9 | 55 | 18 | 15 | -3 | 3.9 | -2.89 |
Central Michigan | 26 | 15 | 57.7% | 18 | 8 | 30 | 23 | 11 | -12 | -13.8 | 0.75 |
Cincinnati | 50 | 32 | 64.0% | 14 | 16 | 52 | 21 | 33 | 12 | 3.9 | 3.11 |
Team |
TOTAL
FUM.
|
FUM.
REC'D
|
FR% | Off INT | Def INT | PBU | Off TO | Def TO | TO Margin |
Adj. TO Margin |
TO Luck/
Game
|
Clemson | 46 | 20 | 43.5% | 12 | 14 | 51 | 24 | 23 | -1 | 2.2 | -1.14 |
Colorado | 38 | 18 | 47.4% | 11 | 7 | 30 | 19 | 15 | -4 | -1.9 | -0.81 |
Colorado State | 42 | 23 | 54.8% | 14 | 8 | 31 | 26 | 22 | -4 | -5.5 | 0.62 |
Connecticut | 44 | 23 | 52.3% | 9 | 18 | 54 | 23 | 31 | 8 | 4.7 | 1.39 |
Duke | 32 | 12 | 37.5% | 12 | 6 | 41 | 21 | 12 | -9 | -0.7 | -3.45 |
East Carolina | 42 | 22 | 52.4% | 20 | 7 | 36 | 35 | 21 | -14 | -12.7 | -0.55 |
Eastern Michigan | 31 | 13 | 41.9% | 8 | 5 | 43 | 17 | 12 | -5 | 3.0 | -3.33 |
Florida | 43 | 21 | 48.8% | 13 | 8 | 37 | 26 | 14 | -12 | -9.9 | -0.82 |
Florida Atlantic | 43 | 24 | 55.8% | 16 | 10 | 22 | 27 | 18 | -9 | -14.7 | 2.36 |
Florida International | 35 | 17 | 48.6% | 5 | 14 | 48 | 15 | 20 | 5 | 4.9 | 0.02 |
Florida State | 37 | 19 | 51.4% | 12 | 16 | 54 | 19 | 23 | 4 | 2.8 | 0.47 |
Fresno State | 44 | 18 | 40.9% | 10 | 5 | 44 | 23 | 9 | -14 | -4.4 | -3.68 |
Georgia | 60 | 29 | 48.3% | 14 | 20 | 54 | 25 | 32 | 7 | 4.2 | 1.00 |
Georgia Tech | 54 | 27 | 50.0% | 8 | 14 | 47 | 19 | 21 | 2 | 1.2 | 0.31 |
Hawaii | 57 | 23 | 40.4% | 10 | 14 | 52 | 26 | 24 | -2 | 3.9 | -2.26 |
Houston | 36 | 13 | 36.1% | 6 | 21 | 61 | 15 | 31 | 16 | 18.1 | -0.74 |
Idaho | 40 | 17 | 42.5% | 16 | 9 | 34 | 26 | 19 | -7 | -3.5 | -1.44 |
Illinois | 60 | 26 | 43.3% | 13 | 10 | 42 | 28 | 22 | -6 | -0.6 | -2.06 |
Indiana | 32 | 17 | 53.1% | 11 | 5 | 31 | 18 | 16 | -2 | -0.1 | -0.81 |
Iowa | 44 | 17 | 38.6% | 8 | 10 | 39 | 18 | 19 | 1 | 6.8 | -2.23 |
Team |
TOTAL
FUM.
|
FUM.
REC'D
|
FR% | Off INT | Def INT | PBU | Off TO | Def TO | TO Margin |
Adj. TO Margin |
TO Luck/
Game
|
Iowa State | 53 | 26 | 49.1% | 17 | 11 | 45 | 35 | 24 | -11 | -9.4 | -0.61 |
Kansas | 45 | 26 | 57.8% | 12 | 8 | 32 | 23 | 18 | -5 | -7.9 | 1.21 |
Kansas State | 43 | 23 | 53.5% | 6 | 18 | 45 | 15 | 27 | 12 | 6.2 | 2.23 |
Kent State | 46 | 23 | 50.0% | 9 | 14 | 39 | 19 | 31 | 12 | 9.8 | 0.94 |
Kentucky | 40 | 20 | 50.0% | 12 | 15 | 37 | 24 | 25 | 1 | -2.7 | 1.54 |
Louisiana Tech | 35 | 18 | 51.4% | 11 | 21 | 55 | 20 | 31 | 11 | 6.1 | 1.88 |
Louisville | 39 | 15 | 38.5% | 13 | 10 | 34 | 22 | 21 | -1 | 3.3 | -1.64 |
LSU | 48 | 26 | 54.2% | 5 | 18 | 58 | 10 | 30 | 20 | 16.7 | 1.17 |
Marshall | 37 | 19 | 51.4% | 15 | 14 | 46 | 27 | 29 | 2 | 0.7 | 0.51 |
Maryland | 43 | 29 | 67.4% | 16 | 11 | 30 | 23 | 27 | 4 | -5.5 | 3.97 |
Memphis | 49 | 29 | 59.2% | 8 | 12 | 29 | 18 | 30 | 12 | 4.5 | 3.11 |
Miami-FL | 39 | 18 | 46.2% | 11 | 6 | 24 | 19 | 15 | -4 | -1.9 | -0.88 |
Miami-OH | 26 | 11 | 42.3% | 11 | 10 | 37 | 21 | 17 | -4 | -1.8 | -0.93 |
Michigan | 44 | 33 | 75.0% | 16 | 9 | 35 | 22 | 29 | 7 | -3.3 | 3.97 |
Michigan State | 42 | 19 | 45.2% | 10 | 18 | 42 | 18 | 25 | 7 | 4.1 | 1.03 |
Middle Tennessee | 50 | 25 | 50.0% | 15 | 4 | 23 | 28 | 20 | -8 | -6.0 | -0.82 |
Minnesota | 31 | 16 | 51.6% | 10 | 4 | 28 | 17 | 9 | -8 | -5.6 | -1.01 |
Mississippi State | 45 | 22 | 48.9% | 13 | 12 | 39 | 20 | 20 | 0 | -0.3 | 0.13 |
Missouri | 35 | 16 | 45.7% | 11 | 13 | 51 | 19 | 22 | 3 | 5.5 | -0.98 |
Team |
TOTAL
FUM.
|
FUM.
REC'D
|
FR% | Off INT | Def INT | PBU | Off TO | Def TO | TO Margin |
Adj. TO Margin |
TO Luck/
Game
|
Navy | 41 | 23 | 56.1% | 6 | 10 | 27 | 15 | 24 | 9 | 4.6 | 1.82 |
NC State | 54 | 23 | 42.6% | 12 | 27 | 35 | 25 | 39 | 14 | 4.6 | 3.61 |
Nebraska | 48 | 29 | 60.4% | 8 | 10 | 43 | 19 | 18 | -1 | -4.7 | 1.40 |
Nevada | 41 | 24 | 58.5% | 12 | 15 | 54 | 25 | 25 | 0 | -3.6 | 1.39 |
New Mexico | 46 | 21 | 45.7% | 8 | 3 | 26 | 21 | 13 | -8 | -2.7 | -2.20 |
New Mexico State | 44 | 26 | 59.1% | 14 | 10 | 42 | 25 | 22 | -3 | -5.7 | 1.05 |
North Carolina | 48 | 23 | 47.9% | 14 | 14 | 50 | 26 | 24 | -2 | -1.1 | -0.36 |
North Texas | 40 | 23 | 57.5% | 9 | 9 | 39 | 17 | 25 | 8 | 6.6 | 0.58 |
Northern Illinois | 38 | 18 | 47.4% | 6 | 13 | 55 | 19 | 25 | 6 | 8.8 | -1.02 |
Northwestern | 32 | 16 | 50.0% | 9 | 12 | 30 | 17 | 20 | 3 | 0.2 | 1.09 |
Notre Dame | 34 | 16 | 47.1% | 17 | 8 | 41 | 29 | 14 | -15 | -11.4 | -1.37 |
Ohio | 45 | 23 | 51.1% | 11 | 15 | 60 | 27 | 27 | 0 | 0.8 | -0.27 |
Ohio State | 42 | 18 | 42.9% | 5 | 13 | 40 | 15 | 20 | 5 | 6.6 | -0.60 |
Oklahoma | 37 | 16 | 43.2% | 16 | 15 | 67 | 29 | 27 | -2 | 3.5 | -2.10 |
Oklahoma State | 42 | 25 | 59.5% | 13 | 24 | 63 | 23 | 44 | 21 | 12.2 | 3.40 |
Ole Miss | 37 | 14 | 37.8% | 13 | 10 | 30 | 25 | 17 | -8 | -4.8 | -1.34 |
Oregon | 47 | 23 | 48.9% | 7 | 17 | 74 | 20 | 29 | 9 | 12.4 | -1.20 |
Oregon State | 42 | 26 | 61.9% | 19 | 11 | 39 | 31 | 23 | -8 | -13.2 | 2.18 |
Penn State | 47 | 30 | 63.8% | 12 | 14 | 59 | 25 | 26 | 1 | -3.8 | 1.83 |
Pittsburgh | 46 | 30 | 65.2% | 14 | 8 | 47 | 22 | 21 | -1 | -4.1 | 1.17 |
Team |
TOTAL
FUM.
|
FUM.
REC'D
|
FR% | Off INT | Def INT | PBU | Off TO | Def TO | TO Margin |
Adj. TO Margin |
TO Luck/
Game
|
Purdue | 41 | 21 | 51.2% | 11 | 12 | 42 | 20 | 21 | 1 | 0.3 | 0.28 |
Rice | 42 | 24 | 57.1% | 7 | 13 | 44 | 19 | 27 | 8 | 4.4 | 1.49 |
Rutgers | 47 | 24 | 51.1% | 16 | 19 | 42 | 28 | 34 | 6 | -0.1 | 2.35 |
San Diego State | 43 | 20 | 46.5% | 8 | 15 | 49 | 16 | 28 | 12 | 12.6 | -0.25 |
San Jose State | 45 | 27 | 60.0% | 15 | 13 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 1 | -6.9 | 3.31 |
SMU | 48 | 19 | 39.6% | 19 | 6 | 48 | 32 | 16 | -16 | -5.2 | -4.17 |
South Carolina | 51 | 27 | 52.9% | 15 | 19 | 32 | 27 | 32 | 5 | -4.4 | 3.61 |
South Florida | 43 | 22 | 51.2% | 11 | 12 | 43 | 24 | 26 | 2 | 1.5 | 0.20 |
Southern Miss | 41 | 16 | 39.0% | 12 | 19 | 75 | 30 | 28 | -2 | 3.9 | -2.11 |
Stanford | 42 | 21 | 50.0% | 10 | 7 | 48 | 17 | 22 | 5 | 10.2 | -2.01 |
Syracuse | 33 | 15 | 45.5% | 9 | 10 | 27 | 19 | 21 | 2 | 1.6 | 0.15 |
TCU | 48 | 25 | 52.1% | 7 | 10 | 44 | 21 | 23 | 2 | 2.7 | -0.28 |
Temple | 36 | 16 | 44.4% | 4 | 15 | 37 | 12 | 21 | 9 | 7.4 | 0.63 |
Tennessee | 45 | 29 | 64.4% | 12 | 9 | 27 | 18 | 18 | 0 | -7.7 | 3.23 |
Texas | 40 | 22 | 55.0% | 15 | 12 | 76 | 26 | 26 | 0 | 5.2 | -2.02 |
Texas A&M | 43 | 17 | 39.5% | 15 | 7 | 55 | 24 | 15 | -9 | 2.1 | -4.28 |
Texas Tech | 48 | 25 | 52.1% | 10 | 5 | 31 | 18 | 19 | 1 | 3.0 | -0.82 |
Toledo | 39 | 23 | 59.0% | 7 | 14 | 54 | 14 | 30 | 16 | 13.5 | 0.96 |
Troy | 46 | 20 | 43.5% | 15 | 8 | 26 | 31 | 19 | -12 | -9.6 | -0.98 |
Tulane | 39 | 14 | 35.9% | 15 | 12 | 48 | 26 | 19 | -7 | -0.4 | -2.55 |
Tulsa | 45 | 18 | 40.0% | 17 | 18 | 59 | 33 | 28 | -5 | -1.7 | -1.26 |
Team |
TOTAL
FUM.
|
FUM.
REC'D
|
FR% | Off INT | Def INT | PBU | Off TO | Def TO | TO Margin |
Adj. TO Margin |
TO Luck/
Game
|
UAB | 41 | 22 | 53.7% | 15 | 9 | 21 | 26 | 21 | -5 | -9.0 | 1.66 |
UCLA | 47 | 22 | 46.8% | 9 | 14 | 47 | 26 | 21 | -5 | -4.4 | -0.21 |
UL-Lafayette | 41 | 21 | 51.2% | 10 | 14 | 45 | 23 | 23 | 0 | -1.7 | 0.67 |
UL-Monroe | 29 | 16 | 55.2% | 10 | 13 | 26 | 18 | 21 | 3 | -3.0 | 2.51 |
UNLV | 39 | 25 | 64.1% | 10 | 7 | 33 | 17 | 20 | 3 | -0.8 | 1.57 |
USC | 38 | 15 | 39.5% | 7 | 9 | 45 | 18 | 17 | -1 | 5.8 | -2.84 |
Utah | 54 | 29 | 53.7% | 10 | 19 | 56 | 23 | 33 | 10 | 5.3 | 1.79 |
Utah State | 46 | 20 | 43.5% | 6 | 4 | 46 | 24 | 15 | -9 | 0.8 | -3.77 |
UTEP | 29 | 17 | 58.6% | 17 | 12 | 41 | 27 | 19 | -8 | -11.1 | 1.28 |
Vanderbilt | 54 | 21 | 38.9% | 18 | 19 | 51 | 28 | 29 | 1 | 3.4 | -0.94 |
Virginia | 42 | 20 | 47.6% | 16 | 12 | 51 | 28 | 21 | -7 | -4.3 | -1.04 |
Virginia Tech | 39 | 23 | 59.0% | 10 | 16 | 51 | 18 | 23 | 5 | 0.0 | 1.78 |
Wake Forest | 30 | 19 | 63.3% | 8 | 13 | 59 | 12 | 21 | 9 | 7.7 | 0.49 |
Washington | 39 | 17 | 43.6% | 13 | 10 | 49 | 22 | 23 | 1 | 6.6 | -2.14 |
Washington State | 43 | 23 | 53.5% | 12 | 8 | 33 | 21 | 17 | -4 | -4.6 | 0.25 |
West Virginia | 49 | 23 | 46.9% | 9 | 14 | 42 | 22 | 23 | 1 | 0.7 | 0.13 |
Western Kentucky | 31 | 13 | 41.9% | 13 | 13 | 52 | 23 | 20 | -3 | 0.7 | -1.53 |
Western Michigan | 58 | 27 | 46.6% | 16 | 12 | 43 | 34 | 31 | -3 | -0.9 | -0.80 |
Wisconsin | 38 | 14 | 36.8% | 5 | 16 | 41 | 10 | 26 | 16 | 17.7 | -0.61 |
Wyoming | 51 | 30 | 58.8% | 11 | 13 | 38 | 19 | 31 | 12 | 5.8 | 2.40 |
Loading comments...