clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Drive-Point Efficiency Report for Week 3

New, 4 comments

How good is your team at converting possessions into points and keeping their opponents from doing the same? (To read more about Drive-Point Efficiency, click here.)

Scott Halleran

The top ten and bottom ten teams for offensive and defensive drive-point efficiency follow.  A positive number is the average number MORE than the expected point value for a drive starting at a given point on the field. A negative number indicates that a team's offense is average fewer points per drive than the expected points. Higher is always better. The numbers are reversed for defense ... lower is always better.

Offense

+/- Exp Pts

per Drive

Defense

+/- Opp Exp

Pts per Drive

Florida State 2.59 Texas State -1.17
Navy 2.4 USC -1.17
Baylor 2.25 Georgia Tech -1.17
Oregon 2.19 Baylor -1.15
Georgia Tech 2.18 Virginia Tech -1.10
Texas A&M 2.05 Miami (Florida) -1.08
LSU 1.70 Louisville -1.06
Indiana 1.65 Michigan State -1.03
UCLA 1.63 Arizona -1.03
Memphis -0.93 California 1.04
Florida Atlantic -1.02 Massachusetts 1.04
San Diego State -1.07 Oregon State 1.07
Virginia -1.08 Georgia 1.08
Southern Mississippi -1.09 UAB 1.20
Hawai'i -1.10 Miami (Ohio) 1.26
Massachusetts -1.11 New Mexico State 1.27
Miami (Ohio) -1.28 Kent State 1.34
Florida International -1.40 Nevada 1.42
Michigan State -1.43 Air Force 1.58

Mapped together as a scatterplot gives a clearer picture of how teams are performing in both efficiency measures together.  Teams in the upper right quadrant are better than average in both measures.  Teams in the lower left quadrant are below average in both measures.  Nor surprisingly, there is a strong correlation between positions in the upper left quadrant and being highly ranked in the polls.  The opposite is also true.

The offensive numbers that some teams are putting up will likely fall significantly as teams enter conference play in the next few weeks.  Along with the Week 4 Drive-Point Efficiency report next week I'll have an analysis of the correlation between the efficiencies and win-loss records.