Football Outsiders on the 2010 Jayhawks
With football season right around the corner, it's about time to start checking in on where different publications/blogs/people place the Jayhawks in the Big 12 pecking order. For my part, I'm taking a look at Football Outsiders College Football Almanac and their thoughts on the team and the Big 12.
The Outsiders focus on advanced and specialized statistics based on data from previous years. As explained at the site, there are four main ways data can be used in looking at football. They are season data (think W/L records), game data (think pass yards per game), possession data, and play by play data. At FO, the possession data and play by play data is the focus. Possession stats are measured with the Fremeau Efficiency Index (FEI), play by play is measured with S&P Ratings. Definitions and a look at the ratings below.
Definitions from the glossary at Football Outsiders
Fremeau Efficiency Index (FEI) College football rating system created by Brian Fremeau based on measuring the success rate of a college football team scoring and preventing opponent scores during the non-garbage possessions of a game. 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.
S&P: Combination of two measures, Success Rate and PPP (EqPts Per Play). S&P combines measurement of efficiency with Success Rates and explosiveness with PPP, similar to the way baseball analysts use OPS to
combine On-Base Percentage and Slugging Percentage.
Success Rate (college football): Our Varsity Numbers column calculates Success Rate for teams, not just running backs, using a set of baselines that differ slightly from our NFL Success Rates: 50% of needed yards on first down, 70% of needed yards on second down, or 100% of needed yards on third or fourth down
Equivalent Points (EqPts): Method used by our college football analyst Bill Connelly, giving each yard line a
point value based on the average number of points a team can expect to score from that spot on the field. From there, each gain or loss is given a point value based on the change in EqPts.
For a more thorough explanation on these measures, Bill C explains it all very clearly over at Rock M Nation.
How does the Big 12 North look in the Almanac?
| Team | Mean Wins |
| Nebraska | 9.8 |
| Missouri | 7.8 |
| Kansas | 7.4 |
| Colorado | 4.8 |
| Kansas State | 3.6 |
| Iowa State | 2.8 |
It's actually better than I expected. Preseason F/+ has them as the #49 team in the country. The offense is projected to be 42nd and the defense is projected at #54. The schedule isn't the strongest, only ranking 89th but we aren't complaining about that this year. The Jayhawks are also projected at 7.4 "mean wins" and between 4-5 conference wins. From what I can tell, Kansas is getting credit for both their 5 year recruiting ranking and the easier schedule this year.
Would anyone be unhappy with 7 wins and a close finish behind Nebraska and Missouri in the Big 12 North this season?
I also checked in with one of the writers of the Football Outsiders Almanac, Bill Connelly. He writes for both Rock M Nation and Football Outsiders and is the man behind their play-by-play data.
1) I know the projections are based on a lot of factors but with Texas Tech being at 16 and Kansas also getting a somewhat favorable projection, how comfortable are you with these considering the coaching changes?
Honestly? Not comfortable at all. I'm still whittling away at the best method for accounting for coaching changes -- we can't just assume a team will get worse after a change, because many don't. I'm not satisfied with always just pretending the change didn't happen, of course, but we're going to have to figure out how to fit teams into certain profiles (Was the coach fired? Did he to a bigger job? Was the team more or less successful than their historical profile with the last coach? Is the new coach a rookie, or does he have experience? Et cetera.) As it stands now, most of the teams I feel shakiest about in terms of FO projections (Tech, Kansas,Tennessee) are the ones with new coaches, and I don't think that's a coincidence.
2) In looking at your part of the F/+, do you put more emphasis on Success Rates or EqPts?
It's equal. I've been tempted to give slightly more weight to EqPts, as their correlation to overall success is a smidge higher, but right now it's 50/50 between the efficiency measure (Success Rate) and the explosiveness one (PPP+).
3) When can we expect to see a Beyond the Box Score Preview for Kansas?
Iowa State's up next -- will probably attempt to hammer that out this weekend. After that is KU (we're going in order of Mizzou's schedule), so ... middle-to-late next week?
Thanks to Bill C for the answers and if you haven't already ordered a copy of the Football Almanac, you can order the College section for only $5 here. Highly recommended.
20 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
There was an article on this
in the LJW a month or so ago. Lots of interesting discussion, and a rec read. I think I posted something on it.
I missed that one.
Got a link?
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
The Newell Post by Jesse Newell at LJW
Jesse summarized some of the most interesting things from the chat with Bill Connelly. Connelly studies the advanced statistics in college football and writes for the college portion of the 2010 Football Outsiders Almanac.
Nice,
good to see some cross-blog networking. Honestly though, how does one build a metric for a new coach’s impact on a team? It’s really beyond subjective.
The Kansas City Royals; Successfully failing since 1986
Yeah, next to impossible.
The players are still there for the most part but who knows what happens with everything else.
Does anyone expect Tuberville to have Tech’s offense anywhere near as effective as Leach did the last few years?
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
If you read more about BC's analysis
he isn’t satisfied with the existing process when considering coaching changes.
It is what makes me all the more excited about our opps this year.
Setting your sites a little low....
Would anyone be unhappy with 7 wins and a close finish behind Nebraska and Missouri in the Big 12 North this season?
Don’t get me wrong, things could certainly go much worse, but absolutely I’ll be unhappy with a 7 win season. The only two games no one can be unhappy about losing on this schedule are GT (assuming they’re good) and @ Nebraska. Every other game is ridiculously winnable and while we won’t win them all, we should be unhappy when we lose.
I certainly don’t think we’ll go 10-2, but even those 2 aren’t against juggernauts. Factor in the two non-con gimmes and anything less than 8 wins from this schedule is a disappointment, no matter how little I’m expecting from this team right now.
by hiphopopotamus on Aug 5, 2010 10:57 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Maybe,
but last season just has me nervous. Schedule’s much easier but Colorado happened last year. Iowa State played a tough game. K-State happened last year.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
"The coach wasn't talking to one of his captains" happened last year.
.
.
.
MM happened last year.
Even the players that were “supportive” of MM last year have commented on things being so much better/enthusiastic this year. That will carry over. I bet Turner & Chuck can even figure how to run out the clock to end a game.
Believe me, I hope my expectations are too low.
Maybe reading Rivethead’s comments have gotten to me.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
Implementing a new offense and our lack of depth
could seriously come back to hurt us this year. I’m hoping this team will have an “it” factor with the new revitalized energy and enthusiasm that Gill brings, but I’m still not going to be upset with 7 wins. As long as we’re bowl eligible this year, I think I’ll be happy.
Can you be confidently concerned?
I think the potential is there but there are huge questions: How effective will our quarterbacking be? Will Pick/Webb be ready to successfully manage a whole game at this level? What kind of progress has the defense made? We’ve been handled by a lot of teams the last two years. What kind of quality depth is there, especially on defense? Lack of depth probably cost us 3-4 games in 2006.
The schedule is to our advantage. The team and staff appear enthused. If we get some breaks, it could be a fun year.
Pretty good description of where I'm at, too.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
In a perfect world.....
we should be able to win nearly every game on the schedule. The problem is that the world is far from perfect and we’re one small ankle tweek from being down to our third string right tackle.
If we stay pretty close to injury free then yes I would be mildly disappointed if we don’t win more than 7 games; however, I think I skew my expectations a bit with the knowledge that staying injury free is a pretty tall order (in fact we’re already not injury free).
At this point I know that a lack of depth at certain positions has nearly nothing to do with the current coaching staff, so I’m not going to be disappointed in them if the injury bug hits and we drop 2 or 3 games that we would have otherwise won. With the way that recruting is going so far it doesn’t look like depth will be a problem for long….perhaps sheer talent level….but not depth.
All I want to see is a team that looks like they are having fun and playing to their potential. Start plugging in better and deeper talent into a system that is up and running and the winning part should take care of itself.
We just don't have the defense.
Hopefully Pick or Webb will rise up and be able to keep us in shootouts from week to week, but I can’t pick anything higher than 6-6 unless Torbush is some kind of guru. I fully expect us to be ranked below #100 in passing defense this year.
"Got a bill that's big enough to twist the Tiger's tail. Husked some corn and made those SORRY HUSKERS BAIL!"
by KennyGregoryRockThaCradle on Aug 9, 2010 3:38 AM CDT reply actions
Well
I fully expect us to be ranked below #100 in passing defense this year
Sounds about right, roight?
Shit happens when you win championships

by 













