Statistical Review: Vanderbilt #24

I have two metrics for strength of schedule. The first is based on how good a team would need to be to consistently get to bowl eligibility. The second is based on how good a team would need to be to consistently go undefeated. If a team played 11 high school teams and the New England Patriots, they could have a very easy SOS-BE (bowl eligible, assuming the 11 high school teams were granted FBS status) but a very hard SOS-Und (undefeated).

Vanderbilt had the country's 52nd ranked SOS-BE; in the SEC, only Mississippi State was lower (at 58th). They played five games against teams in the power top 30 and lost four: South Carolina, Florida, Georgia and Northwestern; they beat Ole Miss. They played eight games against teams in the bottom half nationally in the power rankings (plus Presbyterian) and won all eight. This is not to say that Vanderbilt was a good team or a bad team, but they were a consistent team that won the games they should win and lost 80% of the rest; three wins, nine wins, or 13 wins is more about schedule than Vanderbilt. (They're are many parallels here with Mississippi State).

If you were to design a consistent team, what would they look like? They would be strong on defense. They would be good in the red zone and prevent explosive plays, and they would not be dependent on turnovers. On offense, they wouldn't turn the ball over, they wouldn't be explosive but they'd have a strong running game. In short, games would be decided by the accumulation of a bunch of small plays, not a handful of big plays.

The Vanderbilt defense was exactly what we'd expect. They were particularly strong against the pass and big pass plays, league average in points off turnovers but very good in the red zone. The offense was altogether different: fairly explosive, but in almost all other ways sub-par. They were terrible in the red zone and on third downs. They ran the ball often, but not that well. In one of the great play-calling conundrums, Vanderbilt runners were among the worst in the country at getting back to the line of scrimmage but Vanderbilt ran the ball more than 80% in short yardage situations (12th most nationally)*. They converted top 10 field position into only 2.2 points per possession.

*To be fair, Tate and Stacey converted on about 70% of short yards runs, which, while not spectacular, is above average.

Projection:
Vanderbilt has the statistical odor of a team that will lose more games in 2013 than they did in 2012. Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee and Ole Miss may all put up more of a fight. They trade Auburn for Texas A&M out of the West. In good news, they drop Northwestern in 2013 for UAB. Add in some key losses and 2013 could appear to be a small step backwards even if the team, as a whole, is moving in the right direction.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Oklahoma State #25

Not all quarterbacks, not even all "system quarterbacks", are created equal. Gundy used three different quarterbacks significantly, sometimes in the same game. Lunt started the season, made a fairly quick exit, and had a midseason cameo, Walsh took over for games two through six, and Chelf took the last half of the season. All three were generally successful - OSU scored 30+ points in all but one game. But Walsh racked up 91.9 schedule adjusted expected points added to Chelf's 68.1 and Lunt's 15.2. He did this despite fewer overall attempts than Chelf and 60%  more attempts than Lunt (and he outscored him by 6x). Walsh was the country's 3rd most efficient passer; Chelf ranked 22nd and Lunt 61st.

Like Baylor, Oklahoma State was a much more balanced offense than its Big 12 reputation would suggest. They ran the ball 50% of the time. And this wasn't the A&M-style, pseudo (though very effective) balance built on quarterback scrambles. The three OSU quarterbacks had 82 carries and 493 pass attempts, and 12 of those carries were actually sacks. More importantly, the offense was balanced in production as well. Before adjusting for schedule, the OSU was ten in EPA/rush, even better than when they were throwing the ball.

OSU was balanced in another way. Unlike Baylor, the defense was not a deficiency. When you adjust for schedule, they were top 30 in EPA and yards per pass and rush and top 25 in preventing explosive plays. The two critical shortcomings for the Oklahoma State defense were 11.2 turnovers per 100 possessions and 4.7 points per red zone possession. The latter is still above average but the latter is quite poor. Given the style of offense, improvement in these areas could have reaped huge rewards. As it is, the Pokes finished 20th in EP3+

Projection:
OSU lost 5 games in 2012. The model has them favored in all but two if they were to replay the season (Kansas State and Oklahoma), and would project them to 10, not 8, wins. With the key losses at OU and KSU, Oklahoma State would improve their odds in those games as well. But OSU has its own question marks, and we can't forget that every day brings us one day closer to Gundy's eventual emotional meltdown. This puts the Pokes in the same territory as TCU and Baylor (but with an critical head start): the pieces are on campus and they are led by a coach with a long track record of success on one side of the ball. The question is will those pieces fall in place in time to make a run.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Michigan #26

Who was the most efficient passer in the Big 10 in 2012? Devin Gardner, and it wasn't close. Gardner finished 2nd in schedule adjusted expected points added per pass (behind Nick Florence). He was 32 spots ahead of the next Big 10 quarterback (Curt Phillips). In fact, you have to go through 51 quarterbacks, almost the entire Big 12 and most of the SEC, before you find a Big 10 quarterback that was not a nasty little Mustelidae (i.e., weasel family, i.e., Wolverine/Badger).

Now for a tougher question: Who was the most efficient runner in the Big 10? Again, Devin Gardner. In fact, Gardner was the most efficient runner in the country. But how could that be? In 47 carries he averaged 2.12 yards and lost two fumbles? First, 11 of those carries were sacks. It makes no sense to count sacks as run plays, so I don't. The -87 yards and 2 lost fumbles from sacks are counted against his passing numbers. Second, in the remaining 36 carries, Gardner either scored a touchdown or got a first down on 19. That's more than half. Twelve of the first downs came on 3rd down. The other 2 were 4th down conversions. Five of his seven touchdowns were on 3rd or 4th down. A lot of people averaged more yards per carry than Gardner (at 5.2), but no one did more damage per carry.

Michigan's biggest weakness was the turnover. Few teams turned the ball over more frequently (18.1% of possessions). No team in college football was more likely to get picked off, and few quarterbacks threw it to the other team more often than Denard Robinson (5.39% of passes). Gardner was better, but still bad himself (3.97%).

Projection:
Devin Gardner's rushing efficiency is more a statistical anomaly than predictive result, but his passing numbers were legitimate. He completed only 60% of his passes, but he averaged 16.3 yards when he did connect, and he was fourth nationally in explosive plays per pass. Without Robinson on the field, Gardner will need to connect more often, target the wrong jersey less often, and depend less on big plays.

The Michigan defense was good in the red zone, but they allowed too many completions. Completions turned into sustained drives and a high play per possession average, and they were 98th in turnovers per possession. Turnovers by the offense meant that the defense often started uncomfortably close to the end zone (68.1 yards, 95th nationally). Given their schedule, Michigan may only need to improve in the turnover margin to rack up a long list of wins.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Cincinnati #27

Cincinnati wasn't a great offense in 2012, but they did one thing better than all but a few teams in college football: they picked up yards in big chunks. They were one of five teams that picked up 25 or more yards on more than 10% of pass plays (Alabama was another). Both quarterbacks got big plays at high rates, but Kay was particularly effective. He led all quarterbacks with 25+ yards on 12.2% of passes. They also managed an explosive play on about 3% of run plays, good enough to be in the top 25 in that category. After that, they were in the top 40 in almost every major offensive category, but rarely in the top 25. Most importantly, they were 33rd with 2.5 points per possession.

The defense was also well above average but not great across the board, except they were very good in the red zone (3.73 points per, good for 5th nationally, but average on 3rd downs) and racked up more than 90 points from turnovers.

Projection:
Cincinnati will play some games. They'll win some. They'll lose others.

What impact will Tommy Tubberville have, on offense specifically? At Tech in 2012, they threw the ball 60% of the time, completed 70% of those, and averaged 11 yards per completion. At Cincinnati, they ran 57% of the time, completed 57% of their pass attempts and averaged almost 15 yards per completion. That may look like a sea change is coming, but Tubberville and his staff are not complete morons. As they did in Tech, they will utilize the talent on the roster - a host of waterbug receivers and two senior quarterbacks.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Baylor #28

Baylor finished the season 4th in points/game and 113th in points allowed. But if you've spent much time on this site you know we're not satisfied with stats that aren't adjusted for tempo. It's possible . . . possible . . . that the offense is overrated and defense underrated because each team's offense had a lot of opportunities to score. If they averaged 30 possessions per game, each, Baylor would be top 10 in points allowed/possession but the offense would be bottom 20 in points/possession nationally. Instead, Baylor averaged 27 possessions/game total, only 35th in the country despite a top five tempo on offense. As it is, Baylor was 5th in points/possession, 2nd in EP3+, and 115th in points allowed/possession (although they were a much-less-terrible 83rd in EP3+).

What did Baylor do well? They put Nick Florence on the field. He was really good. In fact, he was the most efficient, most productive passer in college football in 2012. When we add in rushing yards he was 30 points behind Manziel in expected points added (schedule adjusted) but was also 30 points ahead of #3 Tajh Boyd. Let me put this another way. Florence was 2nd in the country in EP3+, the stat that has correctly picked every Heisman winning quarterback since 2005 but one. Seastrunk, who had only 29 carries through the first 7 games, was also pretty good. His 7.73 yards/carry were second best to only Dri Archer for players with over 1,000 yards rushing; only Denard Robinson and Johnny Manziel joined Archer and Seastrunk with 1,000 yards rushing and more than 7 yards per carry.

But Baylor could have been better. They were 10th nationally in plays/possession, helped by a top 20 3rd down conversion rate, but they turned the ball over at a higher rate than any other elite offense and got fewer points in the red zone than any elite offense but Kansas State.

The defense was bad. They were 115th with points allowed/possession (2.73) and 111th in plays and yards/possession. But they were average or slightly below average in most per play categories, and were actually fairly good at preventing explosive plays versus the run. But one fatal flaw was the Bears undoing. Even after adjusting for competition, Baylor was 120th in 3rd down defense. This puts them two spots behind Texas State, four behind New Mexico, and 20 spots behind UMass. That's really bad.

The Baylor defense did seem to be improving. While scoring a below average opponent adjusted EP3 in their first six games against FBS opponents, they were above average in three of their last four. To put this in perspective, Alabama's worst defensive performance was still far better than Baylor's best, but improvement is improvement.

Projection:
Bryce Petty played his last season of high school football in 2008, has since thrown 14 passes, and if you listen to the Baylor faithful, he's about to revolutionize the game of football. But it doesn't matter. As long as Briles is calling the shots, Baylor will score points. Petty may be NCAA-Tebow reincarnate, but he can't add much to the Florence/Seastrunk combo at the end of 2012. All that matters is the defense. If Baylor can get stops on 3rd down the sky's the limit. If not, Baylor will have another fun season, rack up a lot of stats, and lose a few games to a few teams randomly selected from the Big 12 (but not Kansas).
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Penn State #29

Penn State averaged 6.6 plays per possession. But like the other teams in that range and higher, the offense wasn't particularly good. Penn State finished the season with the 48th best schedule adjusted EP3 in the country. Only Nevada had more plays per possession and finished in the top 20 in EP3+, and they were 19th. So how is it that a team can keep the ball for so long yet doesn't get more value out of the possessions?

First, the high play/possession teams tend to start with bad field position, so they need a couple plays to catch up to everyone else's starting point. At 30th, Penn State's starting field position was far from terrible. Second, a lot of plays can increase the risk of turnover, which can hurt a team's EP3. Penn State turned the ball over on only 8.2% of possessions (11th nationally); Louisiana Tech and Arkansas State also ran a lot of plays/possession without a lot of turnovers. Third, the yards per play are low but the third down conversion rate is high, so the offense moves the ball at 10 yard/3 play increments. Penn State was 63rd in yards per pass and 107th in yards per pass. They weren't particularly dynamic on third downs, but good - 43.2% for 32nd nationally. Finally, high play/possession teams are very good at getting into the red zone, but not necessarily very good when they get there. Penn State was in the bottom third in points per possession in the red zone. So, to sum that all up, Penn State didn't rack up a ton of yards per play, but they didn't go backwards very often, especially on running plays, and they were surprisingly good on third downs. They didn't give up the ball very often on turnovers, but were terrible in the red zone, so they were able to run a lot of plays, move the ball downfield, and they didn't rack up a ton of points.

Penn State won games with defense. They weren't elite, but borderline top 20. The defense was particularly good against the run, but the real success came in the red zone. Opponents averaged more than 6 plays/possession and reached the red zone on 27% of possessions, but once there they averaged less than 4 points per possession. That should sound familiar. It should sound like the Penn State offense.

Projection:

For a team that was bad on third downs and in the red zone, having four good options at tight end should improve things. If their new blue chip quarterback can get them the ball, Penn State could push for 9 wins.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: BYU #30

BYU fielded an elite defense, one of the five best in the country, and they lost five games. Let that soak in for a moment.

Only Alabama allowed fewer points per possession and BYU was the nation's most dominant defense by EP3 (effective points per possession, which also considers field position). They were 4th in plays, 3rd in yards, 4th in TDs and 3rd in red zone trips allowed per possession. They were 2nd in EPA per rush and got a TFL on more than a quarter of rush attempts. And they allowed 3rd down conversions on 26% of attempts (#1 nationally). They drop a couple spots in each category when you adjust for schedule, but no team did more against the schedule they faced then BYU. On defense.

The offense was a different story. In reality, they were only truly bad in three areas - they turned the ball over too often (see Boise State), the kicking game was atrocious (see Utah, Notre Dame), and they were as explosive as wet talcum powder. In retrospect, it is hard to diagnose how much of BYU's troubles were a product of a revolving quarterback situation, but that didn't help.

Projection:

BYU brought back Robert Anae to coordinate the offense, and will be going up-tempo in 2013. This could be good. Taysom Hill is a unique talent at quarterback and he will have playmakers at running back and receiver to work with. The key to success for an up-tempo offense is 3rd down - getting conversions on offense and stops on defense. BYU was very good on 3rd downs on both sides of the ball in 2012. 

It could be a disaster because Bronco Mendenhall is still the head coach. Bronco built a stellar defense, but he would not be the first defensive-minded coach that has built a program around a culture that is not conducive to up-tempo and/or spread offenses. There's a reason Anae "resigned" from this same post a couple years ago, and it wasn't because the offense was too good. And I'm not convinced that a season with Rich Rod is the cure.

That being said, it is not unreasonable that BYU could improve its points per possession from 2.16 to 2.66 with Hill at the helm and a real offensive philosophy. If the defense can turn in another top 10 performance, BYU's production would be in the vicinity of the 2012 versions of Ohio State or Georgia. That would not be bad at all.

-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Arizona State #31

When opponents opted to run the ball, the Arizona State defense was below average. They finished 67th in schedule-adjusted EPA per rush, they allowed 25+ yards on 3.5% of carries (112th nationally, 104th after adjusting for schedule), and allowed 5.3 yards per carry. Playing in the Pac-12 and struggling to stop the run is a bad combo.

But if opponents ever decided (to try) to throw the ball, the ASU defense was among the country's best. They led the nation in sacks per pass and sacked quarterbacks on 16% of attempts in passing situations. When quarterbacks were able to throw a pass, they often regretted it soon after. Arizona State allowed only 50% completions (4th nationally) and they picked off more than 5% (2nd). They allowed 4.7 yards per pass attempt (2nd nationally) and 25+ yards on 3.4% of attempts (6th). That being said, teams did have more success on 3rd downs that we would otherwise suspect, so Sun Devils EPA per pass (schedule adjusted) was just inside the top 10.

They also played offense. Taylor Kelley was good, not great. Marion Grice was incredibly efficient (5th in EPA, 7th in EPA+ per rush among running backs), but needed more touches to have a bigger impact. If it weren't for fantastic starting field position, Arizona State might have struggled to score, but instead they were 27th in points per possession.

Projection:
ASU could make noise in 2013. They need Kelley to make the move from good to very good (or even great), but no situation sees more average gains than a junior, second-year starting quarterback in his second year in a system. They need to get better against the run, but that has been a clear goal all off-season, they've added depth on the line, and the pass defense is good enough to sacrifice coverage or pressure without screwing the pooch. With Notre Dame, Stanford and Wisconsin in their first five games, we'll know quickly if ASU has made the necessary corrections.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Tulsa #32

Tulsa was good in 2012 because they dominated at the line of scrimmage. On offense, they performed at an elite level in one area - they were really good at not moving backwards. Only North Texas and Tennessee were sacked less frequently (sacks per pass). They also had a remarkable knack for getting back to, but not further than, the line of scrimmage on running plays; they were in the top third nationally in getting back to the line of scrimmage but in the bottom third in getting past the line of scrimmage when running the ball. They were also 27th with 41.8 penalty yards per game.

The Hurricanes real strength was on defense. They were 3rd nationally in sacks per pass, behind only South Carolina and Arizona State, and 4th on passing downs. They caught runners at or behind the line of scrimmage on 22% of running plays, and opponents opted to run the ball in short yardage situations less than two thirds of the time; the national average is just under 70%. And the defense was stout against the run and pass in general, even when the weren't catching opponents in the backfield.

Projection:

The college football world has been slow to realize that, post Kinne, Tulsa's offense is sub-par. They have been mislead by an offense that scored 35 points per game in 2012. But they needed 14.8 possessions per game (3rd most in the country) to reach that number. In points per possession Tulsa finished 70th, just behind BYU and New Mexico. Most also don't realize that the 260 lb. Alex Singleton was critical, not just in eating up carries but also getting critical yards; he led Tulsa running backs in EPA per rush. At 370 lbs total, Watts and Douglas won't be able to absorb those extra carries without a cost.

But the bigger concern is the defense. It is a major concern because it won't be the same defense. Rice has as many starters returning on its defensive line and more starters returning to the secondary than Tulsa has returning on defense. Where Tulsa won 11 games at the line of scrimmage in 2012, the entire defensive line and 60% of the offensive line will be new starters. Tulsa might still be the class of the West, but that isn't saying much.

-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Louisiana Tech #33

Louisiana Tech was really good on offense. Really good. They scored touchdowns on 47% of possessions, turned it over on 6.4%, reached the red zone on 49% and scored touchdowns on 75% of possessions in the red zone. They were tops in the country in points per possession averaging about 3.5, and they were second in effective points per possession - the most complete overall measure of offensive efficiency - and 6th after adjusting for schedule.

Tech was more efficient than dynamic. They were 19th and 27th in yards per pass and per rush, respectively, but 7th and 5th in EPA per play. This means they got more production out of every yard than almost every other team in the country. Cameron completed 69% of his passes and was sacked less than 2% of the time, but he also averaged only 11.5 yards per completion and completed a pass for more than 25 yards on 7.3% of attempts. A general lack of explosiveness might also explain why Louisiana Tech was only average on 3rd down. Cameron completed just 57% of passes on 3rd and long and Tech was 41st in 3rd down conversions.

The defense was consistently well below average in almost every area. They scored 141 total points in the three games they lost.

Projection:
Outside of Kenneth Dixon, Louisiana Tech was stripped clean after 2012. Cameron and Patton will get paid to play and Sonny Dykes is off to coach Cal (where he hopes to have more success at the FBS level than his Tech predecessor Derek Dooley). Kenneth is really good - 1st among running backs in EPA, 3rd after adjusting for schedule and 11th in EPA per rush - but he'll be less effective in 2013 under Skip Holtz. In 2012 Tech gave Texas A&M a run for their money. After key personnel losses, regression in turnovers, and a coaching hire that won't hit the ground running, Louisiana Tech might not need to decline bowl bids in 2013.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Arkansas State #34

Arkansas State lost three games in 2012, and two of those were to Oregon and Nebraska. One reason for their success is that they turned the ball over only 14 times in 13 games, five of those came against Oregon and Nebraska and another two in their other loss to Western Kentucky. No team gave away fewer points from turnovers than Arkansas State, and they clustered many of the points they did give away in two games they would have lost anyways.

Aided by the lack of turnovers, Arkansas State was 6th nationally in effective points per possession (EP3; 18th after adjusting for schedule). They were also one of six teams to average more than 40 yards per possession; they were 12th in points per possession but would have been top five with decent average starting field position.

Aplin was good. He completed 68% of his attempts and threw interceptions on only 1.2% of passes, and averaged just under 8 yards per pass. Despite this, Arkansas State was only 33rd in EPA/pass, suggesting that he under-performed in high leverage situations. The opposite was true of the running game. Aplin against contributed to his team's offensive success, but Rocky Hayes was particularly impressive: 481 yards on 50 carries.

Projection:
One interesting note on Gus Malzahn: despite his showdown against Bielema over hurry-up offenses, Arkansas State was 106th nationally in possessions per game. Another interesting note: He's now the coach at Auburn. One more interesting note: Ryan Aplin is a Brown (last I heard). Bryan Harsin seems to be a capable offensive mind, and Texas had streaky success in 2012, but he has also led some tire-fire offenses in his career. The bad news for Arkansas State is that if Harsin is successful in 2013, he'll be headed off to Vanderbilt to replace James Franklin as he moves to take over from Mack Brown. Also possible is that, after a season with Aplin, someone from the Brown's staff will take over an SEC job for 2014.

Unfortunately, I don't see a lot to be optimistic about in 2013. If Oku becomes the feature of the offense, Arkansas State will take a big step back; he was 67th nationally among backs in rushing efficiency. The defense was average in 2012 and won't be good enough to carry the team in 2013. A program like Arkansas State can only weather so much turnover.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: UCLA #35

No team in college football was penalized more than UCLA. No team was tackled more often behind the line of scrimmage than UCLA. Only one team was sacked more often than UCLA. Brett Hundley was sacked 15% of the time on passing downs. A team that was strong along the defensive line and prevented big plays, say Stanford for example, was a terrible matchup for the Bruins . . . both times they played. If it weren't for the very good average starting field position, the UCLA offense could have been in serious trouble.

Brett Hundley's numbers were inflated by the sheer quantity of opportunities. Outside of a fairly good completion percentage, the rest of his game was pedestrian. He completed 66.5% of his pass attempts but averaged 11.8 yards per completion and completed only 54.3% on 3rd and long (thought that may have been a product of Hundley being sacked more than any other quarterback in college football). He was 51st in passing efficiency and 65th in rushing efficiency among quarterbacks. He's on track to be a very good college quarterback but he definitely has not yet arrived.

The UCLA defense was almost the mirror image of the offense. It forced turnovers, was solid on 3rd down and got after the quarterback; the Bruins were 7th nationally in sacks per pass on passing downs.

Projection:
Before playing Stanford twice and Baylor in the bowl game, UCLA had a shockingly soft schedule for the Pac-12, especially considering they played Nebraska OOC, before the Stanford doubleheader. They were 9-2 but, according to the CFBTN power rankings, they had not yet faced a team in the top 10 and only one team in the top 20 (Oregon State). Outside of a miserable performance against Cal, UCLA did what it needed to do to get to 9-2, but there wasn't enough there to get over the hump when the road got rougher.

The offensive line should get better, which will help with the negative plays, and hopefully the coaches are talking to the players about avoiding penalties. The big question, then, is if Hundley can improve enough to compensate for losing Johnathon Franklin and a regression in forced turnovers. Franklin was a moderately efficient runner but the rest of the UCLA backfield, as a whole, was bordering on atrocious. My gut tells me Bruin nation is in for a disappointing Mora encore.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Texas Tech #36

If you were to show me the chart below without the team name on top I bet I could have guessed it was Tech. They were average in the ground game, didn't get a ton of explosive plays, especially considering they threw the ball 60% of the time. But they had an efficient passing attack, rarely gave up sacks, were good on third downs and in the red zones, and were among the top 20 nationally in points per possession.

Seth Doege was fantastic at quarterback. He was more efficient per pass than Johnny Manziel, Geno Smith, Teddy Bridgewater, Tyler Bray, Matt Barkley and Colby Cameron. He completed more than 70% of his passes, but was less effective when going further down field. He completed 60% on 3rd and long and averaged just 11 yards per completion. He had six games in the top 32 best passing performances nationally in 2012, and his 25.1 passing EPA+ against TCU was one of the ten best passing performances of the season. But he did not finish the season on a high note after throwing seven interceptions in his final three games. 

The defense was average except in one particular area: they generated only 27.5 points from turnovers. The FBS average is around 63; Tech was 36 points, just under 3 per game, below that mark. Add in that the offense was not as careful as one would hope with the football, and Texas Tech had a -60 EPA turnover margin in 2012, which gets us close to 5 points per game. This could have mattered more if Tech had lost more close games. Instead, they lost five games and three of those by three touchdowns or more. 

Projection:

I'm not sure I want to suggest that Kliff Kingsbury might be overrated, but he made a name for himself with Case Keenum and Johnny Manziel behind center. How much was Kingsbury and how much was Keenum/Manziel is yet to be determined, but Kingsbury can quickly earn his stripes in 2013. Texas Tech has options at quarterback, but with Doege out, they lack experience. He won't be making a Manziel out of Michael Brewer, but we'll know he, and Tech, are destined for great things if he can get close to a Nick Florence. Doing it without Darrin Moore would also be notable.

After quarterback, the two biggest questions are consistency and turnovers. Few players in college football are 60 points better than the next best alternative on campus, but that's what turnovers cost the Red Raiders. If they can pull an average turnover margin in 2013 it would be personnel equivalent of bringing in Eddy Lacy and TJ Yeldon to play running back or EJ Manuel to play quarterback or returning Darrin Moore, and four Darrin Moore clones, at wide receiver. As for consistency, inconsistency has been a Tech hallmark for a decade. I'm not sure anyone can change that.

Tech started 2012 as one of the nation's best according to the per play and per possession stats. They slipped as the season progressed, but they could have been better than 8-5. While they have suffered some major personnel losses after 2012 so has most of the Big 12. Kingsbury should have Tech competitive but well short of conference championship caliber.

-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Wisconsin #37

After the first three games against UNI, Oregon State and Utah State, Wisconsin had outscored those opponents by 4 total points. FCS UNI played five games in September, and except for the game against HBCU Central State, their trip to Camp Randall was the closest they came to a win. Ten games later Wisconsin scored 70 points in the Big 10 championship game. Odd, no?

In reality, picking up the split against Oregon State and Utah State was a success for the Badgers, and UNI has averaged one win against an FBS opponent every three years for the last three decades. But Wisconsin also got better after those first three games. In part, this was because Danny O'Brien and his negative EPA+ (schedule-adjusted expected points added) was replaced by Stave and then Phillips. Phillips was particularly productive, assisted greatly by his legs, but they were both about a quarter of a point better per pass attempt than O'Brien. That quarter of a point adds up quickly.

But Wisconsin was not going to get very far with the passing game,especially when all three quarterbacks were sacked on 8% or more of pass plays. But the ground game was the nation's 8th most effective and was clearly in the second tier significantly behind only Texas A&M and Alabama. Badger backs were prone to getting caught behind the line of scrimmage, much like the quarterbacks, especially James White. But he made up for his 21.6% TFL rate with 6.4% explosive plays. Montee Ball was 3rd in yards nationally but 21st in EPA+ mainly because he converted only 58% of the time in short yardage situations. On the whole, Wisconsin was fairly terrible on 3rd downs.

The defense was good, between top 15 and 25 nationally. Between good average starting field position and allowing only 25 yards per possession, the Badgers were among the nation's best at keeping opponents out of the red zone. This was important, because they were not good over those last 20 yards.

Projection:
The QB situation stills seems to be up in the air, but it shouldn't hurt to have O'Brien out of Madison (I would say that it won't hurt, but I'm sure Maryland would have loved to have Danny O'Brien and his negative EPA back in College Park). The coaching change is worth keeping an eye on, but Gary Andersen was a very solid choice. Montee Ball is gone along with some key folks on defense.

But these are all secondary issues; two other issues reign supreme. 1) Ohio State is back in the race. Wisconsin won't be able to back its way into a Big 10 championship in 2013. 2) No team hurt themselves less with turnovers in 2012 than Wisconsin. Expected points from turnovers should regress towards the mean in 2013. That could cost them a couple of games in a season when they don't have many wins to spare.

-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: UCF #38

UCF was resourceful on offense. They finished in the top 25 in points and effective points per possession (EP3). The didn't turn the ball over very often, were good in the red zone, were just outside the top 10 in 3rd down conversions, and they were penalized just 36 yards per game. They were most successful running the ball with an EPA per rush of .18, good enough for 10th and just ahead of Georgia Tech and Kansas State. Latavius Murray was particularly effective, finishing 18th in EPA among all running backs with 53, and Bortles added another 39 with his legs.

The UCF defense was downright average, except they were particularly good at preventing big plays, particularly in the passing game - opponents managed only 25+ yards on 3% of pass plays.

Projection:
With Latavius Murray out, UCF will turn to Storm Johnson at running back. If 2012 is any indication, Johnson won't be able to carry the load. Instead, UCF will need Bortles to take another step forward at quarterback, but that won't be enough if they suffer some regression in turnovers and penalties.

The 2012 UCF defense was overrated. Opponents averaged only 22 points per game but did that on 11 possessions per game. After suffering some key losses and barring an incredible coaching job, the defense will undoubtedly take a step backwards and slip below average nationally. On the whole, the Knights could be looking at a minor step back from 2012.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Arizona #39

Pop quiz: How often did Arizona throw the ball in 2012?

If you said anything less than 50% you're wrong. I might be the only one surprised by this, but I'll publicly admit that I was surprised. Arizona was more likely to attempt a pass than Oklahoma State and Baylor, a team coached by Kevin Sumlin, and Clemson, Syracuse and Florida State with their NFL-caliber quarterbacks. And the investment paid dividends: Arizona had the nation's 20th most efficient passing game and Matt Scott was the 12th most productive quarterback (schedule adjusted) in college football.

All together, the offense worked fast and was efficient. The Wildcats averaged 6.3 plays per possession yet averaged less than two minutes per possession. That's fast. Only Louisiana Tech averaged more plays in less time. They averaged 39.3 yards per possession, more than Oregon, Clemson, Oklahoma State and Alabama and reached the red zone 43% of the time. Unfortunately, the goal is to reach the end zone, not the red zone. Arizona was mediocre inside the 20 yard line - an area Rich Rod should excel (see Oregon) - and the field goal unit was poor.

The bigger problem for Arizona is that they had to share the football, and things went less well when the defense was on the field. Their opponents averaged a whopping 6.2 plays and 35 yards per possession, almost matching Arizona's numbers. Arizona was terrible defending 3rd downs, 1st downs and 2nd downs, but they did force opponents to move the ball down the field one play at a time. In fact, Opponents ran a play in the red zone 34% of the time, and scored touchdowns on 67% of those possessions. That's not good. What Arizona did do very well on defense, something that should yield big dividends in the Pac-12, is prevent explosive run plays; team's gained 25+ yards on only 1.5% of run plays against the Wildcats.

Projection:
Arizona made big steps forward in 2012. The defense will be a year older and should continue to improve in 2013, but, as I like to say, returning mediocrity is still mediocrity. The offense will be missing a few key pieces, but as long as Carey is running the ball (he was the nation's 4th most productive running back), which is by no means certain, Rich Rod should be able to move the ball again. Assuming a few pieces fall in place, Arizona could improve on its eight wins in 2013.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Kent State #40

Kent State did one thing exceptionally well in 2012 on defense: force turnovers. They turned their opponents over 38 times. The 35 turnovers forced by the defense were worth 113 points, more than turnover gurus Oregon (109), Boise State (104) and Kansas State (98). Their second best attribute is that they didn't have any glaring weaknesses: above average in the red zone and on 3rd downs and roughly average everywhere else. The result was a slightly better than average points per possession allowed but very good field position for the offense (average 34 yard line).

The offense was one-sided; they ran the ball 60% of the time and probably should have done it more. The Flashes had one of the nation's 15 least efficient passing offenses, two spots behind Tulane and just ahead of South Alabama. QB Spencer Keith was 154th in per pass efficiency among the 180 top quarterbacks nationally by pass attempts, below Army's Trent Steelman and twice as bad as Danny O'Brien. He completed 55% of his passes, 40% on 3rd and long, averaged 11 yards per completion and 3% of passes went to the wrong team; to his credit, he was consistently inefficient.

The running game, more accurately the Dri Archer game, was a different story. Archer was worth 104 points in 2012 by EPA, most in the nation for a running back, and was 3rd behind Kenjon Barner and Eddie Lacy after adjusting for the schedule. He was 9th in schedule adjusted per rush efficiency among running backs, sandwiched between TJ Yeldon and Kenjon Barner. He did this largely with big plays: Kent State was third behind Texas A&M and Utah State in explosive plays per carry. Archer went 25 yards on 10% of touches. He led all running backs with 9 yards per carry, 50% more than any other back with at least 150 carries. He was also the Golden Flash's leading receiver by a healthy margin.

Projection:
Statistically, the outlook is poor. While Boise State has made of living of big turnover margins, I'm not convinced Kent State will be able to repeat. I don't see any reason for optimism behind center. And Dri Archer could only be more productive by giving him more touches, and given his size and the big role he played in 2012 that might not be an option. Add in a coaching change, and I'm concerned that the 2012 season might have been a Golden Flash in the pan.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: North Carolina #41

North Carolina ran a good, clean offense. They gave up about 40 points, 3 1/3 per game, on turnovers and were top 20 nationally in turnovers per possession. They were balanced, 50% run, 50% pass, and they did both very well. They were top 20 in EPA per pass and rush and just outside of the top 25 when you adjust for schedule (in case you didn't know, the ACC is not an elite conference). UNC runners were caught behind the line on 16% of attempts, 20th best nationally. They allowed sacks on only 2.4% of intended passes (that doubled on passing downs), and were 15th in interceptions per pass. This all added up to a top 15 scoring offense by points per possession, and it could have been better: the offense was only average on 3rd downs and in the red zone.

The defense, like the offense, was fairly consistent across the board. Unlike the offense, the defense wasn't very good.

Projection:
The similarities between Fedora and Sumlin are striking. Both left programs they had maxed out for greener pastures. Upon their departure, and in large part because of their departure, their former programs shriveled; the regression at Southern Miss is a thing of legend. And they both had a lot of offensive success at their new destinations. Sumlin just had more success, so much that some spilled over on the defense.

The offense was hit hard by NFL departures. If Bernard has another game-winning punt return it'll be the Bengals, not Tar Heels, winning the game. But with Renner back I'm fairly confident Fedora will keep the points coming. I'm not that optimistic about the defense. They gave up at least 30 points in 5 of their last 7 games, and 68 against Georgia Tech. Until they upgrade talent (legitimately this time), the best they can hope for is to tread water.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: USC #42

One fifth of USC possessions ended with a turnover. They threw interceptions on 4.2% of passes, 8th most in the country, and lost a fumble on 1.6% of plays, 10th most nationally. Turnovers costs them over 100 points*, more than everyone but Tulane, Idaho, Western Michigan and Hawaii. When you add in that they lost their 6 games by 54 total points, and they lost 19 turnovers in those games worth 51.4 points - avoiding turnovers could have been a big deal. Keeping with the theme of problems good coaches correct, USC had the 99th fewest penalty yards per game.

USC was also among the nation's worst at converting on 3rd down - 110th after converting for yards needed for the first down. Consider this - Texas A&M was 50% more likely to convert on 3rd down and get at least four more shots at the end zone than USC. One consequence cutting drives short by turnovers and failing to convert on 3rd down was short drives - 5.39 plays per possession, 16th fewest in the country. USC still managed 34 yards and 2.3 points per possession, decent but not great numbers, but the offense would have been downright dynamic if they had converted on 3rd downs and avoided turnovers.

Outside of the interceptions, the USC passing game was a strength - top 10 to top 30 in all major categories after adjusting for competition, 18th most efficient overall - even if it was a disappointment relative to the individual talent level on the field. The running game was a different story. Despite averaging 5.5 yards per carry and an explosive play on 2.9% of runs, the numbers put the USC run game at 83rd in overall efficiency. The high fumble rate was half the problem, and USC runners lost yards 20% of the time. Inconsistency in the running game (they flip-flopped between big play and negative play) meant that it was unreliable in short yardage situations. USC ran the ball 58% of the time in those situations (94 teams ran more often). This undoubtedly contributed to their 3rd down woes.

A common narrative for USC is that they can't defend the spread. They did allow 7.1 yards per carry against Oregon, but all that tells us is that they struggled against Oregon, not that they struggled against the spread. They also allowed 5.5 and 5.3 yards per carry against Stanford and Notre Dame. The problem wasn't spread offenses but teams that knew how to run the ball. Against most opponents, USC was fairly good at preventing explosive running plays, but they were among the nation's bottom third at preventing runners from crossing the line of scrimmage. Especially against Stanford and Notre Dame, the line of scrimmage got pushed back a couple of yards before the runner caught up.

The struggle against the run may have been schematic. USC was fairly strong against the pass. They kept the completion percentage low and prevented explosive plays, but more impressive, they sacked the quarterback once for every nine pass attempts. The odd thing is that USC got to the quarterback more often on non-passing downs than passing downs. Whoever was bringing pressure on 1st down and 2nd and short wasn't in position to defend the run. This isn't an inherent weakness of the Tampa 2, but it is easy to see that it could become a problem.

Projection:
The only positive I see on the USC offense is that Marqise Lee is really, really good. But he was really, really good last year, too. They will take a step back at quarterback, Silas Redd doesn't impress, and the receiving corps will be missing Robert Woods. I would normally argue that the turnovers should regress, but they turned the ball over more last year when Matt Barkley wasn't on the field, and he won't be on the field at all in 2013.

On defense, USC is moving to a five man front. The impact defensively will vary depending on whether it evolves more towards a 52 or a 34. The bigger question is how much of a headache will the Trojans suffer as they make the transition.

The saving grace could be the schedule. UCLA gets Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal. USC trades Oregon and Washington for the in-state land grant institutions. And they get Arizona State at home. If you don't think that remembers, just know that Texas A&M would have been playing Georgia for the SEC title while Alabama watched if Bama and A&M had traded Tennessee and Florida as SEC East opponents.

*We use EPA to estimate the point value of a turnover. We use the down, distance, spot and time remaining to estimate how many points a team can expect to score on that possession and their opponent will score on the next possession. The point impact of a play, then, is the difference in the expected points before and after the play.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Rutgers #43

Watching the Rutgers offense try to the run the ball during 1s vs. 1s in practice must have been a thing to behold. Rutgers had the nation's most dominant run defense and the offense averaged less than 4 yards per carry. It was the greatest disparity in college football between offensive and defensive performance on the same team.

Now, as I noted with Fresno State, Rutgers had the most dominant run defense, not the best. After adjusting for competition Michigan State was slightly better, but only by the tiniest margins. And there was a significant gap between these two and the rest of the field. Rutgers allowed 3.34 yards per rush (2nd nationally), 25+ yards on .7% of run plays (6th), and caught runners in the backfield ten times as often  - 6.82% of runs (3rd).

That run defense with a more-than-adequate pass defense made scoring on the Rutger's defense a formidable challenge. Opponent's averaged 1.06 points (4th) and  24.4 yards per possession (13th), and 3.7 points in the red zone (4th best nationally).

But for everything the defense did right, the offense did two things wrong. They were 110th in points, 115th in plays and 113th in yards per possession. By EPA/rush+ Rutgers had the nation's 7th least effective running game. They were very good at keeping the quarterback upright, allowing sacks on 2.7% of pass plays and 1.3% on passing downs (best in the country), but they were only completing 55% of passes for 12.2 yards per completion, so good protection wasn't adding much overall.

Projection:
The standard narrative on Rutgers in 2012 is that the team collapsed with QB Gary Nova and blew a clear shot at the Big East title. While Nova could have played better, the "collapse" may have had more to do with trading Tulane and Howard for Louisville and Virginia Tech on the schedule. If you adjust for competition and remove two games, Arkansas and Virginia Tech, there is no overall trend in Nova's play. With those games included he was clearly above average as a quarterback. Nova wasn't the problem.

The defense will see significant turnover, including some big losses, but should be good at the outset and get better as the season goes on (barring injury). The real question will be the Rutgers running game, specifically the Rutgers running backs, more specifically Savon Huggins. Rutgers will be a contender in the Big East in 2013; if Huggins runs like a man possessed (which I am not at all expecting), Rutgers will be the team to beat. I'm just stoked for the game against Fresno State.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Syracuse #44

Syracuse did a lot of things well on offense. Nassib headlined one of the nation's most efficient pass offenses -  19th best EPA/Pass+ nationally. They lost yards on only 16% of run plays, and Nassib was sacked only 3% of the time on passing downs. This added up to a 47.8% 3rd and 4th down converstion rate (8th best in the country) and 6.6 plays per possession (6th best nationally).

But these fundamentals didn't add up to a ton of points - only 2.3 per possession (tied with a triumvirate of overrated offenses: Miami, USC and UCLA). No single factor explains this. They were average on turnovers per possession, average in the red zone, average in terms of starting field position, average in explosive plays per pass and terrible in explosive plays per run. In other words, they were the world's most frustrating offense - very good at moving the ball down the field but less good at getting something out of their efforts.

The Syracuse defense was average across the board except against the run. Opponents lost yards a quarter of the time when they decided to run. It was a high risk/high reward run defense, so they also gave up a number of big run plays, but, net, they were a top 30 run defense.

Projection:
Woe be to Syracuse. On offense, the effective passing game was picked clean. Left tackle, receivers, quarterback, even coaching staff are gone. On defense, TFL guru Brandon Sharpe is out as well as the team's top two tacklers. At then end of 2012, Syracuse was rolling. They may have missed a rare opportunity when they didn't get rolling sooner.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Fresno State #45

Let me tell you a story. At the end of the 2009 college football season (and the last day of the 2009 calendar year), I watched Air Force stymie a dynamic Houston Cougar offense that was led by Case Keenum and coached by Kevin Sumlin. Keenum threw for about 200 yards and was picked off six times. Houston scored 20 points, and seven of those came on a kick return. Air Force defensive coordinator Tim DeRuyter converted that game and a very impressive season into a DC position at Texas A&M.

In 2010, DeRuyter helped resurrect a terrible Texas A&M defense (yells of "wrecking crew" were heard from the stands), and the Aggies beat Texas, Oklahoma and Nebraska by allowing 17, 19 and 6 points in those games. The 2011 installment of Texas A&M football was hyped coming into the season, but they finished 7-6 after blowing several substantial second half leads, largely because the secondary couldn't cover a wheelchair in the 4th quarter. 

Head coach Mike Sherman got fired and DeRuyter stepped in as interim head coach for an unimpressive win over Northwestern in the bowl game. Meanwhile, Houston blew its perfect season and conference title hopes in part because head coach Kevin Sumlin was busy being courted by Texas A&M. He left Houston for his new job days after losing to Southern Miss.

Tim DeRuyter packed his things in College Station and took the head job at Fresno State. And here's the punchline: while Sumlin and Manziel rewrote record books in College Station, Fresno State had the nation's most dominant pass defense. Sumlin assistant Kliff Kingsbury, formerly at Houston, then at Texas A&M before heading to Texas Tech, hired Matt Wallerstedt, who followed DeRuyter as Air Force DC and then to A&M, to run his defense in Lubbock, and Kingsbury cites bowl games against Air Force as a factor in that hiring decision. Little did I know I was watching the beginning of a coaching avalanche on that New Year's Eve 2009.

To be clear, Fresno State did not have the best pass defense in the country; Florida, Oklahoma and Alabama did slightly less well against much better competition (though Oklahoma accomplished this by abandoning any pretense of stopping the run). But no team did more against the schedule they faced than Fresno State. Opponents averaged 5.10 yards per pass, completed 51.6% of attempts, were sacked on 9.1% of pass attempts, and threw interceptions on 5.8% of passes. This last number is particularly impressive, half a percentage point higher than any other defense in the country; Keenum isn't alone in finding DeRuyter's defense deceptive. Fresno State's forced turnovers were worth 121 points in 2012, almost 10 points per game (second only to SMU), and ended 18.8% of possessions.

By all accounts, the Fresno State offense should have been better. The quarterback topped 4,000 yards and had a 37/7 TD/INT ratio. The running back was a dime short of 1,500 yards. And they only turned the ball over on 10.3% of possessions. But at 2.3, the points per possession seem relatively low, and the EP3 (effective points per possession) is even lower. The biggest factor was the timing of turnovers. They didn't turn the ball over too often, but when they did it was costly. They were tackled in the backfield too often and weren't great on 3rd downs, so their drives were shorter than we would expect - 5.6 plays per possession. 

Projection:

Fresno State will regress some on defense because, if nothing else, the turnover value will regress some. On the other hand, the tendency towards regression suggests they should make up for some, or all, of that on the other side of the football. It's never a good thing when you lose a career 4,500 yard running back. But if they can beat Boise State at home in September, Fresno State could make some noise in 2013.

-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: Ole Miss #46

On offense, Ole Miss did those things that a team must do to score points . . . and little more. They converted 43.6% of the 3rd and 4th down attempts, and were 12th best nationally on 3rd downs when we adjust for the defense and the distance needed for a first down. They got 25+ yards on 8.1% of pass attempts, and scored 5.4 points per possession in the red zone. They only missed efficiency perfection by turning the ball over on 16% of possessions.

But don't be confused into thinking Ole Miss was very good on offense. They were somewhere between average and good on a per play basis and scored only 2.23 points per possession despite their success in the red zone and on third downs.

The defense was very good but not elite. Their opponent-adjusted EPA per rush was 12th best in the country, and they were 3rd best nationally by sacks on passing downs. This allowed them to keep opponents' drives fairly short - 5.5 plays per possession - ideal for their up-tempo style on offense.

Projection:
Ole Miss did a really good job of getting after the quarterback in 2012, and in 2013 they'll have another Nkemdiche, supposedly a better Nkemdiche, to help with that. Quarterback Bo Wallace is coming off surgery, but he'll have all the major pieces back on offense in 2013. Ole Miss was close to an A&M-style breakout in 2012; they could/should have won games against Texas A&M, Vanderbilt and LSU. They get another shot in 2013 against another scheduling gauntlet.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.

Statistical Review: TCU #47

Casey Pachall averaged 10 expected points added in his four games and 15.6 per game before falling apart against SMU. He was 18th among all quarterbacks in defense-independent EPA/pass. Boykin was 75th by the same measure. Boykin had a total EPA of 12.5, -14 for the season if we exclude the Baylor game. A quick, back-of-the-envelope calculation based on the two QBs EPA per pass suggests that Pachall would have been about 81 points better over the last 9 games, or 9 points per game.

About half of those 9 points could come from playing better in the red zone. TCU scored 4.2 points per red zone possession*; 113 FBS teams averaged more. An extra point per possession in the red zone would add an extra .32 points per possession across all possessions and 4.4 points per game (13.8 possessions/game*.32 points/possession = 4.4 points/game). That number is even bigger if we assume Pachall gets TCU into the red zone more often than Boykin.

The defense did a lot of things well. They held opponents to 5.1 plays and about two minutes of game time per possession. Opponents averaged only 24 yards per possession and touchdowns on 16.8% of possessions. They completed fewer than half of their pass attempts and averaged less than 4 yards per carry, and converted only 31% of the time on 3rd and 4th downs. They got sacks on only 6.3% of pass attempts, but picked off 4.5 passes out of every 100. They were a step behind Alabama and Florida in terms of the the country's best defenses but solidly in the second tier with Stanford and Michigan State.

Projection:
The TCU defense is an institution, and a very experienced institution this year. They should get even better with a year of Big 12 offenses under the belt, especially as Big 12 offenses take a step back. And that could make a real difference on the scoreboard. Alabama, for example, allowed .86 points per possession. It's almost impossible to drive that number down even if the defense gets better. TCU, on the other hand, allowed 1.46 points per possession. If they can bottle up a few more explosive plays and the offense can give them better field position to work with, that number could fall by a few tenths of a point, which over the course of a season adds up to a couple extra wins.

But the real progress will come on the offensive side of the ball. If Pachall returns to form, TCU could easily lift its points per possession from 1.86 to 2.3 or 2.4. If that happens, TCU will be competing for a Big 12 title and in the running to lose to an SEC team in the final BCS title game. They have a chance to make a real statement against LSU on August 31.

*This is an offensive metric and so excludes the impact of special teams play. In case of a field goal attempt, offenses are awarded the average points scored based on the distance of the field goal.
-------------------- The Statistical Review breaks down teams along a number of performance categories, everything from red zone scoring to field goal percentage, and compares that performance against the rest of the FBS. All 124 teams will be reviewed from 124 to 1 by the hybrid rankings. You can find short descriptions of the stats used in the table below.