Virginia Tech Offensive Efficiency in 2010

For the third year, we're going to look at the Virginia Tech Hokies' efficiency stats in conference play. There are two primary schools of thought with efficiency stats. There's the drive-based formula devised by Brian Fremeau and the play-based formula used by SBN's own Bill Connolly of Rock M Nation. Both formulas can be found over at Football Outsiders.

I use a very, very watered down set of efficiency stats that are a little easier to understand. Basically, we're going to compare how yards the Hokies gained in games compared to what they should have gained based on how many plays they ran in that game. You can go back and look at the 2009 numbers and 2008 numbers for a comparison to what we're about to see.

Note: These stats are from conference games only. Non-conference games are outliers because scheduling philosophy varies from school to school. You take the yards per play allowed by the opponent and multiply it by Virginia Tech's plays in that game to get the Hokies' expected yards. Then, you compare it to the yards the Hokies actually racked up. If you meet expectations, your efficiency will be 1.000, the higher the number the better.

Raw data from the amazing cfbstats.com.

First up, rushing.

Abbreviations: YPC - opponent's yards per carry allowed without sacks; Rush - VT carries minus sacks; ExYds - expected yards for VT; Yards - VT yards with sacks taken out; Eff - VT efficiency. Sacks are removed from these stats because the NCAA counts sacks as rushing attempts from some ungodly reason.

VT Offensive Efficiency - Rushing 2010
Opponent YPC Rush ExYds Yards Eff
Boston College 3.3 38 123.8 118 0.953
NC State 4.6 33 152.5 337 2.210
Wake Forest 5.0 53 266.8 299 1.121
Duke 4.8 38 182.9 166 0.908
Georgia Tech 5.2 40 209.5 198 0.945
North Carolina 4.8 35 169.4 193 1.139
Miami 5.4 43 231.0 289 1.251
Virginia 5.7 39 224.0 204 0.911
Florida State 4.5 40 179.2 185 1.032
Total 4.9 359 1750.8 1989 1.136

2009 Rushing Efficiency: 1.146
2008 Rushing Efficiency: 0.994

Here's the passing stats.

Abbreviations: YPA - opponent's yards per attempt allowed; Pass - VT pass attempts; ExYds - expected yards for VT; Yards - VT actual yards; Eff - VT efficiency.

VT Offensive Efficiency - Passing 2010
Opponent YPA Pass ExYds Yards Eff
Boston College 6.0 21 125.1 237 1.895
NC State 7.3 24 175.7 123 0.700
Wake Forest 8.1 35 283.9 314 1.106
Duke 8.8 31 272.9 332 1.217
Georgia Tech 7.7 25 192.2 137 0.713
North Carolina 6.8 28 189.4 249 1.315
Miami 5.8 15 86.7 118 1.361
Virginia 8.5 24 204.5 182 0.890
Florida State 6.7 28 188.4 263 1.396
Total 7.2 231 1667.7 1955 1.172

2009 Passing Efficiency: 1.568
2008 Passing Efficiency: 0.911

And finally, put them all together to get offensive efficiency and scoring efficiency.

Abbreviations: YPP - opponent yards per play allowed; Plays - VT plays; ExYds - expected yards for VT; Yards - VT actual yards; Eff - VT efficiency. PPP - opponent points per play allowed adjusted for non-offensive points; Plays - VT plays; ExPts - expected points for VT; Points - VT points minus non-offensive points; Eff - VT efficiency.

VT Offensive Efficiency - Yards 2010
Opponent YPP Plays ExYds Yards Eff
Boston College 4.5 61 275.5 343 1.245
NC State 5.3 61 320.8 440 1.372
Wake Forest 6.0 89 533.5 605 1.134
Duke 6.2 70 436.6 491 1.125
Georgia Tech 6.1 65 397.6 335 0.843
North Carolina 5.3 66 353.0 418 1.184
Miami 5.1 63 323.3 369 1.141
Virginia 6.5 64 417.8 383 0.917
Florida State 5.1 71 362.1 442 1.221
Total 5.6 610 3400.8 3826 1.125
VT Offensive Efficiency - Points 2010
Opponent PPP Plays ExPts Points Eff
Boston College 0.236 61 14.4 19 1.317
NC State 0.342 61 20.8 35 1.679
Wake Forest 0.511 89 45.5 52 1.143
Duke 0.412 70 28.9 44 1.525
Georgia Tech 0.392 65 25.5 21 0.823
North Carolina 0.348 66 23.0 26 1.131
Miami 0.311 63 19.6 31 1.582
Virginia 0.503 64 32.2 37 1.150
Florida State 0.270 71 19.2 37 1.929
Total 0.368 610 224.7 302 1.344

2009 Offensive Efficiency: 1.170
2008 Offensive Efficiency: 0.903

2009 Scoring Efficiency: 1.376
2008 Scoring Efficiency: 0.810

It should come as no surprise that the rushing and passing numbers were similar considering how balanced the Hokies were in 2010. What also isn't surprising is that the number wound up being favorable for the Hokies since all of these games were wins.

For the Curious (Using Full Season Stats)

vs. Boise State
Rush Eff: 0.856
Pass Eff: 1.599
Total Eff: 1.196

vs. Stanford
Rush Eff: 1.068
Pass Eff: 1.086
Total Eff: 0.850

Against Boise State, Tyrod saved us from our early season offensive line disaster by having a nice game through the air. The Broncos stopper our ground game cold, which teams have tended to do early in the season against us. The offensive line hasn't clicked at the beginning of the regular season since probably 2005, which is one of the reasons we keep losing early games, along with scheduling.

As for Stanford, you'll noticed we actually performed above expectations in the individual rush and pass games, but that the total efficiency is well below what we should have had. That's because the astounding 70 sack yards we allowed gets factored back in. Again, the offensive line failed us in a game against a team with top talent.

Amazingly, our two worst games efficiency wise against ACC play came against two defenses we probably should have destroyed -- Georgia Tech and Virginia. This I think you can blame on conservative play calling. I think we held back against the Wahoos to save guys for the ACC title game and I have no idea what on earth we were doing in that Georgia Tech game, but it sure didn't work.

The Hokies rolled through ACC play because they never really allowed a team to make them one-dimensional. And the one time they were, they found both extremes. The lowest single rating, rushing or passing, was passing efficiency against NC State. But in that same game they blew the doors off their expected yards on the ground, helping them come back to beat the Pack.

We were an extraordinarily efficient team against our own league, but talent deficiency caught up with us against the two top teams we played outside the league, primarily on the offensive line. You can blame play calling all you want, but the Stanford game came down to having a poor game plan rather than individual play calling. We met our expected yards, but had no answer or adjustment for Stanford's pass rush.

And as for the Boise State game, a lot of people point to the decision to throw the ball on third-and-eight as the reason Virginia Tech lost. But look at those efficiency numbers. We were having a lot of success through the air, but they were crushing our run game. A first down and the game's over. So if you make the decision to try and end the game, you're going to do so with the your senior quarterback's arm, who had been having success against the opposing defense. Of course you throw it.

If you run it, you're going to get stopped short of the first down and take 40 more seconds off the clock, giving the Broncos the ball with about a minute to play. Well, they only needed 38 seconds to score anyway.

Why did I just re-live all that? Good grief I have a problem.

Anyway, back on point with the stats and the efficiency and the thing and the stuff.

Yeah, we were pretty good against our league. Not quite as good as last year, but good compared to what was expected. There's not going to be a change on the offensive staff, so you're just going to have to deal with it.

Last year I wrote that if we could put together an offensive line that the numbers we had in 2009 could be duplicated. I don't think this year's line was as good as last year's, but they put together a season that was about 150 yards (in nine games) away from duplicating the previous season's efficiency stats.

For the second consecutive year, the passing efficiency was better than the rushing efficiency thanks to Tyrod. I doubt that will be the case next year with a new quarterback under center, meaning the rushing efficiency is going to have to improve, even from the current numbers, for the Hokies to win another conference title.

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Gobbler Country

You must be a member of Gobbler Country to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Gobbler Country. You should read them.

Join Gobbler Country

You must be a member of Gobbler Country to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Gobbler Country. You should read them.

Spinner.vc97ec6e

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9347_tracker