BYU ranks 117th in offensive tempo this year. We average only 62 offensive plays per game. Number 1 (for reference) is UTSA at 83.

If you remember during the GFGH days of Anae 2.0, we were averaging 90+ per game and got over 100 plays multiple times.

So what's better, a fast-paced offense or a slow offense?

Anecdotally...it's interesting to hear Jason Kelce talk about playing in the Chip Kelly system vs pre and post Chip Kelly. Basically the OL focused on speed and lost weight in Chip's system. And by the end of drives the DL was so tired they were barely rushing anymore. He loved it. When Chip got fired, he had forgotten how much better a DL performs (and how much harder they are to go against) when they're not tired. He had to bulk up really fast because he was getting pushed around. He said from an OL standpoint, he loved going fast because DLs just plain stop trying after a while on fast-paced drives.

Data...

You can Google it...it's honestly all over the place and depends on the year...the scheme, the players etc. There's no real correlation between up-tempo and winning or slow-tempo and winning. It's entirely scheme/talent dependent.

There are some theories about defenses struggling more when the offense is uptempo...that seem to have been debunked. In other words, there is no negative impact on a team's defense regardless of whether or not that team's offense is uptempo. https://www.sharpcollegefootball.com/post/the-tempo-myth