Both land based and carrier based aviation have advantages and disadvantages. I would fully expect the massive footprint at a place like Kandahar, with multiple units rotating though, during the heat of a major operation/war, to operate 7 days a week. That is all well and good as long as you have access to the airfield. And how many pilots, maintainers, host country folks, bottle-washers, donut makers, contractors, air and ground supply runs did it take to keep up the OPTEMPO? I suspect many folks and massive $ was involved.
99 days of combat ops from a carrier during a cruise is quite an accomplishment. Yes the carrier may go off line for a bit for R&R, resupply, other tasking, or there may have been days where there was no tasking, cease fires, politics etc. Syria is not Afghanistan.
Both take a massive amount of investment. Sure a land based airfield is usually going to have greater sortie ability (more efficient in your words). But how efficient would Kandahar be in a conflict in Syria, Africa, China, etc?
I say good on LCDR Tremel and the fine men and women in the BUSH battle group.