IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jqsprt/v6y2010i2n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Iterative Method for Ranking College Football Teams

Author

Listed:
  • Wigness Maggie B

    (Pacific University)

  • Williams Chadd C

    (Pacific University)

  • Rowell Michael J

    (Pacific University)

Abstract

This paper introduces a new iterative model for ranking college football teams. It is first presented as a general model with a number of parameters. We then introduce two learning methods that use past data to predict the optimal values of the parameters for the model. Our learning algorithms are then implemented using data from 1998-2008. We analyze the accuracy of our rankings by considering bowl game outcomes for each season. We also compare our results with the Bowl Championship Series computer ranking system. We close with a discussion of possible directions for future work.

Suggested Citation

  • Wigness Maggie B & Williams Chadd C & Rowell Michael J, 2010. "A New Iterative Method for Ranking College Football Teams," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-15, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:6:y:2010:i:2:n:7
    DOI: 10.2202/1559-0410.1242
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1559-0410.1242
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1559-0410.1242?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gill Ryan & Keating Jerome, 2009. "Assessing Methods for College Football Rankings," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-21, May.
    2. Itay Fainmesser & Chaim Fershtman & Neil Gandal, 2009. "A Consistent Weighted Ranking Scheme With an Application to NCAA College Football Rankings," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 10(6), pages 582-600, December.
    3. Steven Caudill, 2009. "OSU and LSU: easy to spell but did they belong? Using the method of paired comparisons to evaluate the BCS rankings and the NCAA football championship game 2007-08," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(25), pages 3225-3230.
    4. West Brady T & Lamsal Madhur, 2008. "A New Application of Linear Modeling in the Prediction of College Football Bowl Outcomes and the Development of Team Ratings," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 4(3), pages 1-21, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. B. Jay Coleman, 2014. "Minimum violations and predictive meta‐rankings for college football," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(1), pages 17-33, February.
    2. Karl Andrew T., 2012. "The Sensitivity of College Football Rankings to Several Modeling Choices," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 8(3), pages 1-44, October.
    3. Delen, Dursun & Cogdell, Douglas & Kasap, Nihat, 2012. "A comparative analysis of data mining methods in predicting NCAA bowl outcomes," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 543-552.
    4. Jason A. Winfree, 2021. "If You Don'T Like The Outcome, Change The Contest," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(1), pages 329-343, January.
    5. Barrow Daniel & Drayer Ian & Elliott Peter & Gaut Garren & Osting Braxton, 2013. "Ranking rankings: an empirical comparison of the predictive power of sports ranking methods," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 187-202, June.
    6. Jason A. Winfree, 2020. "Rivalries, Bowl Eligibility, and Scheduling Effects in College Football," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 21(5), pages 477-492, June.
    7. West Brady T & Lamsal Madhur, 2008. "A New Application of Linear Modeling in the Prediction of College Football Bowl Outcomes and the Development of Team Ratings," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 4(3), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Liam J. A. Lenten, 2015. "Measurement of Competitive Balance in Conference and Divisional Tournament Design," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 16(1), pages 3-25, January.
    9. Liam J. A. Lenten, 2008. "Unbalanced Schedules And The Estimation Of Competitive Balance In The Scottish Premier League," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 55(4), pages 488-508, September.
    10. N. Winchester & R. T. Stefani, 2013. "An innovative approach to National Football League standings using bonus points," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 123-134, January.
    11. Phillips Andrew J. K., 2014. "Uncovering Formula One driver performances from 1950 to 2013 by adjusting for team and competition effects," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 1-18, June.
    12. Trono John A., 2010. "Rating/Ranking Systems, Post-Season Bowl Games, and "The Spread"," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 6(3), pages 1-20, July.
    13. E. Woodrow Eckard, 2013. "Is the Bowl Championship Series a Cartel? Some Evidence," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:6:y:2010:i:2:n:7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.