IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v32y2002i5p85-94.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

College Football Rankings: Do the Computers Know Best?

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph Martinich

    (College of Business Administration, University of Missouri–St. Louis, 8001 Natural Bridge Road, St. Louis, Missouri 63121)

Abstract

The bowl-championship-series (BCS) committee uses 10 ranking schemes, including eight computer rankings, to select college football teams for bowl-championship-series bowl games, including the national championship game. The large financial benefits of participating in BCS bowl games make it imperative that the selection process accurately select the best teams. I evaluated the performance of the 10 ranking schemes the BCS committee used during the 1999 and 2000 seasons to select bowl teams. I found that almost all are equally accurate, but the Seattle Times scheme clearly underperforms the others. In addition, two proposed changes to the BCS selection formula, (1) to prohibit computer ranking schemes from considering the margin of victory in their rankings, and (2) to include explicitly the outcomes of head-to-head games among teams being considered for BCS bowls, could do more harm than good and could decrease the likelihood of the committee selecting the best teams for the BCS bowls.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph Martinich, 2002. "College Football Rankings: Do the Computers Know Best?," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 85-94, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:32:y:2002:i:5:p:85-94
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.32.5.85.33
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.32.5.85.33
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.32.5.85.33?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rick L. Wilson, 1995. "Ranking College Football Teams: A Neural Network Approach," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 44-59, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sebastián Cea & Guillermo Durán & Mario Guajardo & Denis Sauré & Joaquín Siebert & Gonzalo Zamorano, 2020. "An analytics approach to the FIFA ranking procedure and the World Cup final draw," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 286(1), pages 119-146, March.
    2. Jarrod Olson & Daniel F. Stone, 2014. "Suspense-Optimal College Football Play-Offs," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 15(5), pages 519-540, October.
    3. C. Richard Cassady & Lisa M. Maillart & Sinan Salman, 2005. "Ranking Sports Teams: A Customizable Quadratic Assignment Approach," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(6), pages 497-510, December.
    4. Buchman Susan & Kadane Joseph B., 2008. "Reweighting the Bowl Championship Series," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 4(3), pages 1-13, July.
    5. 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.
    6. B. Jay Coleman, 2005. "Minimizing Game Score Violations in College Football Rankings," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(6), pages 483-496, December.

    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. Koning, Ruud H. & Koolhaas, Michael & Renes, Gusta & Ridder, Geert, 2003. "A simulation model for football championships," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 268-276, July.
    2. Young William A & Holland William S & Weckman Gary R, 2008. "Determining Hall of Fame Status for Major League Baseball Using an Artificial Neural Network," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 4(4), pages 1-46, October.
    3. C. Richard Cassady & Lisa M. Maillart & Sinan Salman, 2005. "Ranking Sports Teams: A Customizable Quadratic Assignment Approach," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(6), pages 497-510, December.
    4. repec:dgr:rugsom:01a65 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Lebovic, James H. & Sigelman, Lee, 2001. "The forecasting accuracy and determinants of football rankings," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 105-120.

    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:inm:orinte:v:32:y:2002:i:5:p:85-94. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.