A comparative analysis of data mining methods in predicting NCAA bowl outcomes
Predicting the outcome of a college football game is an interesting and challenging problem. Most previous studies have concentrated on ranking the bowl-eligible teams according to their perceived strengths, and using these rankings to predict the winner of a specific bowl game. In this study, using eight years of data and three popular data mining techniques (namely artificial neural networks, decision trees and support vector machines), we have developed both classification- and regression-type models in order to assess the predictive abilities of different methodologies (classification versus regression-based classification) and techniques. In the end, the results showed that the classification-type models predict the game outcomes better than regression-based classification models, and of the three classification techniques, decision trees produced the best results, with better than an 85% prediction accuracy on the 10-fold holdout sample. The sensitivity analysis on trained models revealed that the non-conference team winning percentage and average margin of victory are the two most important variables among the 28 that were used in this study.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Fainmesser, Itay & Fershtman, Chaim & Gandal, Neil, 2005.
"A Consistent Weighted Ranking Scheme with an Application to NCAA College Football Rankings,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
5239, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- 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.
- Song, ChiUng & Boulier, Bryan L. & Stekler, Herman O., 2007. "The comparative accuracy of judgmental and model forecasts of American football games," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 405-413.
- Herman O. Stekler & David Sendor & Richard Verlander, 2009.
"Issues in Sports Forecasting,"
2009-002, The George Washington University, Department of Economics, Research Program on Forecasting.
- 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.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:28:y:2012:i:2:p:543-552. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.