IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v93y2026i2p578-595.html

NCAA March Madness and Academic Peer Rankings

Author

Listed:
  • Sean E. Mulholland
  • Kurt W. Rotthoff
  • Aleksandar Tomic

Abstract

Building on previous investigations of the relationship between athletic success and school quality, we analyze the effect of appearances, wins, and surprise “Cinderella” runs in the NCAA men's basketball tournament on the peer assessment score of the U.S. News and World Report's annual rankings. We find that reaching the Sweet Sixteen is associated with a peer score increase of 0.3% for National Universities, which is almost equal to the average decline witnessed by National Universities. Peer scores increase by 2.2% for National Liberal Arts Colleges earning a Sweet Sixteen birth, which is 6.1 times the average decline in our National Liberal Arts Colleges sample. Schools making a Cinderella run see a positive boost relative to non‐Cinderella teams.

Suggested Citation

  • Sean E. Mulholland & Kurt W. Rotthoff & Aleksandar Tomic, 2026. "NCAA March Madness and Academic Peer Rankings," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 93(2), pages 578-595, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:93:y:2026:i:2:p:578-595
    DOI: 10.1002/soej.70032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.70032
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/soej.70032?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
    ---><---

    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:wly:soecon:v:93:y:2026:i:2:p:578-595. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    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.