IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jqsprt/v5y2009i2n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Methods for College Football Rankings

Author

Listed:
  • Gill Ryan

    (University of Louisville)

  • Keating Jerome

    (University of Texas at San Antonio)

Abstract

With the advent of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) much emphasis has been placed on ranking teams. We consider several mathematical methods for ranking college football teams based on point differential including least squares with fixed or mixed effects. We also consider the use of modifications such as truncating or censoring (such as Harville's method) the result to adjust for the possibility of teams running up the score. We assess the predictive performance of these models using leave-one-out cross validation. The methods and analyses are applied to all major NCAA football data from 1930-2007.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:5:y:2009:i:2:n:3
    DOI: 10.2202/1559-0410.1172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1559-0410.1172
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1559-0410.1172?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.

    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:5:y:2009:i:2:n:3. 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: 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.