Saturday, August 31, 2013
Friday, August 30, 2013
Pay and Performance
One of the topics that I talk about in sports economics is the strength of the relationship between payroll and performance. Many people will give me examples of teams that spend a lot of money and perform well (i.e. the New York Yankees) and here is an example of a team (the Houston Astros) that does not spend much (relative to the rest of the league) and is performing poorly.
Yet, if we take all the teams in MLB, we will find that while there is a positive and statistically significant relationship between relative payroll and performance, the amount of that relationship is limited - typically around 20% over a five year time period; meaning that there is 80% of performance that is not explained by payroll.
Yet, if we take all the teams in MLB, we will find that while there is a positive and statistically significant relationship between relative payroll and performance, the amount of that relationship is limited - typically around 20% over a five year time period; meaning that there is 80% of performance that is not explained by payroll.
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Low Student Football Ticket Sales
The Daily Iowan reports that student tickets to the University of Iowa's home football games have NOT sold out so far this season. In response, the ticket office is lowering the price of student tickets for the first game, which is just days away. This is a natural response given the law of demand. At the end of the article, there is some speculation as to why ticket sales are below capacity. I want to add another - winning percent from last year. In research on the NFL I find that the prior years winning percent is a positive and statistically significant factor affecting attendance. That is not to say that prior winning percentage matters in NCAA FBS attendance demand, but it is very possible.
Friday, August 23, 2013
No NCAA FBS Predictions Here
Freakonomics has a nice podcast about the folly of predictions. Given that lately I have spent some time doing research on NCAA FBS teams, I get the occasional question about how "team X" will do in the upcoming season. My answers is: "I don't know"; which is about as honest an answer as I can give. In other words, I don't make predictions (except for bowl games) about how NCAA FBS teams will fare because the model that I use is not designed to make predictions, and according to Freakonomics - it is folly anyway. (Glad they agree with me).
While this may not be very satisfying let me give two examples using two sets of teams (Mississippi State and Mississippi) and (Oregon and Oregon State) where both sets of teams are from the same state. I mention this as the teams have a similar population to draw from for recruiting and each set of teams plays in the same FBS conference and none of these teams changed coaches during the time period I am looking at. I state this because I starting reading a book on college football and most of the examples used to make a point are not what I would call a typical case. I will write more on this later.
First let's look at Mississippi State and Ole Miss (i.e. Mississippi). Using my NCAA FBS Production Model, Mississippi State finished as the #43 highest ranked team in FBS for the 2011 season and followed that up with a #44 ranking for the 2012 season. Both were above average teams and notice that there was not much movement from one season to another. On the other hand, Ole Miss finished the 2011 season as the #119 most productive team (or the #2 least productive team) and then dramatically increased to #45 in 2012, just one place below Mississippi State.
Second let's look at Oregon and Oregon State. Again using the NCAA FBS Production Model, Oregon was the #8 most productive team in 2011 and the #3 most productive team in 2012, while Oregon State went from the #96 ranked team in 2011 to the #32 ranked team in 2012.
So what makes one team remain similar and another team change dramatically? Using the NCAA FBS Production model - I don't know. In other words the model is not designed to make predictions, but rather to take on-field actions by the teams offense and defense and turn them into measures of overall production. Once that I done, I sort from highest to lowest (for the team production) and the team that has the highest overall production number is the #1 ranked team and the team with the lowest production number is the #124 ranked team in 2012. I can tell you that Oregon and Oregon State both improved on both sides of the ball, which helped increase their productivity relative to other teams in the FBS "league". But I can't tell you before the season starts or for the next game what will happen. I do make "predictions" for the bowl games and am about75% 60% correct on those. Hey, upset's do happen - Jack! (Channeling my inner Si Roberson from Duck Dynasty).
UPDATE: As mentioned below - I was 60% correct on the bowl games. Thanks for your close reading of the blog!
While this may not be very satisfying let me give two examples using two sets of teams (Mississippi State and Mississippi) and (Oregon and Oregon State) where both sets of teams are from the same state. I mention this as the teams have a similar population to draw from for recruiting and each set of teams plays in the same FBS conference and none of these teams changed coaches during the time period I am looking at. I state this because I starting reading a book on college football and most of the examples used to make a point are not what I would call a typical case. I will write more on this later.
First let's look at Mississippi State and Ole Miss (i.e. Mississippi). Using my NCAA FBS Production Model, Mississippi State finished as the #43 highest ranked team in FBS for the 2011 season and followed that up with a #44 ranking for the 2012 season. Both were above average teams and notice that there was not much movement from one season to another. On the other hand, Ole Miss finished the 2011 season as the #119 most productive team (or the #2 least productive team) and then dramatically increased to #45 in 2012, just one place below Mississippi State.
Second let's look at Oregon and Oregon State. Again using the NCAA FBS Production Model, Oregon was the #8 most productive team in 2011 and the #3 most productive team in 2012, while Oregon State went from the #96 ranked team in 2011 to the #32 ranked team in 2012.
So what makes one team remain similar and another team change dramatically? Using the NCAA FBS Production model - I don't know. In other words the model is not designed to make predictions, but rather to take on-field actions by the teams offense and defense and turn them into measures of overall production. Once that I done, I sort from highest to lowest (for the team production) and the team that has the highest overall production number is the #1 ranked team and the team with the lowest production number is the #124 ranked team in 2012. I can tell you that Oregon and Oregon State both improved on both sides of the ball, which helped increase their productivity relative to other teams in the FBS "league". But I can't tell you before the season starts or for the next game what will happen. I do make "predictions" for the bowl games and am about
UPDATE: As mentioned below - I was 60% correct on the bowl games. Thanks for your close reading of the blog!
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
NCAA Bowls for 2014
ESPN says that there are 38 NCAA FBS bowls for 2014. Since 2008 only one season has this been possible (2011) and there are teams still on probation (Penn State for sure) so hitting 76 bowl eligible teams will be difficult. I know there are provisions for a five win team, but I think we are starting to hit the bottom of the barrel.
Seems as if the NCAA needs to start regulating the NCAA - opps that would reduce NCAA revenues, and that does not seem to be part of the regulation criteria.
Seems as if the NCAA needs to start regulating the NCAA - opps that would reduce NCAA revenues, and that does not seem to be part of the regulation criteria.
Labels:
NCAA
Thursday, August 15, 2013
Nebraska Under Bo Pelini
December 2007 the University of Nebraska hired Bo Pelini as their new head football coach. Given that Pelini has five seasons under his belt, I thought that I would look at the University of Nebraska's program using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.
First let's take a look at the production of the Husker's football team starting with the 2008 season and move forward in time. Nebraska finished 9-4 in 2008 overall. The Huskers were the #34 most productive team in the Football Bowl Subdivision using my Complex Invasion College Football Production Model Ranking, with the #17 ranked most productive offense and the #92 most productive defense. All of this against a tougher (strength of schedule (SOS) = 51.62) than the 2008 season's average SOS of 62.94. Nebraska's most impressive victory came against the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #29 ranked Kansas Jayhawks (45 - 35) and their worst performance was a 30-35 loss to Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #47 ranked Virginia Tech.
In 2009 in terms of the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model the Husker's were ranked #16 in terms of overall production, which is an improvement from 2008. In terms of offense and defense, the team switched with their offense dropping to #53 and their defense increasing to #9 in the nation. Nebraska faced a strength of schedule equal to 58.43 - which is average as compared to the average SOS for 2009 of (62.97) and finished 8-4 in the regular season and 9-4 overall. The Cornhusker's best win was against the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #8 University of Oklahoma Sooners (10-3) and their worst loss was to the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #83 Iowa State (7-9).
In 2010 in terms of the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model, Nebraska finished the regular season at 9-3 and lost their bowl game to Washington to finish 9-4 during the 2010 season. The University of Nebraska finished again as the #16 most productive team overall in the football bowl subdivision with the #27 ranked offense and the #12 ranked defense. The Husker's faced an average strength of schedule of 68.86 as compared to the overall league SOS of 63.05. Nebraska's best win using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model was against #12 Oklahoma State (51-41) and their worst loss was to the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #86 Washington (7-19). This was also the last year that Nebraska played in the Big 12.
The following season (2011) resulted in a similar end of season win-loss record (9-4) and saw a small decline in Nebraska's production in terms of the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model as the Husker's were the #23 most productive team in the Football Bowl Subdivision with the offense ranked using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model at #57 and their defense was ranked #16. Nebraska played against a tougher SOS (37.54) as compared to the league average SOS of 63.57. Note that this is the first year that Nebraska played in the Big 10 as opposed to the Big 12 Nebraska's best win was a (24-3) victory over #4 ranked Michigan State and their worst loss was to #37 South Carolina (13-30).
This past season (2012) the Husker's finished the regular season at 10-3 and lost the Capital One Bowl (as I predicted) against the University of Georgia to finish the season overall at 10-4. Nebraska again played against a tougher SOS 51.86 which is greater than one standard deviation of schedule strengths given the "league's" SOS for 2012 of 65.53. In terms of the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model, Nebraska finished as the #35 ranked team overall with the #18 ranked offense, but having the #75 ranked defense. The Husker's best game that season was a 42-13 victory over #29 ranked Arkansas State using my Complex Invasion College Football Production Model and their worst performance was a 30-36 loss to #36 ranked UCLA Bruins using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.
First let's take a look at the production of the Husker's football team starting with the 2008 season and move forward in time. Nebraska finished 9-4 in 2008 overall. The Huskers were the #34 most productive team in the Football Bowl Subdivision using my Complex Invasion College Football Production Model Ranking, with the #17 ranked most productive offense and the #92 most productive defense. All of this against a tougher (strength of schedule (SOS) = 51.62) than the 2008 season's average SOS of 62.94. Nebraska's most impressive victory came against the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #29 ranked Kansas Jayhawks (45 - 35) and their worst performance was a 30-35 loss to Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #47 ranked Virginia Tech.
In 2009 in terms of the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model the Husker's were ranked #16 in terms of overall production, which is an improvement from 2008. In terms of offense and defense, the team switched with their offense dropping to #53 and their defense increasing to #9 in the nation. Nebraska faced a strength of schedule equal to 58.43 - which is average as compared to the average SOS for 2009 of (62.97) and finished 8-4 in the regular season and 9-4 overall. The Cornhusker's best win was against the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #8 University of Oklahoma Sooners (10-3) and their worst loss was to the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #83 Iowa State (7-9).
In 2010 in terms of the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model, Nebraska finished the regular season at 9-3 and lost their bowl game to Washington to finish 9-4 during the 2010 season. The University of Nebraska finished again as the #16 most productive team overall in the football bowl subdivision with the #27 ranked offense and the #12 ranked defense. The Husker's faced an average strength of schedule of 68.86 as compared to the overall league SOS of 63.05. Nebraska's best win using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model was against #12 Oklahoma State (51-41) and their worst loss was to the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model #86 Washington (7-19). This was also the last year that Nebraska played in the Big 12.
The following season (2011) resulted in a similar end of season win-loss record (9-4) and saw a small decline in Nebraska's production in terms of the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model as the Husker's were the #23 most productive team in the Football Bowl Subdivision with the offense ranked using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model at #57 and their defense was ranked #16. Nebraska played against a tougher SOS (37.54) as compared to the league average SOS of 63.57. Note that this is the first year that Nebraska played in the Big 10 as opposed to the Big 12 Nebraska's best win was a (24-3) victory over #4 ranked Michigan State and their worst loss was to #37 South Carolina (13-30).
This past season (2012) the Husker's finished the regular season at 10-3 and lost the Capital One Bowl (as I predicted) against the University of Georgia to finish the season overall at 10-4. Nebraska again played against a tougher SOS 51.86 which is greater than one standard deviation of schedule strengths given the "league's" SOS for 2012 of 65.53. In terms of the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model, Nebraska finished as the #35 ranked team overall with the #18 ranked offense, but having the #75 ranked defense. The Husker's best game that season was a 42-13 victory over #29 ranked Arkansas State using my Complex Invasion College Football Production Model and their worst performance was a 30-36 loss to #36 ranked UCLA Bruins using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)