Whoa, nellie! empirical tests of college football's conventional wisdom
By: Trevon D. Logan
Contributors: National Bureau of Economic Research
Series: NBER working paper series -- working paper 13596; Working paper series (National Bureau of Economic Research : Online) -- working paper no. 13596.
Publisher: National Bureau of Economic Research
Published: 2007
Place of publication: Cambridge, MA
Language: eng
Format: [electronic resource] /
Description: "College football fans, coaches, and observers have adopted a set of beliefs about how college football poll voters behave.  I document three pieces of conventional wisdom in college football regarding the timing of wins and losses, the value of playing strong opponents, and the value of winning by wide margins.  Using a unique data set with 25 years of AP poll results, I test college football's conventional wisdom.  In particular, I test (1) whether it is better to lose early or late in the season, (2) whether teams benefit from playing stronger opponents, and (3) whether teams are rewarded for winning by large margins.  Contrary to conventional wisdom, I find that (1) it is better to lose later in the season than earlier, (2) AP voters do not pay attention to the strength of a defeated opponent, and (3) the benefit of winning by a large margin is negligible.  I conclude by noting how these results inform debates about a potential playoff in college football"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site.
Notes: Title from PDF file as viewed on 11/30/2007.

Includes bibliographical references.

Also available in print.

System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Mode of access: World Wide Web.