The market for college football

The NY Times brings us up to date on the business which is college football:

What Made College Football More Like the Pros? $7.3 Billion, for a Start
By MARC TRACY and TIM ROHAN

"The story of college football’s gold rush can be told through television contracts. Under the championship playoff format that began this season, ESPN is paying $7.3 billion over 12 years to telecast seven games a year — four major bowl games, two semifinal bowl games and the national championship game. (In the first semifinal on Thursday, Oregon will play Florida State in the Rose Bowl; the title game is on Jan. 12.)

Each of the five major conferences — the Southeastern, the Atlantic Coast, the Pacific-12, the Big 12 and the Big Ten — will see its base revenue increase to about $50 million, from about $28 million under last season’s system. The base revenue will nearly triple for the five conferences that make up the next tier of college football."

The Nobel sport of football at Stanford

The Nobel committee recognized two Stanford faculty members this year. And it's the football season.
So here I am, waving to the crowd from the field, with Brian Kobilka, who shared this year's Nobel prize in Chemistry. (The bottom pic is how we looked to my wife from the skydeck of Stanford's football stadium...)

Unravelling in college football

There are some big eighth graders out there.

LSU Gives Scholarship Offer To 8th Grader
"It's a scene that plays out on college campuses every single summer, although this offer was different for one main reason -- Dylan Moses has yet to start eighth grade.

"Considering the Tigers are only just starting to hand out offers to members of the Class of 2014, it came as a bit surprise for a 2017 prospect to get one."

And so did the University of Washington

"Washington made a splash in the recruiting world Wednesday, but don't bother checking the ESPN 150 for the newest Huskies commit. He won't be included in that list this year, next year or the one after that.

"It's highly unlikely a single Washington player still will be on the roster by the time Tate Martell makes an appearance in purple and gold, but after receiving a scholarship offer from the Huskies three weeks ago, the soon-to-be eighth-grade quarterback committed to coach Steve Sarkisian on Wednesday, Martell's father, Al, confirmed to ESPN.com.

"The Washington coaching staff is not able to confirm whether it has accepted the commitment from the 14-year-old Martell. Schools are not able to offer a written scholarship until Sept. 1 of a prospect's senior season, according to NCAA rules. Martell won't be able to sign a national letter of intent until Feb. 1, 2017."

HT: Vikram Rao

College football playoffs on the horizon?

This is a bit dated but still interesting: Inside Higher Ed reports on Playoff Politics

"The move to a playoff does represent “a little bit of bowing” to pressure from fans and sports media who are dissatisfied with the system currently used to pick a Division I champion, Kansas State University President Kirk Schulz said. That system uses a combination of mathematical formulas and sportswriter and coaches’ polls to select the teams that will compete in the Bowl Championship Series title game – and it has come to questionable results more than once.

This year, for instance, the system bypassed Big 12 Conference champion Oklahoma State University to pit Southeastern Conference champion Louisiana State University against that same conference’s runner-up, the University of Alabama (a repeat, furthermore, of a ridiculously hyped match-up earlier in the season dubbed the “game of the century”).

But there's far more at stake than just who gets into the national championship. The fate of the other four prized BCS bowl games -- the Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar Bowls -- hangs in the balance.

While all 12 conference commissioners have sat in on the meetings that are shaping the playoff, those who run the six BCS conferences make the most money and carry the most weight. And before the BCS did away with the “automatic qualifier” designation last month, which automatically placed the champion of each BCS conference into one of the four top bowls, they also had direct, lucrative ties to one of those five widely watched games. (It also likely played a role in the frenzy of conference realignment in recent years.)

So while commissioners like Larry Scott of the Pacific-12 Conference and Jim Delany of the Big 10 Conference have cited the tradition and sentimentality of the bowls as reason to keep them intact moving forward, there are also financial benefits to doing so. That's why talk of a tournament has revolved around keeping the bowls intact in some form, and tacking a four-team playoff onto that. 

************
In the meantime, Big 12, SEC Agree to Pit Champions in Bowl

"The Big 12 and Southeastern Conference champions will meet in a new game starting after the 2014 season, unless one or both are selected to play in a planned four-team national playoff, the Big 12 announced today. If a champion reaches the playoff, another team from the same conference will be selected for the game. The bowl game’s location will be announced at a later date.

"The news comes as leaders of the Bowl Championship Series negotiate major-college football’s first playoff, which would replace the current one-game BCS championship and begin after the 2014 season. BCS leaders hope to have the new playoff format finalized by midsummer and discuss a new TV deal with ESPN, which has first negotiating rights, in October.

"The pact is reminiscent of the longstanding arrangement between the Big Ten and the Pac-12, whose champions usually meet in the Rose Bowl.
...

"The new bowl represents a potential threat to the Fiesta Bowl, which since the start of the BCS has pitted the Big 12 champion against an at-large team.
...

"The BCS’s 11 conference commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick are meeting with their constituents about the particulars of the potential playoff, and will meet again June 20. If the four-team plan is approved, it will move to the BCS presidential oversight committee for approval in early July."

Unraveling of college football recruiting

Two articles on unraveling in college football recruiting:
Timing is everything with offers: How programs wrestle between getting evals while also making prospects feel wanted

"While coaches like Dooley face challenges to offer early in a prospect's junior year, other coaches have to ramp it up even further. Georgia coach Mark Richt said not offering an in-state prospect can put the Bulldogs in a permanent trail position for a prospect.
"Our biggest problem at Georgia is trying to make those evaluations properly and making those offers," Richt said. "It does put pressure on us sometimes to offer a guy a bit sooner than you'd like to. I think everybody across the board has to project a little more. You have to hope that we've made the right projection.
"If you get your class nailed down a year in advance and all of a sudden some of those guys didn't keep progressing like you thought and some other guys came up, [you say] 'Man, I wish I had waited and offered that kid because I like this guy better than I like that guy.' Some people find a way to dump that guy and take that [other] guy. At Georgia, if we offer and he commits to us, we're not dumping him."

********

Iowa recruit not old enough to drive (HT: David Backus)
"Football programs are increasingly entering the territory of basketball scholarship offerings. John Allen was told twice last week Iowa was on the verge of offering his son Brian a football scholarship. John Allen didn't believe it either time. Brian Allen was after all only a high school freshman and had never played varsity football. But on Monday, John Allen called Iowa coach Kirk Ferentz as he was advised, and Ferentz confirmed that he would like to extend a scholarship offer to Brian Allen. "We're all kind of amazed by it," John Allen said. "I don't think it's sunk in yet. He's 15 years old. He can't drive a car yet, etc."
***********

One impetus behind the unraveling of markets is that people make early offers to avoid being left behind as others make even earlier offers. As Yogi Berra said (in a different context), "it gets late early out there."

College football is big business (who knew?)

The Chronicle reports on just how big a business college football has become  With an Assist From Alabama, Southeastern Conference Breaks the $1-Billion Mark

"Thanks to a lucrative television contract and robust earnings generated by several highly ranked football teams, the 12 athletic programs in the league brought in $1,006,798,094 during the 2009-10 fiscal year, according to new data from the Education Department. That's about an 11-percent increase from the previous year and a nearly 77-percent bump from six years ago.
The league's biggest boost came from the University of Alabama, where revenues spiked by 24 percent in 2009-10, to $129.3-million. With its increase, Alabama leapfrogged Ohio State University and the University of Florida to reach No. 2 on the list of biggest revenue-producing programs in all of college sports. The University of Texas, which brought in $143.6-million, remains No. 1."
...
"Still, as revenues have grown, so have expenses: Even though each of the top 20 moneymakers in college sports pulled in more than $75-million last year—eight programs alone made more than $100-million—that doesn't mean all of them turned a profit. Of the 120 athletic programs in Division I-A, all but 14 operated with a deficit*. (For a list of the top 100 earners, see this LSU fan blog, which first reported on the conference's crossing the billion-dollar mark.)"

*"Institutions in Division I-A, which include some of the biggest and wealthiest athletics programs in the NCAA, allocated a median of $10.2-million to their athletic departments in the 2009 fiscal year, according to the NCAA’s annual analysis of Division I financial data. That allocation was an increase from the median of $8-million that universities provided to sports program during the previous year."

College football teams are hard to rank

At least that's the conclusion of a recent NY Times article, Who’s No. 1?, written before the Thanksgiving weekend games were played.  It begins by noting

"This is the 13th year of the Bowl Championship Series, the byzantine and unpopular system that is supposed to guarantee that the college-football season ends with a championship game between the sport’s two best teams. Comparing teams that usually do not play one another — there are 120 major college-football programs, and each one competes in just 12 games each season — was never going to be easy. Like three egg rolls served to a party of four at a Chinese restaurant, the portions never seem to divide up quite as neatly as they should. This year, for instance, four programs — Oregon, Auburn, Boise State and Texas Christian — have spent much of the season in contention for the two positions in the championship."
...
"In addition to the championship game, the B.C.S. involves four beauty-contest games: the Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar bowls. In the last four years, the teams ranked lower than their opponents by the B.C.S. formula have won 12 of the 20 games established by the system. The putative underdog has also won 6 of the last 8 title games: last year’s championship, in which the higher-rated Alabama defeated Texas, was something of a novelty. If the No. 2 team routinely beats the No. 1 team, it’s worth asking whether the B.C.S. rankings are valid.
...
"Without high-quality out-of-conference games, every major conference is in essence an island unto itself. We can identify the best team in the Pac 10, or the best team in the S.E.C. But we don’t have any good way of comparing the Pac 10 against the S.E.C., or against any other conference. It doesn’t matter how smart your computer rankings are, or how wizened the participants in your poll: there simply isn’t enough worthwhile data to work with."


I've written earlier posts about college football bowls, and how the present system arose in part out of an effort to roll back the unraveling of dates at which teams and bowls were matched...

College football and the BCS as a political football

The WSJ reports today: U.S. May Examine College Footbal Bowl System
"Sen. Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah) said he received a letter from the Justice Department, in which it "outlined the inequities" of the BCS system and said that it is considering whether to investigate the BCS under the antitrust laws. The letter also said that the administration is exploring other options to address college football's postseason, including encouraging the NCAA to take control and asking the Federal Trade Commission to examine the BCS's legality under consumer-proteciton laws.
Shortly after he was elected in November 2008, Barack Obama said he would "throw my weight around a little bit" regarding college football's lack of playoff system. Currently, the BCS stages a national title game between the two teams that finish atop a compilation of polls, while other arguably deserving teams often get excluded. Mr. Hatch, whose home-state Utah Utes were left out following the 2008 season despite a perfect record, has been advocating for changes, too, writing a letter to the president in October asking for an antitrust investigation."

The article goes on to quote the BCS director as saying we've seen this before: ""There is much less to this letter than meets the eye," Mr. Hancock said. "The White House knows that with all the serious issues facing the country, the last thing they should do is increase the deficit by spending money to investigate how the college football playoffs are played. With all due respect to Sen. Hatch, he is overstating the importance of the letter he received from the Office of Legislative Affairs." "

Here are my previous posts on the BCS and the serious business of college football.

Senate Judiciary Committee and College Football Playoffs

The United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary had the following item on its home page yesterday:
"Did You Know? The Senate Judiciary Committee conducted 104 hearings and business meetings in the 110th Congress, more than any other Senate Committee"

There is only one meeting so far on next week's calendar:
Tuesday 7/7/2009
Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights
"The Bowl Championship Series: Is it Fair and In Compliance with Antitrust Law? "

Here's the AP story: Senate to Hold Hearing on College Football's BCS
"The Senate plans to hold a hearing next week looking into antitrust issues surrounding the Bowl Championship Series. It's the second time this year that Congress is shining a light on the polarizing system college football uses to crown its national champion."
...
"Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, the subcommittee's top Republican and the lawmaker who sought the hearing, did not return telephone and e-mail messages left at his office Tuesday.
In an essay for Sports Illustrated being released Wednesday, Hatch wrote that the Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits contracts, combinations or conspiracies designed to reduce competition.
''I don't think a more accurate description of what the BCS does exists,'' Hatch wrote. He noted that six conferences get automatic bids to participate in series, while others do not. The system, he argued, ''intentionally and explicitly favors certain participants.''
...
Football fans in Hatch's state were furious that Utah was bypassed for the national championship despite going undefeated in the regular season. Hatch noted that President Barack Obama and others have called for the BCS to be replaced with a playoff system."
...
"David Frohnmayer, president of the University of Oregon and chairman of the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee, expressed a preference Tuesday for the current system, saying the proposals for a playoff system ''disrespect our academic calendars, and they utterly lack a business plan.'' "

College football bowls used to be an unravelled market, and, whatever its other flaws, the BCS system has largely eliminated that problem. While I'm rooting for the Judiciary Committee in their own competition to hold the most hearings, I hope that their efforts will not do too much harm to one of the main reasons we have colleges.

Unraveling

Many markets have trouble coordinating on the timing of transactions, and this has led to market failures in markets as diverse as the market for college football bowls, and the labor market for federal court clerks, and in various medical markets, such as (most recently) gastroenterologists and orthopaedic surgeons.

Why do transactions in some markets happen inefficiently early? Here are the concluding paragraphs from our recent NBER working paper Unraveling Results from Comparable Demand and Supply: An Experimental Investigation
by Muriel Niederle, Alvin E. Roth, M. Utku Unver - #15006 (LS)

" It has been known at least since Roth and Xing (1994) that many markets unravel, so that offers become progressively earlier as participants seek to make strategic use of the timing of transactions. It is clear that unraveling can have many causes, because markets are highly multidimensional and time is only one dimensional (and so transactions can only move in two directions in time, earlier or later). So there can be many different reasons that make it advantageous to make transactions earlier. There can also be strategic reasons to delay transactions; see e.g. Roth and Ockenfels (2002) on late bidding in internet auctions.
Thus the study of factors that promote unraveling is a large one, and a number of distinct causes have been identified in different markets or in theory, including instability of late outcomes (which gives blocking pairs an incentive to identify each other early), congestion of late markets (which makes it difficult to make transactions if they are left until too late), and the desire to mutually insure against late-resolving uncertainty. There has also been some study of market practices that may facilitate or impede the making of early offers, such as the rules and customs surrounding "exploding" offers, which expire if not accepted immediately.
In this paper we take a somewhat different tack, and consider conditions related to supply and demand that will tend to work against unraveling, or to facilitate it. There seems to be a widespread perception, in markets that have experienced it, that unraveling is sparked by a shortage of workers.
But for inefficient unraveling to occur, firms have to be willing to make early offers and workers have to be willing to accept them. Our experiment supports the hypothesis that a shortage of workers is not itself conducive to unraveling, since workers who know that they are in short supply need not hurry to accept offers by lower quality firms. Instead, in the model and in the experiment, it is comparable supply and demand that leads to unraveling, in which attention must be paid not only to the overall demand and supply, but to the supply and demand of workers and firms of the highest quality. This seems to reflect what we see in many unraveled markets, in which competition for the elite firms and workers is fierce, but the quality of workers may not be reliably revealed until after a good deal of hiring has already been completed."

http://papers.nber.org/papers/W15006

Postscript: Skip Sauer over at The Sports Economist has a post about a 9th grader offered a college football scholarship in what is becoming a seriously unraveled market.

Football bowls: market design by Congress?

Sports fans will no doubt be relieved to learn that the Feds are on the case: Congress examining fairness, financing of BCS system .

"Tackling an issue sure to rouse sports fans, lawmakers pressed college football officials Friday on switching the Bowl Championship Series to a playoff, with one Texas Republican calling the current system as unworkable as communism and joking it should be labeled "BS," not "BCS."
John Swofford, the coordinator of the BCS, rejected the idea of switching to a playoff, arguing it would threaten the existence of celebrated bowl games. Sponsorships and TV revenue that now go to bowl games would instead be spent on playoff games, "meaning that it will be very difficult for any bowl, including the current BCS bowls, which are among the oldest and most established in the game's history, to survive," Swofford said.
Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, who has introduced legislation that would prevent the NCAA from labeling a game a national championship unless it's the outcome of a playoff system, said that efforts to tinker with the BCS were bound to fail.
"It's like communism," he said at the House Energy and Commerce Committee's commerce, trade and consumer protection subcommittee hearing. "You can't fix it." "

While the BCS system is already a kind of camel (i.e. a horse designed by a committee), it is a considerable improvement over the unraveled market that came before it, in which bowl matchups were frequently mis-matches arranged several weeks before the end of the regular season, see
Frechette, Guillaume, Alvin E. Roth, and M. Utku Unver, "Unraveling Yields Inefficient Matchings: Evidence from Post-Season College Football Bowls," Rand Journal of Economics, 38, 4, Winter 2007, 967-982, with an online appendix).

I'm skeptical that Congress will push this very far, but it is good to know that the country is in such good shape that some of our Congress persons can devote their efforts to this.

HT: Utku Unver

College football and the BCS National Championship Game

Number 1 ranked Oklahoma will play number 2 ranked Florida Thursday evening in the Bowl Championship Series' National Championship Game, which this year will be played at the Orange Bowl. The championship game is the culmination of a sequence of "bowl" games that the BCS organizes, in which the most successful college teams each season play a final post-season game.

College football doesn't host playoffs. The "championship" game matches the two highest ranked teams at the end of the regular season, based on a more than usually uncertain ranking system (since some of the highly ranked teams will not have played each other). Sports Illustrated just published a story, before the championship game, saying that some of the early bowl games had low Nielsen ratings (which measure television viewership): Ratings are proof the addition of fifth BCS game officially a failure. The article notes
"By removing the top two teams from the existing BCS bowls (Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange), the remaining lineup gets unavoidably watered-down. "

Utku Unver and Guillaume Frechette and I wrote a paper which showed that (under earlier versions of the BCS system) the championship games drew enough extra television viewers to make up for the lower viewership in other bowl games that (consequently) had neither the top nor second ranked team playing in them. (See also this interview about the origin of the BCS system (to which I devoted an earlier post).)

So, while the most exciting thing for some people Thursday evening will be the final score, I'll be waiting to hear the final Nielsen ratings.


(Our European colleagues are always bemused by the large role that college plays in the life of American football players, not to mention the role that football plays in the life of American colleges. While some professional sports have minor leagues or the equivalent, colleges serve that role for football. But that's a story for another time.)

10 PM update: here's a Washington Post story on the more than usual uncertainty in this year's rankings, which may lead to a lack of consensus that the winner of the championship game is the best college team. (The president elect for one is on record as thinking that a playoff system would be more rewarding...)

Auctions for seats at sporting events

The Jets Gross $16 Million in a Seat-License Auction

The days when sports teams sold tickets at below market clearing prices to fans who waited on long lines are fading fast.

College football bowls

How Economics May Lead to Better Football Games, an interview based on the paper
Frechette, Guillaume, Alvin E. Roth, and M. Utku Unver, "Unraveling Yields Inefficient Matchings: Evidence from Post-Season College Football Bowls," Rand Journal of Economics, 38, 4, Winter 2007, 967-982, with an online appendix).