BleedGopher
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2008
- Messages
- 62,293
- Reaction score
- 18,972
- Points
- 113
per Andy:
Do you see fewer upsets because it’s likely that all college football stadiums will be reduced capacity/no fans at all? The home-field advantage aspect of the game really becomes negated. — Andrew in Chesapeake Beach, Md.
This is a fascinating question, because home-field advantage is a difficult concept to pin down anyway. In a way, a season in which a lot of teams play with limited capacity might provide a control group to give us a basis for comparison. But before we discuss that, let’s unpack the idea of home-field advantage in college football.
Alabama and Ohio State win a huge percentage of their home games, but is that because of the atmosphere or because they usually have better players and coaches than their opponents? The correct answer probably leans much harder on the latter. That’s what makes determining home-field advantage in college football so challenging.
The NFL has a draft and a salary cap and various rules to ensure that talent gets distributed as close to equal as possible. Since 2014, home teams in that league have won 56.7 percent of the time (890-681-4). There is an advantage to playing at home, but only a slight one.
Since 2014 in the FBS, home teams have won 62.8 percent of the time (3,053-1,805). Cut that down to the Power 5 conferences and Notre Dame and that figure jumps to 65.4 percent (1,697-891). The Power 5 teams typically pay between one and three teams in a given season to come be underdogs in their stadiums, and given the results, it stands to reason that a giant piece of the home-field advantage in major college football is the fact that the home team is often far more talented than the visiting team.
The other factor in home-field advantage is whether the home team outperforms expectations. Though they aren’t perfect — because a presumed home-field advantage is often baked in — betting lines offer the best window into whether a team plays as expected, worse than expected or better than expected.
Given our assumptions about home-field advantage, we should find that teams such as LSU, Ohio State and Oklahoma — with full stadiums and loud crowds — perform the best at home against the spread. So who actually has performed the best at home against the spread in the College Football Playoff era? Among the schools that have played in the FBS every year since 2014, Navy has. According to data compiled by TeamRankings.com, the Midshipmen have outperformed the spread by an average of 5.9 points as the home team. Among teams that have played every season in the FBS since 2014, Memphis is next, outperforming the spread by an average of 4.5 points a game. No one is claiming that raucous atmospheres at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium or the Liberty Bowl caused those teams to exceed expectations at home.
Penn State (plus-4.1 per game against the spread) is the first program with what would be considered a true home-field advantage on the list. LSU, which has one of America’s loudest stadiums, is farther down the list at plus-2.7 points a game against the spread. Alabama, which plays in an equally intimidating venue, is way down at minus-0.4.
Does this mean Bryant-Denny Stadium offers no home-field advantage? No. Ask opponents if they’d rather play Alabama in Tuscaloosa or at a neutral site, and they’ll always pick the neutral site. But it could mean that what really makes Alabama so good at home is Alabama being really good at football.
One other thing to consider as we examine home-field advantage: Not all home games — or home crowds — are created equal. A prime example of this is Florida. When the Gators are good, The Swamp is a loud, claustrophobic place to play. The noise certainly affected Auburn quarterback Bo Nix last season in a game the Gators won as point-spread underdogs. But Florida was undefeated and playing a good opponent that used to play the Gators every year before the aftershocks of SEC expansion made Auburn-Florida games a rarity.
theathletic.com
Go Gophers!!
Do you see fewer upsets because it’s likely that all college football stadiums will be reduced capacity/no fans at all? The home-field advantage aspect of the game really becomes negated. — Andrew in Chesapeake Beach, Md.
This is a fascinating question, because home-field advantage is a difficult concept to pin down anyway. In a way, a season in which a lot of teams play with limited capacity might provide a control group to give us a basis for comparison. But before we discuss that, let’s unpack the idea of home-field advantage in college football.
Alabama and Ohio State win a huge percentage of their home games, but is that because of the atmosphere or because they usually have better players and coaches than their opponents? The correct answer probably leans much harder on the latter. That’s what makes determining home-field advantage in college football so challenging.
The NFL has a draft and a salary cap and various rules to ensure that talent gets distributed as close to equal as possible. Since 2014, home teams in that league have won 56.7 percent of the time (890-681-4). There is an advantage to playing at home, but only a slight one.
Since 2014 in the FBS, home teams have won 62.8 percent of the time (3,053-1,805). Cut that down to the Power 5 conferences and Notre Dame and that figure jumps to 65.4 percent (1,697-891). The Power 5 teams typically pay between one and three teams in a given season to come be underdogs in their stadiums, and given the results, it stands to reason that a giant piece of the home-field advantage in major college football is the fact that the home team is often far more talented than the visiting team.
The other factor in home-field advantage is whether the home team outperforms expectations. Though they aren’t perfect — because a presumed home-field advantage is often baked in — betting lines offer the best window into whether a team plays as expected, worse than expected or better than expected.
Given our assumptions about home-field advantage, we should find that teams such as LSU, Ohio State and Oklahoma — with full stadiums and loud crowds — perform the best at home against the spread. So who actually has performed the best at home against the spread in the College Football Playoff era? Among the schools that have played in the FBS every year since 2014, Navy has. According to data compiled by TeamRankings.com, the Midshipmen have outperformed the spread by an average of 5.9 points as the home team. Among teams that have played every season in the FBS since 2014, Memphis is next, outperforming the spread by an average of 4.5 points a game. No one is claiming that raucous atmospheres at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium or the Liberty Bowl caused those teams to exceed expectations at home.
Penn State (plus-4.1 per game against the spread) is the first program with what would be considered a true home-field advantage on the list. LSU, which has one of America’s loudest stadiums, is farther down the list at plus-2.7 points a game against the spread. Alabama, which plays in an equally intimidating venue, is way down at minus-0.4.
Does this mean Bryant-Denny Stadium offers no home-field advantage? No. Ask opponents if they’d rather play Alabama in Tuscaloosa or at a neutral site, and they’ll always pick the neutral site. But it could mean that what really makes Alabama so good at home is Alabama being really good at football.
One other thing to consider as we examine home-field advantage: Not all home games — or home crowds — are created equal. A prime example of this is Florida. When the Gators are good, The Swamp is a loud, claustrophobic place to play. The noise certainly affected Auburn quarterback Bo Nix last season in a game the Gators won as point-spread underdogs. But Florida was undefeated and playing a good opponent that used to play the Gators every year before the aftershocks of SEC expansion made Auburn-Florida games a rarity.
Dear Andy: Will less-full college football stadiums negate home-field advantage?
College football isn't set up to soften home settings, but the most influential ones in recent years might surprise you.
theathletic.com
Go Gophers!!
