I can't imagine any FSU fan would argue with the findings of this study, particularly the favoring of underdogs. I've always thought it was fairly obvious that the perceived lesser team was granted significantly more leeway in officiating (which is the opposite of the ACC way in basketball).

Hopefully this will jumpstart some change, although to be fair, I thought it has been slightly less egregious the last couple seasons.

#GOACC

I have to agree: it seemed pretty obvious at times that ACC referees tended to favor the underdogs in the past, but it also seems like someone finally figured out that doesn't help the conference any, so they stopped doing that about 2 seasons ago.

I actually wrote about this back in January [LINK]. However, that was when they were still working on this paper, so it might be worth another look now.

Quote from the paper

from page 2:

Quote:conference referees presided over an in-conference game involving a team that could make the playoff if it won versus a team with little (or no) chance of making the playoff. Each of these conferences stood to potentially lose $6M if the higher ranked team did not win that game, providing a possible incentive to make favorable calls to the potential playoff team

from page 4:

Quote:Contrary to profit-maximizing expectations of bias, none of the biases evident in the conferences in our study promoted favored teams. The ACC, and to a lesser extent the former Big East, actually show evidence of the opposite bias: more favored teams are penalized to a greater degree

from page 5:

Quote:Home field advantage produces significantly fewer penalty yards in both the ACC and the Big XII

from page 7:

Quote:there is reason to believe that the ACC handicaps its stronger teams despite the financial incentives to do the opposite

I have no doubt that officials at all levels have biases, and numerous studies have shown that. I am not prepared to accept yet that those biases are conscious - that is, I don't think anybody is deliberately favoring one team or another. That is, I doubt anybody sat referees down and said "we have to stop favoring underdogs because it's costing us money".

I do believe that crowd emotions affect officials just like they affect fans. When a trailing team starts mounting a comeback, everybody gets into it at least a little. Especially when the team that's trying to come back is the home team.

I also endorse wholeheartedly the idea that all officials should come from a single source not associated with any conference. There is no significant cost benefit to having conference officials.

What's the study say about basketball bias vs football bias in the ACC, and how they treat the home teams and the favorites?

(02-28-2015 01:48 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  What's the study say about basketball bias vs football bias in the ACC, and how they treat the home teams and the favorites?

I would be much more interested in seeing a study on officiating bias for ACC basketball.

" I've always thought it was fairly obvious that the perceived lesser team was granted significantly more leeway in officiating (which is the opposite of the ACC way in basketball)."


ACC gives prefers to basketball powers and punishes football powers.


Always has.....of course, like most ACC moves, this is the WORST financial move it could make given you only have a VERY small group of football schools that bring in most of the money for the conference.


I do agree with Hokie Mark, it seems like the last 2 years, the ACC has gotten away from this, thankfully.

In the Louisville football games last season I thought the officiating was pretty good. Of couse I was used to BE officiating who couldn't even get a field goal right even on slow motion replay.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

I'm not impressed with the statistics in the study.


First of all, the study uses a LV betting line to determine who is the dog.

Second, although the study reports a significant statistical bend toward the home underdog, IIRC, that resulted in only a net gain of 6 penalty yards for the home underdog. If you are in danger of losing a game due to 6 penalty yards, you have issues on the field that go beyond the officials.

Now, if you look at who the traditional home underdogs are, you will find WF and Duke as near-permanent dogs, however, on average they probably have the smartest football players on the field. I don't expect a Duke or WF team to be heavily penalized, ever. Now, perhaps that's my bias based on a idea about average Duke and WF students. But they and other egg-headed leaning schools seem to be under penalized according to the study results.

If you look at who was determined to be under penalized, you have schools like WF, Vandy, Duke, and Northwestern leading the way. NC State is skewed more to that edge, but this study comes at a time when the NC State coach was recruiting 2 star kids that were for the most part great students but very average football players.

It would be interesting if the study included the SAT scores for the teams, you might then find a strong correlation between penalty yards and handfuls of really dumb kids and as we know, the stupidity penalty usually shows up as an egregious personal foul from a player who can't control his emotions. Over the years, NC State has had several kids that were good for at least one stupid personal foul nearly EVERY game.

Another flaw is that when most ACC schools play a another P-5 they take their own officials to that away game. Unless I am wrong, when FSU, Clemson, UGa, and UL go to Kentucky, SC, UGa, Auburn, or Florida, they take ACC officials. There is no control for this.

It just goes to prove anything can be published today without rigorous vetting.

If a team is less athletically gifted, its coaches have to really stress fundamentals like avoiding unnecessary penalties. Miami is the poster child for the obverse. Incredible athletes but it looks like the Miami coaches are unconcerned about penalties, even really stupid penalties. Don't blame the officials for that.