SJustin McQuistanMatthew Cox
Grid of Shame
Background
Our study is an extension of the research conducted by The Wall Street Journal in their examination of rating all 125 major-college football teams on two axes: weakling or powerhouse and admirable or embarrassing (Bachman, 2013)
Purpose of the Study
This study was designed to take an in-depth look into the Men’s College Basketball programs of the power conferences (Big Ten, Pac 12, ACC, Big 12, SEC, Big East, AAC, and Mountain West) including the Ohio Valley Conference. We also included those teams which may not belong to one of the previous conferences, but based on their 2012-2013 final rankings and preseason rankings inside the top 30, qualified for research.
Research Question& Hypotheses
Our research is exploratory in nature. Our study is primarily concerned with how good teams are projected to be on the court as well as how embarrassing they have been off of it. H1: A powerhouse and admirable school will have a strong
recruiting class. H2: If a school is ranked in the preseason top 25, they will
also rate high on the fame axis. H3: Teams that are projected to be a powerhouse and high in
fame and will stay in the same quadrant throughout the year, pending no upcoming penalties or other shame factors
Significance of the Study
To provide hard data on how men’s college basketball teams rank on and off the court. In doing so we are properly providing the “common fan” as well as fans with strong “team identification” the tools to praise and ridicule the top 113 college basketball teams of the 2013-14 season.
The significance of the study is that very little research has been compiled that combines the Powerhouse/Weakling (preseason rankings, regular season rankings, recruiting class ranking, and post season experience) with the Shame/Fame (APR, NCAA violations and probation, graduation success rate, lottery picks in the past twenty five years, and sick or ick factor) of the top college-basketball programs, giving the consumer projections of their teams prospects for 2013-14.
Limitations
Short time frame to conduct research
Much of the analysis is subjective
Limited data
Powerhouse/Weakling
Preseason/APR/Coaches Poll Widely accepted ranking
systems Regular season polls were
from week 2 of the 2013-2014 season
Points for 2012-2013 season only to top 25 and vote getters
Used median score of total “powerhouse” points to determine our 0-value X-axis
Preseason/APR/Coaches
1 - 5 = 10pts
6 - 10 = 9pts
11 - 15 = 8pts
16 - 20 = 7 pts
21 - 25 = 6 pts
26 - 30 = 5 pts
31 - 35 = 4 pts
36 - 40 = 3 pts
41 - 100 = 2 pts
101 - 123 = 1 pt
Fame/Shame
NCAA violations or probation
Academic Progress Rates (APR) 2011-2012
Graduate Success Rate (GSR)
“ick” factor = arrests and other violations
Fame/Shame
APR Ranged from 1000 (perfect score) to
897 NCAA standard to be eligible for
postseason play is 930 12 teams would not have qualified Median score of 960
GSR Only applied to teams that qualified
for the 2013 NCAA tournament
Draft Rank Very subjective Only top 20 teams received points
Table 2 Table 3
APR Ranking and ScoringPath to Draft Rankings
960=0pts 1-5 = 4 pts
961-970 = 1pt 6-10 = 3pts
971-980 = 2pt 11-15 = 2pts
981-990 = 3pt 16-20 = 1 pt
991-1000 = 4 pt
959-950 = -1pt
949-940 = -2pt
939-931 = -3 pt
930-below = -4pt
GSR Scoring
50-below= -2pt
51 -above = 2pt
School NameAPR 2011-2012 *most recent
NCAA Stat GSR (Graduation Success Rate) NCAA Violations/Arrests - past two years Path to the Draft Rank Preseason Ranking 2012-2013 Post Season Rank AP Top 25 USA Today Powerhouse Points Admirable Points Air Force 957 4 -1
Alabama 9951 arrest: conspiracy to kidnapp a child (-4pts) 17 4 1
Arizona 969 54 6 6 14 6 5 36 6Arizona State 973 34 34 40 11 2Arkansas 951 4 -1
Auburn 9401 arrest: second-degree possession marijuana (-1pt) 4 -3
Austin Peay 944 2 -2Baylor 965 Probation - 3 yrs and recruiting (-3pts) 23 31 23 25 22 -2Belmont 1000 100 43 6 6
Ole Miss 979 56
*4 arrests: possession of marijuana, DUI, paraphanelia, Marshal Henderson - drugs (-6pts) 28 9 -2
Oregon 918 85 18 15 18 18 29 -2Pittsburgh 975 54 1 arrest: 2 counts of DUI (-4pts) 38 37 38 32 13 0
Providence 9151 arrest: domestic violence, vandalism (-1pt) 4 -5
Saint Mary's 976 92 Four Years Probation - recruiting (-4pts) 33 42 8 -3
UCF 920
1 arrest: resisting, Post season 1 yr, probation 5 yrs, financial aid, recruiting, vacate record (-7pts) 4 -11
PowerhouseWeakling
Fame
Shame
References
Arrest Nation. (2013). Arrest Nation College Basketball. Arrest Nation The Sports Arrests Database. http://arrestnation.com/category/featured-commentary/
Bachman. (2013, 08 28). College football's grid of shame. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/articleSB10001424127887324324404579041092507233498.html
Brennan, Eamonn. (2013). Men’s College Basketball Nation: Path to the Draft 2013. ESPN. http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/tag/_/name/path-to-the- draft-2013
Lapchick, Richard. (2013, March 18). Keeping Score When It Counts: Graduation Success and Academic Progress Rates for the 2013 NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Tournament Teams. The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sports at the University of Central Florida, p. 5. http://www.tidesport.org/Grad%20Rates/2013%20Men's %20Basketball%20Tournament%20Teams%20Study.pdf.
NCAA. (2011, September 1). Legislative Services Database LSBDi.
https://web1.ncaa.org/LSDBi/exec/search
NCAA. (2013). APR Public Recognition Awards.
References
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/newmedia/public/rates/index.html
RecruitingNation. (2013, February 15). How we determine our class ranking. ESPN. http://espn.go.com/college-sports/recruiting/basketball/mens/story/_/id/8951114/how-determine-our-class-rankings
Scout. (2013). Scout with Fox Sports.com on MSN. http://www.scout.com/3/about-team- rankings-bb.htm
Sloan, L. R. (1979). The function and impact of sports for fans: a review of theory and contemporary research. In J. J. Goldstein (Ed.), Sports, games and play: Social and psychological viewpoints (pp. 219-262). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Sutton, W. A., McDonald, M. A., Milne, G. R., & Cimperman, J. (1997). Creating and fostering
Fan identification in professional sport. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 6(1), 15-22.
Wann, D. L. (1997). The psychology of sport fans and sport spectators. In D. L. Wann (Ed.), Sport Psychology (pp. 325-347). Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall.