Can a sub-optimal tournament be optimal when the prize can be collectively consumed? The case of college football's national championshipJames Swofford, Franklin Mixon and Trellis Green Applied Economics, 2009, vol. 41, issue 25, pages 3215-3223 Abstract: One of the most heated debates in all of sports is the annual debate over major college football's national champion. Since its implementation in 1995, the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) system has often failed to quell the controversy concerning what team is the Division 1 Football Bowl Subdivision football champion. Many of the BCS controversies have spawned changes in the title selection format, while others are perhaps the result of certain changes. What remains now is the cry from some college football fans for an expanded 'national championship playoff,' though college and university presidents and many college football coaches continue to resist these cries. We try to explain this resistance to expanding the number of teams invited to compete for the BCS championship and the persistence of the two team playoff format in college football. For three championship eras-pre-BCS, BCS and a futuristic post-BCS expanded playoff-we first relate some of the controversial details to concepts such as optimal tournaments and the public goods concept of collective consumption. Date: 2009 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:applec:v:41:y:2009:i:25:p:3215-3223 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from Access Statistics for this article Applied Economics is edited by Mark Taylor More articles in Applied Economics from Taylor and Francis Journals |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
Swedish Business School at Örebro University.