Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Rating Rivalries in Intercollegiate Athletics Cody T. Havard The University of Memphis.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Rating Rivalries in Intercollegiate Athletics Cody T. Havard The University of Memphis."— Presentation transcript:

1 Rating Rivalries in Intercollegiate Athletics Cody T. Havard The University of Memphis

2 Rating Rivalries What makes a rivalry?  Proximity, historical and comparative competition. Kilduff, Elfenbein, & Staw, 2010  Competition, proximity, on-field or off-field incidents, demographic make up, historical occurrences. Havard, Gray, Gould, Sharp, & Schaffer, 2013 What increases the intensity of a rivalry?  Promotion, fan interest What is the most intense fan rivalry in intercollegiate athletics?  Depends on who you ask.

3 Most Intense Rivalries Examples from popular culture

4 Most Intense Rivalries Perception of Intensity One persons perspective Little data to show intensity of fan rivalry

5 Rating Rivalries 2500 data points on teams identified as “rival”. Sport Rivalry Fan Perception Scale (SRFPS: Havard et al., 2013). 1.Number of rivals per school. 2.Aggregate score assigned to rival school. 3.Common Rivalry Score 225 Combinations  62 Intercollegiate Teams

6 SRFPS 12-item scale that measures  Out-group Indirect Competition (OIC) –I would support the rival in a championship game.  Out-Group Academic Prestige (OAP) –The academic prestige of the rival is poor.  Out-Group Sportsmanship (OS) –Fans of the rival are not well-behaved at games.  Sense of Satisfaction (SoS) –I feel a sense of belonging when my favorite team beats the rival. –7-Point Likert Scale

7 1 – Number of Rivals

8

9 Rivalry can increase likelihood to consume sport product.

10 1 – Number of Rivals

11 1 – Rival to Most

12 1 – Lost in Translation Syracuse – Identified 11 rivals (6 in conference), identified by 1 (0 in conference) Nebraska – Identified 9 rivals (5 in conference), identified by 6 (3 in conference) West Virginia – Identified 7 rivals (1 in conference), identified by 2 (0 in conference) Texas A&M – Identified 3 rivals (2 in conference), identified by 3 (0 in conference) Arizona – Identified 8 rivals (7 in conference), identified by 2 (2 in conference)

13 2 – Most Intense Fan Rivalries

14 3 – Most Intense Common Rivalries If two teams identified each other as rivals At least 3 participants per team

15 3 – Most Intense Common Rivalries

16 Implications Way to display rival intensity Athletic Departments  Focus on identified rival teams  Foster relationship with rival teams Athletic Conferences  Out-of-Conference required play  Impact on conference make up Television Revenue  Tournaments and events

17 Future Study Add to database  Work on those n’s Measure longitudinal trends  Time stamps Investigate differences between rivalries

18 Thank you! Cody T. Havard, Ph.D. Sport Commerce @chavardphd @sportrivalrycom www.sportrivalry.com


Download ppt "Rating Rivalries in Intercollegiate Athletics Cody T. Havard The University of Memphis."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google