{"id":6606,"date":"2019-11-01T06:30:49","date_gmt":"2019-11-01T11:30:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/?p=6606"},"modified":"2020-06-02T11:25:00","modified_gmt":"2020-06-02T16:25:00","slug":"evaluating-the-two-game-road-trip-in-college-sports-does-a-travel-partner-scheduling-approach-affect-team-competitiveness","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/evaluating-the-two-game-road-trip-in-college-sports-does-a-travel-partner-scheduling-approach-affect-team-competitiveness\/","title":{"rendered":"Evaluating the Two-Game Road Trip in College Sports: Does a Travel Partner Scheduling Approach Affect Team Competitiveness?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Authors: <\/strong> Mark Mitchell, Samuel Wathen, and Robert Orwig<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Corresponding Author:<\/strong>
Mark Mitchell, DBA
Professor of Marketing
Associate Dean, Wall College of Business
NCAA Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR)
Coastal Carolina University
P. O. Box 261954
Conway, SC  29528
mmitchel@coastal.edu<\/a>
(843) 349-2392<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mark Mitchell<\/strong>, DBA is Professor of Marketing at Coastal Carolina University in Conway, SC.
Samuel Wathen, <\/strong>PhDis Professor of Management at Coastal Carolina University in Conway, SC.
Robert Orwig<\/strong>, DBA is Associate Professor of Management at the University of North Georgia in Dahlonega, GA.
<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Evaluating the Impact of Two-Game Road\nTrips in College Sports:  Does a Travel\nPartner Scheduling Approach Affect Team Competitiveness?
\n<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

ABSTRACT<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some NCAA athletic conferences have\nimplemented a geographic travel partner strategy when scheduling league games.  Teams are organized into two-team\nclusters.  A visiting team comes to the\nregion and plays both opponents during one road trip before returning to\ncampus.  Prior research reveals NBA teams\ntend to have a lower winning percentage when playing back-to-back games on\nback-to-back evenings.  This study examines\nthe performance of college sports teams on two-game road trips to see if the\nNBA pattern exists in college sports.  Game\nresults (and winning percentages) from the Sun Belt Conference for the 2016-17\nseason are evaluated over four sports (women\u2019s soccer, women\u2019s volleyball,\nwomen\u2019s basketball, and men\u2019s basketball). \nTeam performance in Game 2 was comparable to Game 1 in women\u2019s soccer,\nwomen\u2019s basketball, and men\u2019s basketball. Game 2 performance was improved in\nwomen\u2019s volleyball.   There was not a\nsignificant reduction in road team performance in Game 2 of two-game road trips\nwhen the quality of the opponent was introduced into the analysis of women\u2019s\nsoccer, women\u2019s volleyball and women\u2019s basketball.  However, men\u2019s basketball teams tended to win\nmore often during Game 1 rather than Game 2 when playing comparable\nopponents.  The travel partner scheduling\nmodel maximizes player rest, reduces travel time, and minimizes missed class\ntime.  This study suggests its\nimplementation does not impact team competitiveness, particularly during Game 2\nas found in the NBA.  Conference\npersonnel and university athletic administrators may take comfort that their\ndrive to control costs and enhance the student-athlete experience is not\nimpacting the competitiveness of their teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Keywords:<\/strong>  Team winning percentages, game scheduling, travel partner scheduling, home team advantage<\/p>\n\n\n\n

INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Beginning with the 2018-19 season, the\nColonial Athletic Association (CAA) implemented a \u2018travel partner\u2019 scheduling\nstrategy for Women\u2019s Basketball, pairing each team with a geographic travel\npartner for league games.  This format\nallows for the scheduling of back-to-back Friday and Sunday games with both\ngames played either at home or on the road.  For example, the University of North Carolina at\nWilmington played at the College of William & Mary (Williamsburg, VA) on\nFriday and later at Elon University (Burlington, NC) on Sunday (Washburn\n2018).   For the same weekend, their\ntravel partner (The College of Charleston) played an opposite and concurrent\nschedule at Elon on Friday and at William & Mary on Sunday. According to\nMapquest, the Elon and William & Mary are approximately 250 miles apart (5).  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Sun Belt Conference has used the travel\npartner scheduling format since 2015 (2).  \nIn fact, geographic proximity to an existing conference member\n(Appalachian State University) was an important variable in the selection of\nthe most-recent addition to the conference (Coastal Carolina University in\n2016).   A press release from the Sun\nBelt Conference on that day outlined this geographic strategy this way (10):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With\nthe addition of Coastal Carolina, the Sun Belt Conference will now have a\nsymmetrical, geographic structure that is unparalleled in the history of the\nconference. The league will have two universities in Alabama (South Alabama and\nTroy), Arkansas (Arkansas State and Little Rock), Georgia (Georgia Southern and\nGeorgia State), Louisiana (UL Lafayette and UL Monroe) and Texas (UT Arlington\nand Texas State) to go with Appalachian State in North Carolina and Coastal\nCarolina in neighboring South Carolina.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When\nannouncing the Men\u2019s Basketball schedule for 2016-17, Conference Commissioner\nKarl Benson noted (11):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“This\nis an exciting time for the Sun Belt Conference as we have created a membership\nstructure that makes perfect sense with six sets of travel partners located in\nseven states,” Sun Belt Conference commissioner Karl Benson said.\n“Not only does the 12 team league allow for an 18-game regular season but\nit will allow for a much more manageable travel schedule for our men’s and\nwomen’s student-athletes that will result in less missed class time and much\nmore time back on their respective campuses rather than on airplanes and\nbuses.”<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further\nin the same press release (11), the conference communication notes that \u201ceach\nteam will only travel four times for two-game road trips during the upcoming\nseason. Travel partners will be utilized for two-game road trips throughout the\nconference schedule to maximize rest, minimize travel times and limit\nmissed class time for men’s and women’s basketball student-athletes. Men’s\nand women’s basketball programs will each take just one, single-game road trip\nall season. Those single-game road trips will be for rivalry games.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the book \u201cScorecasting: The Hidden\nInfluences Behind How Sports are Played and Games are Won,<\/em><\/strong>\u201d authors\nTobias Moskowitz and Jon Wertheim note that home teams win 62% of their games\nin the National Basketball Association (NBA). \nHowever, they note that not all road games are equal.  Occasionally, NBA teams will play on\nback-to-back nights in separate cities. \nAnd, when doing so, these teams seem to be \u2018a step slow.\u2019  On average, NBA teams playing on back-to-back\nnights win 36% of these second-day games (for both home and away games).   NBA Hall of Famer Charles Barkley referred\nto these second-day games as \u201cthrowaways.\u201d He once described such games this\nway: \u201cYou show up because they pay you to\nshow up.  But, deep in your belly, you\nknow you ain\u2019t gonna win.\u201d <\/em>(6, p. 125).  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For these back-to-back games, some NBA\nteams started resting players given their perceived competitive\ndisadvantage.  In March 2017, NBA\nCommissioner Adam Silver stated that the issue of resting players \u201cis an\nextremely significant issue for our league\u201d as fans complained that their\nfavorite players were being rested on a night these fans showed up just to\nwatch these visiting team stars play (8). \nFor illustration, the Cleveland Cavaliers played 15 such games during\nthat 2016-17 regular season.  For these\n2-city back-to-back games, the Cavaliers had a record of 5-10 (a 0.33 winning\npercentage).  Backing out these 15 games\nfrom the team\u2019s overall record of 51-31, we see the Cavaliers were 46-21 (a\n0.69 winning percentage) in the remainder of games that provided at least one\nday of rest between games (1). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As illustrated above, the scheduling of\nback-to-back contests may affect team competitiveness, particularly during the second\ngame of the road trip.  With few\nexceptions (such as women\u2019s volleyball when destinations are relatively close),\ncollege sports schedules usually allow a rest day between contents.  Still, these student-athletes are \u2018on the\nroad\u2019 which means hotels, restaurants, and being removed from their normal\nschool routines.  And, we must\nacknowledge the substantial differences in team travel between NBA\nprofessionals and NCAA student-athletes, particularly the presence of bus\ntrips, non-charter air flights, and the obvious differences in hotel and\nrestaurant accommodations.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The purpose of this manuscript is to\nanalyze team performance on two-game road trips in one conference for a variety\nof sports for an entire sports season. \nWin-loss records will be analyzed in addition to some measure of\ncompetitive strengths of the teams.  \nWith the results, coaches and athletic administrators can formulate\nstrategies to improve team performance or, if viewed differently, to minimize\nthe \u2018effects of the road\u2019 on their teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

METHODS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Where possible, the Sun Belt Conference (SBC)\nadheres to the travel partner scheduling strategy.   The\ntwelve member schools are divided into six two-team travel partner clusters:<\/p>\n\n\n\n