Value On Or Against Interim Coaches In Bowl Games 🏈
Is there betting value on or against interim coaches in bowl games?
ESPN PLUS ($ MATERIAL)
If we're being honest, bowl games are only sort of games, right? The rhythm and flow of the season is over. Teams have had at least two weeks off (maybe up to five), and their coaching staffs have spent as much time recruiting as they have spent preparing for their bowl opponents. Plus, some players sit out, others mail it in mentally, and you never know what you're going to get.
That's all assuming the coaching staff has stayed. If you're one of the teams going through a coaching change during bowl prep, who the heck knows what's going to happen, right? When teams are playing with interim coaches in particular, we really never know what we're going to get, right?
Not so fast, my friend!
As I did when looking at rivalry effects a few weeks ago, I decided to dive in to our gambling database to learn what I could about interim coach effects. I looked at how teams with interim coaches -- 49 of them in all, going back to the 2010 season (and removing four interim-versus-interim games) -- performed in bowls against the closing line. The result was ... not really a result. Games with interims aren't any less predictable or more volatile than any other games.
Performance against the spread (2010-18)
• Bowl favorites: 167-169-3
• Bowl favorites with interim coaches: 16-14
• Bowl underdogs: 169-167-3
• Bowl underdogs with interim coaches: 7-10-1*
There was also one pick 'em line: Miami (Ohio) against MTSU in 2010. The interim-led Redhawks won.
Bowl game absolute error averages (Vegas closing line vs. final scoring margin (2010-18)
• All: 13.2 points per game
• Games with interim coaches: 13.0 points per game
In small samples, interim-led favorites fare slightly better against the spread and underdogs fare slightly worse, but we're dealing with statistical insignificance here. Flip one result, and teams are either .500 ATS or within one game of .500. (I also messed around with why a coach left: Was he fired for disappointing results, or did he get hired away by a bigger program? In the end, a lot of that washed out in whether or not they were favored.)
Meanwhile, the distance between spread and reality (which I usually record using absolute error) is actually smaller in games involving interims.
Sometimes the data tell you the direct opposite of what you expect to hear.
This also isn't the busiest bowl season for interims. There are currently five teams slated to take the field with a substitute teacher leading the way.
• Boca Raton Bowl (Dec. 21): FAU (interim coach: Glenn Spencer) vs. SMU
• New Orleans Bowl (Dec. 21): Appalachian State (Shawn Clark) vs. UAB
• Cotton Bowl Classic (Dec. 28): Memphis (Ryan Silverfield*) vs. Penn State
• Sun Bowl (Dec. 31): Florida State (Odell Haggins) vs. Arizona State
• Birmingham Bowl (Jan. 2): Boston College (Rich Gunnell) vs. Cincinnati
Silverfield was named Mike Norvell's permanent successor recently, but I'm counting him as an interim for this game given that Norvell coached the first 13 games of the season. I included examples such as this in the above sample, too.
Four of these five teams are underdogs. Everyone but App State (-17 in New Orleans) is taking between three and seven points. In the above sample, interim-led teams that are between +3 and +7 are 7-7-1 ATS. As far as the App State case, teams that are favored by more than seven points are 4-3 ATS, but no one has been favored by as much as the Mountaineers are. The biggest line involving an interim-led team was when Texas Tech, sans Tommy Tuberville, was -13 against Minnesota in the 2012 Meineke Car Care Bowl. The Red Raiders won 34-31.
Is there gambling value in the above paragraph? No edge is sort of valuable in and of itself. Although we talk about interim effects and how they make teams unpredictable ... they really don't, at least not on average. If you're looking for an edge in bowl season, simply ignoring coaching changes altogether might provide as much of an edge as trying to parse who will or won't show up for their temporary head man.
ESPN PLUS ($ MATERIAL)
If we're being honest, bowl games are only sort of games, right? The rhythm and flow of the season is over. Teams have had at least two weeks off (maybe up to five), and their coaching staffs have spent as much time recruiting as they have spent preparing for their bowl opponents. Plus, some players sit out, others mail it in mentally, and you never know what you're going to get.
That's all assuming the coaching staff has stayed. If you're one of the teams going through a coaching change during bowl prep, who the heck knows what's going to happen, right? When teams are playing with interim coaches in particular, we really never know what we're going to get, right?
Not so fast, my friend!
As I did when looking at rivalry effects a few weeks ago, I decided to dive in to our gambling database to learn what I could about interim coach effects. I looked at how teams with interim coaches -- 49 of them in all, going back to the 2010 season (and removing four interim-versus-interim games) -- performed in bowls against the closing line. The result was ... not really a result. Games with interims aren't any less predictable or more volatile than any other games.
Performance against the spread (2010-18)
• Bowl favorites: 167-169-3
• Bowl favorites with interim coaches: 16-14
• Bowl underdogs: 169-167-3
• Bowl underdogs with interim coaches: 7-10-1*
There was also one pick 'em line: Miami (Ohio) against MTSU in 2010. The interim-led Redhawks won.
Bowl game absolute error averages (Vegas closing line vs. final scoring margin (2010-18)
• All: 13.2 points per game
• Games with interim coaches: 13.0 points per game
In small samples, interim-led favorites fare slightly better against the spread and underdogs fare slightly worse, but we're dealing with statistical insignificance here. Flip one result, and teams are either .500 ATS or within one game of .500. (I also messed around with why a coach left: Was he fired for disappointing results, or did he get hired away by a bigger program? In the end, a lot of that washed out in whether or not they were favored.)
Meanwhile, the distance between spread and reality (which I usually record using absolute error) is actually smaller in games involving interims.
Sometimes the data tell you the direct opposite of what you expect to hear.
This also isn't the busiest bowl season for interims. There are currently five teams slated to take the field with a substitute teacher leading the way.
• Boca Raton Bowl (Dec. 21): FAU (interim coach: Glenn Spencer) vs. SMU
• New Orleans Bowl (Dec. 21): Appalachian State (Shawn Clark) vs. UAB
• Cotton Bowl Classic (Dec. 28): Memphis (Ryan Silverfield*) vs. Penn State
• Sun Bowl (Dec. 31): Florida State (Odell Haggins) vs. Arizona State
• Birmingham Bowl (Jan. 2): Boston College (Rich Gunnell) vs. Cincinnati
Silverfield was named Mike Norvell's permanent successor recently, but I'm counting him as an interim for this game given that Norvell coached the first 13 games of the season. I included examples such as this in the above sample, too.
Four of these five teams are underdogs. Everyone but App State (-17 in New Orleans) is taking between three and seven points. In the above sample, interim-led teams that are between +3 and +7 are 7-7-1 ATS. As far as the App State case, teams that are favored by more than seven points are 4-3 ATS, but no one has been favored by as much as the Mountaineers are. The biggest line involving an interim-led team was when Texas Tech, sans Tommy Tuberville, was -13 against Minnesota in the 2012 Meineke Car Care Bowl. The Red Raiders won 34-31.
Is there gambling value in the above paragraph? No edge is sort of valuable in and of itself. Although we talk about interim effects and how they make teams unpredictable ... they really don't, at least not on average. If you're looking for an edge in bowl season, simply ignoring coaching changes altogether might provide as much of an edge as trying to parse who will or won't show up for their temporary head man.
