GAME PERFORMANCES OF NCAA DIVISION I TEAMS WITH & WITHOUT INTEGRATED SPORT SCIENCE SUPPORT
H. S. Gray, J. A. Gentles, B. D. Johnston, K. C. Brown, S. Mizuguchi, M. W. Ramsey, W. A. Sands, K. Sato, M. E. Stone, and M. H. Stone.
Dept. of Exercise and Sport Sciences, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN 37614
PURPOSE: To investigate the potential impact of integrated sport science support from the Sports Performance Enhancement Consortium (SPEC) on game performances. METHODS: Seven years of game results and scoring from an NCAA D-I institution were analyzed in reference to each individual team sport’s involvement with SPEC. Winning percentage (W%), Rating Percentage Index (RPI), and scoring differentials (scoring for vs. scoring against) for each period of play were the main variables. RESULTS: Baseball: W% and RPI improved while with SPEC, scoring differentials better in later innings. Softball: Marginally better W%, RPI, and scoring differentials with SPEC. Men’s Basketball: W% and RPI slightly better with SPEC, better 2nd half scoring differential but poorer in the 1st half. Women’s Basketball: No involvement with SPEC, better scoring differential in the 1st half vs. the 2nd half. Men’s Soccer: W% and RPI, along with 2nd half and overtime differentials improved with increased SPEC support. Women’s Soccer: Improvements in W%, RPI, and 2nd half differential since recent full SPEC integration. Women’s Volleyball: Long history with SPEC. Mixed W% & RPI, 5th set wins occurred more of late. CONCLUSIONS: While many other factors influenced observations, the signs are positive for SPEC. Overall, teams with integrated sport science support have had better W% and RPIs than teams without. Additionally, teams working with SPEC have performed well late in games.
Please view the full poster as a picture file (save to computer then zoom in and out):
PURPOSE: To investigate the potential impact of integrated sport science support from the Sports Performance Enhancement Consortium (SPEC) on game performances. METHODS: Seven years of game results and scoring from an NCAA D-I institution were analyzed in reference to each individual team sport’s involvement with SPEC. Winning percentage (W%), Rating Percentage Index (RPI), and scoring differentials (scoring for vs. scoring against) for each period of play were the main variables. RESULTS: Baseball: W% and RPI improved while with SPEC, scoring differentials better in later innings. Softball: Marginally better W%, RPI, and scoring differentials with SPEC. Men’s Basketball: W% and RPI slightly better with SPEC, better 2nd half scoring differential but poorer in the 1st half. Women’s Basketball: No involvement with SPEC, better scoring differential in the 1st half vs. the 2nd half. Men’s Soccer: W% and RPI, along with 2nd half and overtime differentials improved with increased SPEC support. Women’s Soccer: Improvements in W%, RPI, and 2nd half differential since recent full SPEC integration. Women’s Volleyball: Long history with SPEC. Mixed W% & RPI, 5th set wins occurred more of late. CONCLUSIONS: While many other factors influenced observations, the signs are positive for SPEC. Overall, teams with integrated sport science support have had better W% and RPIs than teams without. Additionally, teams working with SPEC have performed well late in games.
Please view the full poster as a picture file (save to computer then zoom in and out):


