Conferences entrust college football referees to impartially officiate games. However, a growing body of research documents officiating biases in sports. We focus on bias among major college football referees. Following a natural experiment approach, we contrast in-conference games with a quasi-control group consisting of games involving teams from different conferences. Specifically, we find significant relationships between the betting line variables—expected game closeness and clear game favorite—and penalties among ACC and former Big East officials that suggests bias toward the underdog team during in-conference games. Additionally, we find home field bias in the ACC and Big XII and bias of game pace in the Big XII and former Big East. We also do a preliminary examination of the biases’ roots. Some biases we pinpoint are, counterintuitively, revenue-inhibiting for certain conferences. Our results show the potential impact on-field referees have on games and the underlying revenue streams for the conferences. They also highlight oft-discussed, but rarely researched, officiating biases at the intersection of game integrity and the commercial goals of the competing programs and the conferences they represent. To lessen such friction, we advocate for centralization of the management and oversight of college football referees. We conclude by explaining how such biases could impact expanded legalized sports betting after the US Supreme Court removed restrictions on state-by-state regulation in 2018.

会议委托大学橄榄球裁判公正地主持比赛。但是，越来越多的研究文件证明了体育方面的偏见。我们集中于主要的大学橄榄球裁判之间的偏见。遵循自然的实验方法，我们将会议游戏与准控制组进行对比，准控制组由来自不同会议的团队组成的游戏组成。具体来说，我们发现下注线变量之间存在显着的关系-预期的比赛接近度和明确的比赛偏爱-以及ACC和前大东区官员之间的罚款，这些罚款暗示着在会场比赛中对失败者球队的偏见。此外，我们发现ACC和Big XII的主场偏向以及Big XII和前大东区的比赛节奏偏向。我们还对偏差的根源进行了初步检查。与直觉相反，我们指出的一些偏见是 某些会议禁止收入。我们的结果表明，现场裁判员对比赛和会议的潜在收入流有潜在影响。他们还强调了在游戏完整性与竞争性程序及其代表的会议的商业目标交集处经常讨论但很少研究的主观偏见。为了减轻这种摩擦，我们主张集中管理和监督大学生足球裁判员。最后，我们通过解释这种偏见如何影响美国最高法院于2018年取消了对各州法规的限制后如何扩大合法化的体育博彩。他们还强调了在游戏完整性与竞争性程序及其代表的会议的商业目标交集处经常讨论但很少研究的主观偏见。为了减轻这种摩擦，我们主张集中管理和监督大学生足球裁判员。最后，我们通过解释这种偏见如何影响美国最高法院于2018年取消了对各州法规的限制后如何扩大合法化的体育博彩。他们还强调了在游戏完整性与竞争性程序及其代表的会议的商业目标交集处经常讨论但很少研究的主观偏见。为了减轻这种摩擦，我们主张集中管理和监督大学生足球裁判员。最后，我们通过解释这种偏见如何影响美国最高法院于2018年取消了对各州法规的限制后如何扩大合法化的体育博彩。