Now that the 2012-13 revenue figures have been released by the NCAA, I slapped together some of the facts and figures that we toss around about a school's worth in realignment. I have taken all of the FBS schools and given them a 1 to 5 score in the following categories:

1. Undergraduate population (indicator of alumni quantity and current ability to support)

2. U.S. News World Report score - Has limitations, but good indicator of general health and prestige of undergraduate program and arts programs.

3. ARWU (Academic Ranking of World Universities) - Good indicator of research focus and capacity.

4. 2013 football attendance - It doesn't matter how good a school is if no one shows up.

5. 2012-13 gross athletic revenue - Sure, the school accountants work the numbers, but it is a good indicator of a school's ability to fund athletics through the AD and contribute the overflow to university causes.

The glaring item missing is TV markets, but I agree with JRSec that the future of major realignment will be value, not market potential. Also missing is the subjective "legacy" and "future potential". This is just an indicator of where things now stand.

So, without further ado, the breakdown of scores. I used some judgment here and found the most natural breaking points:

1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000

5. Revenue - (5) $87 mil +, (4) $65 mil +, (3) $40 mil +, (2) $25 mil +, (1) less than $25 mil

Tally up the totals for each school and divide by 5 to give a score on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 being the most valuable schools/programs.

5 - Florida, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Texas, Wisconsin
4.8 - none
4.6 - California, Florida State, Georgia, Minnesota, Texas A&M, UCLA, Washington
4.4 - Illinois, Michigan State, Purdue, Rutgers, Southern Cal
4.2 - Indiana, Iowa, Virginia Tech
4 - Arizona, Arizona State, LSU, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama (this low because they are not ranked in ARWU since the med school is UAB)

3.8 - Auburn, BYU, Clemson, Colorado, Iowa State, Maryland, NC State, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Pittsburgh, Stanford
3.6 - Arkansas, Kentucky, Oregon, Virginia
3.4 - Central Florida, Duke, Georgia Tech, Kansas, Miami, Northwestern, Oregon State, Utah
3.2 - Connecticut, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt, Washington State
3 - Baylor, Cincinnati, Colorado State, Massachusetts, Mississippi State, South Florida, Syracuse, Temple, West Virginia

2.8 - Buffalo, Houston, Louisville, Mississippi, San Diego State
2.6 - Boston College, Hawaii, New Mexico, Rice, TCU, Wake Forest
2.4 - East Carolina, Ohio, SMU
2.2 - Appalachian State, Kent State, Miami-Oxford, North Texas, Tulane, Utah State
2 - Air Force, Army, Central Michigan, Florida International, Memphis, Navy, Nevada, UAB, UTSA, Western Michigan

1.8 - Akron, Ball State, Fresno State, Northern Illinois, Old Dominion, San Jose State, Texas State, Tulsa, UNC-Charlotte, UNLV, UTEP, Wyoming
1.6 - Boise State, Bowling Green, Florida Atlantic, Georgia Southern, Georgia State, Idaho, LA-Lafayette, MTSU, New Mexico State, Southern Miss
1.4 - Louisiana Tech, Marshall, Toledo, Western Kentucky
1.2 - Arkansas State, Eastern Michigan, South Alabama
1 - LA-Monroe, Troy

Highlights: 1) The private schools get hit by undergraduate population, but many also have football attendance below 40,000 (BC, WF, Duke, Vandy, Cuse, NW). 2) The Mississippi schools are fortunate that they are squeezed between many powerhouses and that the SEC is loyal. 3) Boise State is doing a heck of a job, because their raw data suggests they are virtually identical to Fresno State. 4) An asterisk may be needed beside Army, Navy, Air Force, BYU, and Notre Dame because of their unique national followings by non-alumni. I was not sure how to objectively score "following" for them but leave out special cases like Nebraska, USC, etc. TV following is probably the best indicator if anyone has a good set of numbers we can use.

If anyone has legit TV market share data, I'd love to add it to this data and see what comes up. Yes, in a vacuum, UCF, USF, Temple, and UMass look good, but that is not the whole story.

I have posted this on the SEC board, and we had a good discussion about how we see the data. Please don't use this exercise to degrade another school (here's looking at you, rival/hated schools within Texas). Also, it would be fine to use a +/- .2 for these scores. Many schools have a borderline score in at least one category. This is just to give a general idea.

For those wondering, the average conference scores are below. This shows where teams will be as of next year (e.g. Louisville in ACC, Rutgers/Maryland in Big 10):

Big 10 - 4.4
PAC - 3.95
SEC - 3.87
ACC - 3.52
Big 12 - 3.42
AAC - 2.6
MWC - 2.16
MAC - 2.01
CUSA - 1.8
Sun Belt - 1.49

(01-15-2014 11:25 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Now that the 2012-13 revenue figures have been released by the NCAA, I slapped together some of the facts and figures that we toss around about a school's worth in realignment. I have taken all of the FBS schools and given them a 1 to 5 score in the following categories:

1. Undergraduate population (indicator of alumni quantity and current ability to support)

2. U.S. News World Report score - Has limitations, but good indicator of general health and prestige of undergraduate program and arts programs.

3. ARWU (Academic Ranking of World Universities) - Good indicator of research focus and capacity.

4. 2013 football attendance - It doesn't matter how good a school is if no one shows up.

5. 2012-13 gross athletic revenue - Sure, the school accountants work the numbers, but it is a good indicator of a school's ability to fund athletics through the AD and contribute the overflow to university causes.

The glaring item missing is TV markets, but I agree with JRSec that the future of major realignment will be value, not market potential. Also missing is the subjective "legacy" and "future potential". This is just an indicator of where things now stand.

So, without further ado, the breakdown of scores. I used some judgment here and found the most natural breaking points:

1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000

5. Revenue - (5) $87 mil +, (4) $65 mil +, (3) $40 mil +, (2) $25 mil +, (1) less than $25 mil

Tally up the totals for each school and divide by 5 to give a score on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 being the most valuable schools/programs.

5 - Florida, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Texas, Wisconsin
4.8 - none
4.6 - California, Florida State, Georgia, Minnesota, Texas A&M, UCLA, Washington
4.4 - Illinois, Michigan State, Purdue, Rutgers, Southern Cal
4.2 - Indiana, Iowa, Virginia Tech
4 - Arizona, Arizona State, LSU, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama (this low because they are not ranked in ARWU since the med school is UAB)

3.8 - Auburn, BYU, Clemson, Colorado, Iowa State, Maryland, NC State, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Pittsburgh, Stanford
3.6 - Arkansas, Kentucky, Oregon, Virginia
3.4 - Central Florida, Duke, Georgia Tech, Kansas, Miami, Northwestern, Oregon State, Utah
3.2 - Connecticut, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt, Washington State
3 - Baylor, Cincinnati, Colorado State, Massachusetts, Mississippi State, South Florida, Syracuse, Temple, West Virginia

2.8 - Buffalo, Houston, Louisville, Mississippi, San Diego State
2.6 - Boston College, Hawaii, New Mexico, Rice, TCU, Wake Forest
2.4 - East Carolina, Ohio, SMU
2.2 - Appalachian State, Kent State, Miami-Oxford, North Texas, Tulane, Utah State
2 - Air Force, Army, Central Michigan, Florida International, Memphis, Navy, Nevada, UAB, UTSA, Western Michigan

1.8 - Akron, Ball State, Fresno State, Northern Illinois, Old Dominion, San Jose State, Texas State, Tulsa, UNC-Charlotte, UNLV, UTEP, Wyoming
1.6 - Boise State, Bowling Green, Florida Atlantic, Georgia Southern, Georgia State, Idaho, LA-Lafayette, MTSU, New Mexico State, Southern Miss
1.4 - Louisiana Tech, Marshall, Toledo, Western Kentucky
1.2 - Arkansas State, Eastern Michigan, South Alabama
1 - LA-Monroe, Troy

Highlights: 1) The private schools get hit by undergraduate population, but many also have football attendance below 40,000 (BC, WF, Duke, Vandy, Cuse, NW). 2) The Mississippi schools are fortunate that they are squeezed between many powerhouses and that the SEC is loyal. 3) Boise State is doing a heck of a job, because their raw data suggests they are virtually identical to Fresno State. 4) An asterisk may be needed beside Army, Navy, Air Force, BYU, and Notre Dame because of their unique national followings by non-alumni. I was not sure how to objectively score "following" for them but leave out special cases like Nebraska, USC, etc. TV following is probably the best indicator if anyone has a good set of numbers we can use.

If anyone has legit TV market share data, I'd love to add it to this data and see what comes up. Yes, in a vacuum, UCF, USF, Temple, and UMass look good, but that is not the whole story.

I have posted this on the SEC board, and we had a good discussion about how we see the data. Please don't use this exercise to degrade another school (here's looking at you, rival/hated schools within Texas). Also, it would be fine to use a +/- .2 for these scores. Many schools have a borderline score in at least one category. This is just to give a general idea.

For those wondering, the average conference scores are below. This shows where teams will be as of next year (e.g. Louisville in ACC, Rutgers/Maryland in Big 10):

Big 10 - 4.4
PAC - 3.95
SEC - 3.87
ACC - 3.52
Big 12 - 3.42
AAC - 2.6
MWC - 2.16
MAC - 2.01
CUSA - 1.8
Sun Belt - 1.49

That's not a bad start, however, you probably need to include basketball as a 20%/80% split with football, number of living alumni, and then try to do something to figure out how they interact when in the same overall market - that's something that really helps Ohio State, Wisconsin, Nebraska, LSU, etc - they are the only B-5 team in their state.

I'm not sure the results would change that much.

BBB, this is some great stuff. As you note, there's perhaps one more component that could be somehow put in the formula if you can find a reasonable and objective source of information. For lack of a better term, I'd call it "brand strength". Your suggestion of good TV ratings data would be one possible source, as perhaps could be some source of logo/gear sales.

lumberpack4, the revenue category is overall AD, so it already factors in football, basketball, and other sports. That is actually the saving grace for schools like Kansas and Duke. Concerning alumni, existing undergraduate attendance was the best single resource to keep it as simple as possible. The support and $$$ for athletics tend to come from undergraduate experiences, and the student population at most of these schools has not fluctuated greatly by comparison percentage to the other schools in the last 50 years. As you say, it probably doesn't change the result much, anyway. There is nothing really new in these numbers; it just puts together a lot of the numbers we toss around into an easier format for discussion.

One of the things that really stood out to me is the incredibly solid numbers across the board for Virginia Tech. Some astute Big 10 folks on here have pointed out how VT would be a good consideration for addition for their conference despite the absence of AAU. They are better academically in both categories than Nebraska and are a very close match in every category except overall revenue to Iowa.

Only a UK fan could figure out some kind of formula that would rank everyone in The AAC ahead of Louisville. I would be interested in selling how you screwed the numbers to list Louisville next to Buffalo. Typical LPT bull sh it.
CJ

(01-15-2014 12:14 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  BBB, this is some great stuff. As you note, there's perhaps one more component that could be somehow put in the formula if you can find a reasonable and objective source of information. For lack of a better term, I'd call it "brand strength". Your suggestion of good TV ratings data would be one possible source, as perhaps could be some source of logo/gear sales.

Thanks, Phog, and good idea about using merchandise numbers. That is easily accessible,and I'm working on it now. If anybody has a current (just 2012-13) TV ratings data set that is universally acceptable, please let me know.

(01-15-2014 12:27 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-15-2014 12:14 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  BBB, this is some great stuff. As you note, there's perhaps one more component that could be somehow put in the formula if you can find a reasonable and objective source of information. For lack of a better term, I'd call it "brand strength". Your suggestion of good TV ratings data would be one possible source, as perhaps could be some source of logo/gear sales.

Thanks, Phog, and good idea about using merchandise numbers. That is easily accessible,and I'm working on it now. If anybody has a current (just 2012-13) TV ratings data set that is universally acceptable, please let me know.

This site complied the national TV ratings for the whole 2013 season:

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-...ngs/#bowls

The problem with rankings is where to have the cut-offs for each boundary, but I think you're about right with those. I would however make a sliding scale between your scoring values because all other things being equal, a school with almost 40000 average attendance should not be only 0.2 better than one that can't pull 10000.

Oh and a quick edit, if you can use the TV values then I'd combine the two academic scores (research + undergrad) to still leave you with 5 metrics.

(01-15-2014 12:25 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Only a UK fan could figure out some kind of formula that would rank everyone in The AAC ahead of Louisville. I would be interested in selling how you screwed the numbers to list Louisville next to Buffalo. Typical LPT bull sh it.
CJ

Jim, Louisville has 12,058 undergraduates, a 161 USNWR ranking, is not ranked in ARWU, has an average football attendance of 52,914, and has an outstanding revenue stream of $96+ million. Adding in a new column for merchandise will help because you are looking to be top 30. Academic prowess pulled you down a bit; your peers are Ole Miss, WVU, and Northern Illinois. If anything, these rankings should show how much the ACC believes in the direction that Louisville is headed. Despite the reputation of the lowest common denominator of UK's fanbase, I don't spend all day trying to figure out another way to screw over Louisville. Using these same numbers on the SEC board, we discussed where Louisville would fit in the SEC in these crazy scenarios.

(01-15-2014 12:19 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  lumberpack4, the revenue category is overall AD, so it already factors in football, basketball, and other sports. That is actually the saving grace for schools like Kansas and Duke. Concerning alumni, existing undergraduate attendance was the best single resource to keep it as simple as possible. The support and $$$ for athletics tend to come from undergraduate experiences, and the student population at most of these schools has not fluctuated greatly by comparison percentage to the other schools in the last 50 years. As you say, it probably doesn't change the result much, anyway. There is nothing really new in these numbers; it just puts together a lot of the numbers we toss around into an easier format for discussion.

One of the things that really stood out to me is the incredibly solid numbers across the board for Virginia Tech. Some astute Big 10 folks on here have pointed out how VT would be a good consideration for addition for their conference despite the absence of AAU. They are better academically in both categories than Nebraska and are a very close match in every category except overall revenue to Iowa.

AAU is a red-herring - a non-empirical private club.

(01-15-2014 12:19 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  One of the things that really stood out to me is the incredibly solid numbers across the board for Virginia Tech. Some astute Big 10 folks on here have pointed out how VT would be a good consideration for addition for their conference despite the absence of AAU. They are better academically in both categories than Nebraska and are a very close match in every category except overall revenue to Iowa.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the B1G doesn't like to take the second fiddle in states. I don't see Vtech getting an invite before UVA.

"1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000"

A lot of these ranges just seem completely arbitrary.

For example, why Top 75 for US News instead of Top 50 or better yet 1-25, 25-50, 50-100, 100-200, +200-unraanked?

(01-15-2014 12:25 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Only a UK fan could figure out some kind of formula that would rank everyone in The AAC ahead of Louisville. I would be interested in selling how you screwed the numbers to list Louisville next to Buffalo. Typical LPT bull sh it.
CJ

+2

(01-15-2014 01:02 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-15-2014 12:25 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Only a UK fan could figure out some kind of formula that would rank everyone in The AAC ahead of Louisville. I would be interested in selling how you screwed the numbers to list Louisville next to Buffalo. Typical LPT bull sh it.
CJ

Jim, Louisville has 12,058 undergraduates, a 161 USNWR ranking, is not ranked in ARWU, has an average football attendance of 52,914, and has an outstanding revenue stream of $96+ million. Adding in a new column for merchandise will help because you are looking to be top 30. Academic prowess pulled you down a bit; your peers are Ole Miss, WVU, and Northern Illinois. If anything, these rankings should show how much the ACC believes in the direction that Louisville is headed. Despite the reputation of the lowest common denominator of UK's fanbase, I don't spend all day trying to figure out another way to screw over Louisville. Using these same numbers on the SEC board, we discussed where Louisville would fit in the SEC in these crazy scenarios.

Not true. UofL has 15,893,

I don't know how difficult it would be to do, but I would love to see these reordered utilizing only 1, 4 and 5. While some views those rankings as critical, I would like to see where these same schools rank using just the data from attendance, football attendance and athletic revenue. I think we would see some interesting differences.

(01-15-2014 03:23 PM)Hitch Wrote:  

(01-15-2014 12:19 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  One of the things that really stood out to me is the incredibly solid numbers across the board for Virginia Tech. Some astute Big 10 folks on here have pointed out how VT would be a good consideration for addition for their conference despite the absence of AAU. They are better academically in both categories than Nebraska and are a very close match in every category except overall revenue to Iowa.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the B1G doesn't like to take the second fiddle in states. I don't see Vtech getting an invite before UVA.

Sure, but I don't see UVA and VTech as much different than, say, Indiana/ Purdue, UF/FSU, or USC/Clemson. Each has its strengths. I'm not saying that the Big 10 would choose VT over UVA, but if for whatever reason UVA was not available, the Big 10 could do much worse than VT. In other words, if UVA did not exist and VT was exactly as it is now but had the designation of flagship, it would be an add, academically speaking, that is a bit higher than Nebraska. Of course, Nebraska has legendary status as a football school, but it can definitely be said that if the Big 10 is looking for great academics as well as a bump in football, VT should be a viable option.

Sorry, VT and ACC folks. I don't think VT is going anywhere. We are playing hypotheticals since that is all SEC and Big 10 folks have to do at the moment. Feel free to poach our schools in an imaginary world.

(01-15-2014 03:50 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(01-15-2014 01:02 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-15-2014 12:25 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Only a UK fan could figure out some kind of formula that would rank everyone in The AAC ahead of Louisville. I would be interested in selling how you screwed the numbers to list Louisville next to Buffalo. Typical LPT bull sh it.
CJ

Jim, Louisville has 12,058 undergraduates, a 161 USNWR ranking, is not ranked in ARWU, has an average football attendance of 52,914, and has an outstanding revenue stream of $96+ million. Adding in a new column for merchandise will help because you are looking to be top 30. Academic prowess pulled you down a bit; your peers are Ole Miss, WVU, and Northern Illinois. If anything, these rankings should show how much the ACC believes in the direction that Louisville is headed. Despite the reputation of the lowest common denominator of UK's fanbase, I don't spend all day trying to figure out another way to screw over Louisville. Using these same numbers on the SEC board, we discussed where Louisville would fit in the SEC in these crazy scenarios.

Not true. UofL has 15,893,

I went by NCAA reporting on undergraduate enrollment for the 2012-13 year since that is the latest numbers. Either the NCAA messed up, or Louisville reported the wrong number. Are you sure that 15,893 does not include graduate students?

Excellent analysis. This shows what I've been saying all along - the Big 10 is king when it comes to long-term value. The SEC has to stay aggressive if they want to keep up with the Big 10 in revenue.

One comment on the revenue part, though. Much of the revenue comes from the conference. This makes schools like Mississippi State, Purdue, WSU etc look much better than AAC/MWC schools despite the fact that they don't actually bring in any more revenue.

It'd be pretty easy to subtract conference revenue and grade based on that.

(01-15-2014 03:37 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  "1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000"

A lot of these ranges just seem completely arbitrary.

For example, why Top 75 for US News instead of Top 50 or better yet 1-25, 25-50, 50-100, 100-200, +200-unraanked?

The ranges are primarily to show tiers, and I tried to keep it as close to 20% in each tier as possible. So, with 129 FBS programs, I tried to keep each tier to around 20-30 teams with some natural breaking points. I'll use revenue as an example:

Tier 5 - After the obscene amounts from the top 10 programs (over $110 million each), schools 11 through 23 were typically within a million and a half or so. When I got to school 24, which is right around that 25 school mark, there was a disparity of a bit over 2 million between schools (89.145 mil to 86.9 mil), and then there was a run of 5 schools that were all from 86.9 to 83.9 mil). So, the 89.145 school was a good cutoff (it was Florida State on top and Nebraska on bottom, by the way).

Arbitrary? Fine, but lines have to be drawn at some point when combining data. For what it is worth, my school, Kentucky, got the shaft two times. They were the 2nd highest of the "4" revenues, and they were the 4th highest of the "3" undergraduate attendance. They were middle of the road in all other categories.

As for the US News rankings, look at it from an overall FBS perspective. Remember, we are not necessarily comparing Indiana to Oklahoma here... we are comparing Stanford to Eastern Michigan. I would contend that a USNWR school in the top 75 is a "5" program, meaning such a ranking would not prevent any conference from taking them. I would certainly hope that is the case... schools with rankings of 73 to 75 (some ties) are Michigan State, Iowa, and Indiana. "4" schools between 76 and 149 may cause pause for a top conference depending on other factors, but they are still acceptable, seeing that almost this entire category is P5 schools. 150 to 200 has historically been a school that needs help from other areas to be acceptable in a power conference. Ole Miss, TT, Louisville, and WVU are such schools. An unranked national university (e.g. Memphis, UNLV) has more value than an average or lowly ranked regional university, which is fairly well shown in how conferences are currently composed.

Take a look:

Big 10 - All but one school (Nebraska) in top 75
PAC - All schools in top 150
SEC - All schools in top 150. Ole Miss is exactly 150.
ACC - All schools near top 100 (NC State 101) except Louisville, which is 160 (perfect of example of where other circumstances made up for this category gap.)
Big 12 - Most in top 150. TT and WVU top 170.
AAC - All top 200 schools except Navy (very good Liberal Arts College) and Memphis (circumstances made up for it)

MAC, MWC and CUSA - A bit from every category (regional ties and availability trump academics)

Sun Belt - Interesting one. All unranked national or regional except their football only adds of New Mexico State and Idaho.


To show the true chasm between a 5 and a 1 school in each category, percentage of schools, existing conditions and priorities, and some natural breaking points had to be employed. Hope that helps.

(01-15-2014 04:28 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  I don't know how difficult it would be to do, but I would love to see these reordered utilizing only 1, 4 and 5. While some views those rankings as critical, I would like to see where these same schools rank using just the data from attendance, football attendance and athletic revenue. I think we would see some interesting differences.

UCF and ECU sure like that suggestion! Surprisingly, it does not help the G5's much in comparison to the P5's. Boise State, for example, is still just a 2 average. They have about 12,000 students, 34,000 football attendance, and 33 mil revenue. By these football only numbers, they are almost identical to Hawaii. Boise State has just found a way to field outstanding teams without the "data" benefits.