This will probably never happen, but for discussion, this would be the top 48 revenue schools based on this
link (48-52 are within $200k of each other) divided into 4, 12 school conferences:
South SEC + TCU
Alabama
Florida
LSU
Tennessee
Auburn
Arkansas
Georgia
South Carolina
Kentucky
Texas A&M
Missouri
TCU
West PAC + B12
Texas
Oklahoma
Kansas
Baylor
Oklahoma State
Kansas State
USC
Cal
Stanford
Washington
UCLA
Oregon
North B1G
Wisconsin
Michigan
Ohio State
Iowa
Penn State
Minnesota
Michigan State
Nebraska
Indiana
Purdue
Rutgers
Northwestern
East ACC + ND and WVU
Notre Dame
Louisville
FSU
Virginia
UNC
WVU
Duke
Syracuse
NCST
VT
Clemson
Miami
Schools from current P5 (schools left out):
PAC: 6 (Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado, OSU, WSU) 50%
SEC: 11 (Ole Miss, Vanderbilt, MSU) 79%
B12: 8 (TTU, ISU) 80%
B1G: 12 (UMD, Illinois) 86%
ACC: 10 (BC, WF, Pitt, GT) 71%
INDY: ND
Revenue floor: 48 Northwestern $66M (Colorado, Arizona, and Ole Miss all within $200k)
Of course, revenue can fluctuate quite a bit from year to year, but this gives you some idea on what it could look like, give or take a few schools near the bottom in revenue.
Interestingly shows why Texas does not want to go west. The PAC has more dead weight schools than even the ACC. All of their last 4 expansion adds are low revenue mountain schools (ASU, Arizona, CU, Utah).
(05-25-2014 01:12 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote: [ -> ]This will probably never happen, but for discussion, this would be the top 48 revenue schools based on this link (48-52 are within $200k of each other) divided into 4, 12 school conferences:
South SEC + TCU
Alabama
Florida
LSU
Tennessee
Auburn
Arkansas
Georgia
South Carolina
Kentucky
Texas A&M
Missouri
TCU
West PAC + B12
Texas
Oklahoma
Kansas
Baylor
Oklahoma State
Kansas State
USC
Cal
Stanford
Washington
UCLA
Oregon
North B1G
Wisconsin
Michigan
Ohio State
Iowa
Penn State
Minnesota
Michigan State
Nebraska
Indiana
Purdue
Rutgers
Northwestern
East ACC + ND and WVU
Notre Dame
Louisville
FSU
Virginia
UNC
WVU
Duke
Syracuse
NCST
VT
Clemson
Miami
Schools from current P5 (schools left out):
PAC: 6 (Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado, OSU, WSU) 50%
SEC: 11 (Ole Miss, Vanderbilt, MSU) 79%
B12: 8 (TTU, ISU) 80%
B1G: 12 (UMD, Illinois) 86%
ACC: 10 (BC, WF, Pitt, GT) 71%
INDY: ND
Revenue floor: 48 Northwestern $66M (Colorado, Arizona, and Ole Miss all within $200k)
Of course, revenue can fluctuate quite a bit from year to year, but this gives you some idea on what it could look like, give or take a few schools near the bottom in revenue.
Interestingly shows why Texas does not want to go west. The PAC has more dead weight schools than even the ACC. All of their last 4 expansion adds are low revenue mountain schools (ASU, Arizona, CU, Utah).
I can agree with most of this given your parameters, but T.C.U. by any metric isn't as attractive as Ole Miss, Miss State or even Vanderbilt. I'm not even sure that T.C.U. should be included in the 5 present conferences. I think B.Y.U. by all rights should have gotten in ahead of the Frogs. I definitely couldn't put them in at 56, let alone 48.
When I'm a little less tired I'll give this a go though. Take care, JR
(05-25-2014 02:24 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-25-2014 01:12 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote: [ -> ]This will probably never happen, but for discussion, this would be the top 48 revenue schools based on this link (48-52 are within $200k of each other) divided into 4, 12 school conferences:
South SEC + TCU
Alabama
Florida
LSU
Tennessee
Auburn
Arkansas
Georgia
South Carolina
Kentucky
Texas A&M
Missouri
TCU
West PAC + B12
Texas
Oklahoma
Kansas
Baylor
Oklahoma State
Kansas State
USC
Cal
Stanford
Washington
UCLA
Oregon
North B1G
Wisconsin
Michigan
Ohio State
Iowa
Penn State
Minnesota
Michigan State
Nebraska
Indiana
Purdue
Rutgers
Northwestern
East ACC + ND and WVU
Notre Dame
Louisville
FSU
Virginia
UNC
WVU
Duke
Syracuse
NCST
VT
Clemson
Miami
Schools from current P5 (schools left out):
PAC: 6 (Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado, OSU, WSU) 50%
SEC: 11 (Ole Miss, Vanderbilt, MSU) 79%
B12: 8 (TTU, ISU) 80%
B1G: 12 (UMD, Illinois) 86%
ACC: 10 (BC, WF, Pitt, GT) 71%
INDY: ND
Revenue floor: 48 Northwestern $66M (Colorado, Arizona, and Ole Miss all within $200k)
Of course, revenue can fluctuate quite a bit from year to year, but this gives you some idea on what it could look like, give or take a few schools near the bottom in revenue.
Interestingly shows why Texas does not want to go west. The PAC has more dead weight schools than even the ACC. All of their last 4 expansion adds are low revenue mountain schools (ASU, Arizona, CU, Utah).
I can agree with most of this given your parameters, but T.C.U. by any metric isn't as attractive as Ole Miss, Miss State or even Vanderbilt. I'm not even sure that T.C.U. should be included in the 5 present conferences. I think B.Y.U. by all rights should have gotten in ahead of the Frogs. I definitely couldn't put them in at 56, let alone 48.
When I'm a little less tired I'll give this a go though. Take care, JR
I just placed TCU there because one of the B12 schools needed to go into the south because the SEC was at 11 schools in the top 48. You could move any of the B12 schools that are little brothers in their state pretty easily (KSU, OSU, Baylor, TCU) into that 12th spot. The East (ACC), North (B1G) and South (SEC) were made up of 10-12 schools from the same conference.
I agree, obviously the bottom schools could be moved around some. This is just going by a straight 48 top AD revenue schools in the article so I did not substitute on any other metric (academics, market, FB or BB strength, etc.). I think any of the schools making between $60-69M could be subbed for one another. In the end to get to 48 you would have to make some hard cuts. This is just a straight top 48. Feel free to make some substitutions and changes and come up with a similar model. Schools like UConn and BYU are definitely worthy of the top 48, if they had P5 TV money they would be at $75M plus most likely.
This would be a lot more accurate in say 2018 or 2020 when all the conferences have settled into their TV deals and conference networks/T3 deals. Right now some conferences are starting new deals or networks and that revenue is not showing up yet. Of course, if you did this that would all get thrown out the window most likely and everything would get reworked. Also due to accounting differences some sort of average would be more accurate with TV money taken out to eliminate the P5 TV contract differences versus the G5. More work than I wanted to do right now.
I don't care much for the decisions that have to be made in order to keep 4 conferences in which two remain competitively weaker than the other two. I would rather divide the 48 this way.
Big 10:
California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington
Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Northwestern
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Purdue, Wisconsin
Maryland, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse
SEC:
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Arizona, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
but with 8 more you can do things a bit differently
Big 10:
Arizona, California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington
Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse, Wisconsin
Boston College, Connecticut, Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers
SEC:
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C.State, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Alabama, Baylor, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
The casualties now by revenue, goegraphy and academics are: Arizona State, Oregon State, Washington State, Utah from the PAC. Wake Forest, Miami, Louisville from the ACC. T.C.U. , Iowa State and West Virginia from Big 12.
So the issue becomes this:
Doable: 12/15 from the ACC is enough to dissolve a GOR and the Conference.
Doable: 7/10 from the Big 12 is not enough to dissolve a GOR and the Conference.
Problem: While 8/12 is enough to dissolve the PAC three of the 4 schools left behind are little brothers.
This unfortunately is why we need a 64 team model now. And if you are going to have that then 4 conferences of 16 make some sense. The only way to accomplish this with fewer is to have 3 conferences of 20 in which the PAC takes 8 Big 12 programs (enough to dissolve the GOR and Big 12) and for the Big 10 and SEC to take 6 each of the ACC schools (enough to dissolve the GOR and ACC). Then you could cut the number of teams in an upper tier to 60. Fewer than that is not legally practical at this time. It could be in about a decade and a half.
Also, how profitable a school is for itself isnt the same as how profitable it is for a conference.
For example, No one would throw out the state of Arizona and the Phoenix market place for their TV negotiations just because UAZ and ASU dont sell a ton of luxury boxes or t-shirts.
personally I like 56
i can find 5-10 schools to cut from the p5. but definitely not 18
(05-25-2014 03:55 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care much for the decisions that have to be made in order to keep 4 conferences in which two remain competitively weaker than the other two. I would rather divide the 48 this way.
Big 10:
California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington
Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Northwestern
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Purdue, Wisconsin
Maryland, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse
SEC:
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Arizona, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
but with 8 more you can do things a bit differently
Big 10:
Arizona, California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington
Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse, Wisconsin
Boston College, Connecticut, Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers
SEC:
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C.State, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Alabama, Baylor, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
The casualties now by revenue, goegraphy and academics are: Arizona State, Oregon State, Washington State, Utah from the PAC. Wake Forest, Miami, Louisville from the ACC. T.C.U. , Iowa State and West Virginia from Big 12.
So the issue becomes this:
Doable: 12/15 from the ACC is enough to dissolve a GOR and the Conference.
Doable: 7/10 from the Big 12 is not enough to dissolve a GOR and the Conference.
Problem: While 8/12 is enough to dissolve the PAC three of the 4 schools left behind are little brothers.
This unfortunately is why we need a 64 team model now. And if you are going to have that then 4 conferences of 16 make some sense. The only way to accomplish this with fewer is to have 3 conferences of 20 in which the PAC takes 8 Big 12 programs (enough to dissolve the GOR and Big 12) and for the Big 10 and SEC to take 6 each of the ACC schools (enough to dissolve the GOR and ACC). Then you could cut the number of teams in an upper tier to 60. Fewer than that is not legally practical at this time. It could be in about a decade and a half.
I am fine with your break downs. The bottom revenue schools are pretty inter-changeable and would probably get added or left out for market reasons like 10th mentioned.
Yes. This is just an academic exercise because at this point you could never cut out another 16+ schools from the power 5 unless the privates have to drop sports to a lower division (unlikely) or the education bubble pressures some universities to drop big time athletics down the road. Politically, right now, it would be cutting your own throat. Too much push back would occur.
It's kinda fun to tinker with this, isn't it, jhawk? If it ever came down to the top 48 revenue schools, they would have to unleash Ernst & Young on all of these schools, because I think we would see some completely new mathematical creations.
If a reduction ever took place, I think there would be some general guidelines:
1. Every flagship school that wanted in would be in. They are too valuable for long term stability. Come hell or high water, the flagship school of a state will be funded and followed by the general population and supported by every state representative at the federal level. The state of Tennessee, for example, could probably better handle the elimination of the Department of Transportation than the elimination of Vol football. There would be less public backlash. To my count, that is 35 schools (Texas A&M and UCLA are both included since they are technically the flagships of their system in massive states). If UConn insisted to be in, I think they would have a good argument for inclusion that the rest of the flagships would find too hard to fight. That would be 36. In addition, any other flagship schools that want skin in the game, like Hawaii, New Mexico, etc., can probably arrange for required competition at some level, even if it is just in bowls.
2. The next round would be the most elite private schools that have as strong a level of funding and top level support as many flagships. This is a small group of Stanford, USC, Notre Dame, Duke, Northwestern, and maybe Vanderbilt. Put another way, if those previous 5 are in, Vanderbilt will make sure they do what is necessary to be in. Include all 6, and you have 42 schools.
3. Those last 6 spots would become like the Constitutional Convention. Everyone would have an argument, but I think the "Who can you just not imagine being left out?" argument having some play here, especially from a TV and revenue perspective. I have a hard time envisioning Auburn, Florida State, and Michigan State being left out. For those last three slots, let's just insert Team A, Team B, and then Your team, whoever that may be depending on who reads this!
(05-26-2014 08:40 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote: [ -> ]It's kinda fun to tinker with this, isn't it, jhawk? If it ever came down to the top 48 revenue schools, they would have to unleash Ernst & Young on all of these schools, because I think we would see some completely new mathematical creations.
If a reduction ever took place, I think there would be some general guidelines:
1. Every flagship school that wanted in would be in. They are too valuable for long term stability. Come hell or high water, the flagship school of a state will be funded and followed by the general population and supported by every state representative at the federal level. The state of Tennessee, for example, could probably better handle the elimination of the Department of Transportation than the elimination of Vol football. There would be less public backlash. To my count, that is 35 schools (Texas A&M and UCLA are both included since they are technically the flagships of their system in massive states). If UConn insisted to be in, I think they would have a good argument for inclusion that the rest of the flagships would find too hard to fight. That would be 36. In addition, any other flagship schools that want skin in the game, like Hawaii, New Mexico, etc., can probably arrange for required competition at some level, even if it is just in bowls.
2. The next round would be the most elite private schools that have as strong a level of funding and top level support as many flagships. This is a small group of Stanford, USC, Notre Dame, Duke, Northwestern, and maybe Vanderbilt. Put another way, if those previous 6 are in, Vanderbilt will make sure they do what is necessary to be in. Include all 7, and you have 43 schools.
3. Those last 5 spots would become like the Constitutional Convention. Everyone would have an argument, but I think the "Who can you just not imagine being left out?" argument having some play here, especially from a TV and revenue perspective. I have a hard time envisioning Auburn, Florida State, and Michigan State being left out. For those last two slots, let's just insert Team A and then Your team, whoever that may be depending on who reads this!
totally agree. with two minor alterations
1. syracuse is clearly in the class of the elite football privates. clearly the weakest of the bunch academically but given the resources/wealth of that school and its de facto flagship of NY status there isn't much difference between them and the other schools you mentioned.
2. michigan state is without a doubt in the same class as texas a&m and UCLA.
Yeah, john, I Syracuse was just about in that list alongside Vandy. Syracuse does not have as strong of an endowment as the ones I mentioned (just shy of a billion), but as the de facto flagship of NY for athletics, they carry a big club. If Syracuse made it, though, Boston College would have an almost equally compelling argument. Like I said, trying to get down to 48 where most people feel good about it is nearly impossible. jhawk and JR have given good shots at it.
(05-26-2014 08:07 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, john, I Syracuse was just about in that list alongside Vandy. Syracuse does not have as strong of an endowment as the ones I mentioned (just shy of a billion), but as the de facto flagship of NY for athletics, they carry a big club. If Syracuse made it, though, Boston College would have an almost equally compelling argument. Like I said, trying to get down to 48 where most people feel good about it is nearly impossible. jhawk and JR have given good shots at it.
yeah cuse is clearly one step below those schools academically (our endowment is 1.1 bill) but they do more than enough to make up for that with athletic performance.
as for BC vs SU I don't see them as equal. BC has better academics but significantly less FB history, less BB history, and comes in a very saturated market with so many pro teams and colleges in the boston area. Boston has the highest % of college students of any major city and 6 colleges who have 5 digit enrollments.
if I had to rank all FBS schools by total conference value I would have the two separated by 15-25 spots.