CSNbbs
2016 WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - Printable Version

+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: SECbbs (/forum-285.html)
+---- Forum: SEC Conference Talk (/forum-246.html)
+---- Thread: 2016 WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: (/thread-828191.html)



2016 WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - JRsec - 09-24-2017 11:35 PM

B1G:
1. Ohio State: 1,510,482,000
6. Michigan: 892,951,000
12. Penn State: 549,497,000
14. Nebraska: 507,679,000
16. Iowa: 483,564,000
18. Wisconsin: 439,379,000
22. Michigan St: 336,794,000
32. Minnesota: 260,264,000
44. Indiana: 178,168,000
46. Northwestern: 163,315,000
49. Maryland: 147,608,000
53. Illinois: 143,318,000
55. Purdue: 135,021,000
65. Rutgers: 72,441,000

B1G Total: $5,820,481,000
B1G Average Per School Value: $415,748,643


B12:
2. Texas: 1,243,124,000
3. Oklahoma: 1,001,967,000
29. Oklahoma St: 285,293,000
30. Kansas St.: 277,203,000
34. Texas Tech: 246,871,000
41. Iowa State: 196,973,000
43. Kansas: 183,031,000
48. T.C.U.: 153,631,000
59. Baylor: 103,591,000
66. West Virginia: 72,649,000

Big 12 Total: $3,764,333,000
Big 12 Average Per School Value: $376,433,300


SEC:
4. Alabama: 930,001,000
5. Louisiana St: 910,927,000
8. Georgia: 822,310,000
9. Tennessee: 745,640,000
10. Auburn: 724,191,000
11. Florida: 682,031,000
13. Texas A&M: 522,863,000
15. South Carolina: 484,757,000
17. Arkansas: 456,153,000
23. Mississippi: 330,503,000
28. Kentucky: 287,589,000
35. Mississippi St: 230,655,000
56. Missouri: 126,219,000
64. Vanderbilt: 73,991,000

SEC Total: $7,327,830,000
SEC Average Per School Value: $523,416,428


PAC:
19. Washington: 434,313,000
21. Oregon: 368,529,000
25. U.S.C.: 324,195,000
26. Arizona St.: 315,412,000
27. U.C.L.A.: 314,436,000
36. Stanford: 225,479,000
37. California: 220,017,000
39. Utah: 206,365,000
40. Colorado: 203,533,000
51. Arizona: 146,153,000
52. Oregon St.: 144,713,000
54. Washington St: 142,052,000

PAC Total: $3,045,197,000
PAC Average Per School Value: $253,766,417


ACC:
*7. Notre Dame: 856,938,000
20. Florida St.: 385,339,000
24. Clemson: 328,411,000
31. Virginia Tech: 269,883,000
33. Miami: 254,502,000
38. Georgia Tech: 212,068,000
42. N.C. State: 191,813,000
45. Virginia: 168,534,000
47. Louisville: 160,899,000
50. North Carolina: 147,179,000
57. Syracuse: 120,903,000
58. Pittsburgh: 114,468,000
62. Boston College: 82,241,000
68. Duke: 64,195,000
70. Wake Forest: 52,940,000

ACC Total: $2,533,375,000
ACC Average Per School Value: $182,383,929


*Note: Notre Dame's value is not included in the ACC totals
***************************
G5 Schools to the 72nd Position:
60. Brigham Young: 98,924,000
61. Central Florida: 82,302,000
63. Boise State: 77,981,000
67. South Florida: 70,189,000
69. Connecticut: 59,776,000
71. Houston: 41,381,000
72. Temple: 40,669,000


To find the difference in valuation for basketball schools I would suggest you take a look at your Gross Total Revenue, subtract the amount generated by Basketball, and then divide it by the total to find the % of your revenue generated by basketball.

For Total Gross Revenue Rankings use this link and then scroll down to Post #10:
csnbbs.com/thread-821515.html




RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - BePcr07 - 09-25-2017 12:21 AM

The G5's surprise me a bit. I figured Houston and South Florida would be much higher. Boise St is likely on the down.

Also shocking that only Ohio St, Texas, and Oklahoma cross the billion-dollar threshold. Especially Notre Dame.

The PAC is down and the XII has a massive gap between #1/2 and the rest.


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - XLance - 09-25-2017 04:37 AM

Methodology?
Football only?
Anybody can make statistics tell any story they want. Who funded the research?


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - AllTideUp - 09-25-2017 05:47 AM

(09-25-2017 04:37 AM)XLance Wrote:  Methodology?
Football only?
Anybody can make statistics tell any story they want. Who funded the research?

I'd be interested to see the basketball numbers too, but do you really think the WSJ has a bias against the ACC and basketball in general?


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - AllTideUp - 09-25-2017 05:54 AM

I'm a little surprised by the PAC. I figured USC would be the clear #1.

Also interesting that there are only 3 B1G schools that are above the SEC average.


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - XLance - 09-25-2017 07:45 AM

(09-25-2017 05:47 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 04:37 AM)XLance Wrote:  Methodology?
Football only?
Anybody can make statistics tell any story they want. Who funded the research?

I'd be interested to see the basketball numbers too, but do you really think the WSJ has a bias against the ACC and basketball in general?

No, I think researchers always give the desired results to the folks that fund the research.04-cheers


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - AllTideUp - 09-25-2017 11:11 AM

MSN published a summary of the WSJ article that also happens to be behind a paywall.

Finance professor values college football teams

Lance, did the ACC turn down a membership for Indiana University-Purdue University of Columbus? They seem to be the culprit.


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - murrdcu - 09-25-2017 12:00 PM

Whose couch did West Virginia set on fire to be that low?


WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - Lenvillecards - 09-25-2017 12:18 PM

(09-25-2017 07:45 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:47 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 04:37 AM)XLance Wrote:  Methodology?
Football only?
Anybody can make statistics tell any story they want. Who funded the research?

I'd be interested to see the basketball numbers too, but do you really think the WSJ has a bias against the ACC and basketball in general?

No, I think researchers always give the desired results to the folks that fund the research.04-cheers


Yeah, I would like to know what these numbers are based on as well. Louisville is top 3 in the ACC when it comes to athletic budgets & this has teams with smaller football budgets ahead of Louisville. Furthermore, Louisville is 1 of only 6 teams that has appeared in the last 21 AP top 25 rankings. I'm sure you could raise similar questions about other teams & conferences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - mj4life - 09-25-2017 12:47 PM

(09-25-2017 05:47 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 04:37 AM)XLance Wrote:  Methodology?
Football only?
Anybody can make statistics tell any story they want. Who funded the research?

I'd be interested to see the basketball numbers too, but do you really think the WSJ has a bias against the ACC and basketball in general?

Any value ranking that has UVA,NCSU & Georgia Tech ahead of UNC is flawed IMO & definitely not 40-50 million more


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - JRsec - 09-25-2017 12:51 PM

(09-25-2017 12:47 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:47 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 04:37 AM)XLance Wrote:  Methodology?
Football only?
Anybody can make statistics tell any story they want. Who funded the research?

I'd be interested to see the basketball numbers too, but do you really think the WSJ has a bias against the ACC and basketball in general?

Any value ranking that has UVA,NCSU & Georgia Tech ahead of UNC is flawed IMO & definitely not 40-50 million more

These numbers are predominantly based on football value. In the pinned section of this board is a thread on Total Revenue by school. It has 2 links. You will find at the bottom of that thread a post by me that breaks down the conference rankings by Total Revenue. Kansas is roughly in the same position in the Big 12 in total revenue as they are here. In most conferences basketball only reflects 15-20% of the total revenue.

But, look at both lists and the lopsided valuation for football will be reflected with minor exceptions in both lists.

NOTE: I'VE PINNED THE LINK TO REVENUE TOTALS TO THE BOTTOM OF THE OP. LOOK FOR POST #10.


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - mj4life - 09-25-2017 05:42 PM

(09-25-2017 12:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 12:47 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:47 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 04:37 AM)XLance Wrote:  Methodology?
Football only?
Anybody can make statistics tell any story they want. Who funded the research?

I'd be interested to see the basketball numbers too, but do you really think the WSJ has a bias against the ACC and basketball in general?

Any value ranking that has UVA,NCSU & Georgia Tech ahead of UNC is flawed IMO & definitely not 40-50 million more

These numbers are predominantly based on football value. In the pinned section of this board is a thread on Total Revenue by school. It has 2 links. You will find at the bottom of that thread a post by me that breaks down the conference rankings by Total Revenue. Kansas is roughly in the same position in the Big 12 in total revenue as they are here. In most conferences basketball only reflects 15-20% of the total revenue.

But, look at both lists and the lopsided valuation for football will be reflected with minor exceptions in both lists.

NOTE: I'VE PINNED THE LINK TO REVENUE TOTALS TO THE BOTTOM OF THE OP. LOOK FOR POST #10.
I was referring to football only also, their is no metric that I would use like total revenue, sponsorship, local media etc that any of the schools listed ahead of UNC generate more value. Even the biggest NCSU homer doesn't believe their football program is 40 million more valuable than UNC period.


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - JRsec - 09-25-2017 05:51 PM

(09-25-2017 05:42 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 12:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 12:47 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:47 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 04:37 AM)XLance Wrote:  Methodology?
Football only?
Anybody can make statistics tell any story they want. Who funded the research?

I'd be interested to see the basketball numbers too, but do you really think the WSJ has a bias against the ACC and basketball in general?

Any value ranking that has UVA,NCSU & Georgia Tech ahead of UNC is flawed IMO & definitely not 40-50 million more

These numbers are predominantly based on football value. In the pinned section of this board is a thread on Total Revenue by school. It has 2 links. You will find at the bottom of that thread a post by me that breaks down the conference rankings by Total Revenue. Kansas is roughly in the same position in the Big 12 in total revenue as they are here. In most conferences basketball only reflects 15-20% of the total revenue.

But, look at both lists and the lopsided valuation for football will be reflected with minor exceptions in both lists.

NOTE: I'VE PINNED THE LINK TO REVENUE TOTALS TO THE BOTTOM OF THE OP. LOOK FOR POST #10.
I was referring to football only also, their is no metric that I would use like total revenue, sponsorship, local media etc that any of the schools listed ahead of UNC generate more value. Even the biggest NCSU homer doesn't believe their football program is 40 million more valuable than UNC period.

I didn't create the numbers, I just posted them for discussion. Usually the WSJ has credible methodology. Too bad we can't ask them how they came up with the figures.


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - mj4life - 09-25-2017 06:38 PM

(09-25-2017 05:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:42 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 12:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 12:47 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:47 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I'd be interested to see the basketball numbers too, but do you really think the WSJ has a bias against the ACC and basketball in general?

Any value ranking that has UVA,NCSU & Georgia Tech ahead of UNC is flawed IMO & definitely not 40-50 million more

These numbers are predominantly based on football value. In the pinned section of this board is a thread on Total Revenue by school. It has 2 links. You will find at the bottom of that thread a post by me that breaks down the conference rankings by Total Revenue. Kansas is roughly in the same position in the Big 12 in total revenue as they are here. In most conferences basketball only reflects 15-20% of the total revenue.

But, look at both lists and the lopsided valuation for football will be reflected with minor exceptions in both lists.

NOTE: I'VE PINNED THE LINK TO REVENUE TOTALS TO THE BOTTOM OF THE OP. LOOK FOR POST #10.
I was referring to football only also, their is no metric that I would use like total revenue, sponsorship, local media etc that any of the schools listed ahead of UNC generate more value. Even the biggest NCSU homer doesn't believe their football program is 40 million more valuable than UNC period.

I didn't create the numbers, I just posted them for discussion. Usually the WSJ has credible methodology. Too bad we can't ask them how they came up with the figures.
I'm not knocking you, just based on my knowledge of what each football program brings in so just don't see state being worth that much more. Their average attendance is higher but their sponsorship, donor base etc is still significantly lower than UNC even though our football base is extremely fickle.


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - JRsec - 09-25-2017 06:49 PM

(09-25-2017 06:38 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:42 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 12:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 12:47 PM)mj4life Wrote:  Any value ranking that has UVA,NCSU & Georgia Tech ahead of UNC is flawed IMO & definitely not 40-50 million more

These numbers are predominantly based on football value. In the pinned section of this board is a thread on Total Revenue by school. It has 2 links. You will find at the bottom of that thread a post by me that breaks down the conference rankings by Total Revenue. Kansas is roughly in the same position in the Big 12 in total revenue as they are here. In most conferences basketball only reflects 15-20% of the total revenue.

But, look at both lists and the lopsided valuation for football will be reflected with minor exceptions in both lists.

NOTE: I'VE PINNED THE LINK TO REVENUE TOTALS TO THE BOTTOM OF THE OP. LOOK FOR POST #10.
I was referring to football only also, their is no metric that I would use like total revenue, sponsorship, local media etc that any of the schools listed ahead of UNC generate more value. Even the biggest NCSU homer doesn't believe their football program is 40 million more valuable than UNC period.

I didn't create the numbers, I just posted them for discussion. Usually the WSJ has credible methodology. Too bad we can't ask them how they came up with the figures.
I'm not knocking you, just based on my knowledge of what each football program brings in so just don't see state being worth that much more. Their average attendance is higher but their sponsorship, donor base etc is still significantly lower than UNC even though our football base is extremely fickle.

I have a site (Wedge first posted it) where you can look at Revenue Totals as they are broken down by sport. You might find more data to explain the valuations by checking that sight. It is a government site and the totals are as reported on tax info: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/search


Well MJ I did the work for you from the tax returns and here are the facts:

UNC Revenue:
Football: 40,515,499
Basketball: 21,839,115
Other Sports: 11,244,253
Revenue not allocated to gender sports: 17,383,651
Total Revenue: 90,969,518

Duke Revenue:
Football: 31,795,916
Basketball: 34,176,346
Other Sports: 21,488,785
Revenue not allocated to gender sports: 4,510,789
Total Revenue: 91,971,836

N.C. State Revenue:
Football: 39,539,932
Basketball: 14,483,517
Other Sports: 10,826,838
Revenue not allocated to gender sports: 15,188,861
Total Revenue: 80,225,029

Kentucky Revenue:
Football: 39,714,834
Basketball: 27,892,672
Other Sports: 1,888,620
Revenue not allocated to gender sports: 54,491,573
Total Revenue: 124,006,908

So, N.C. State from their tax returns took in roughly 8 million more than Duke in football and about 1 million less than UNC and roughly about the same as Kentucky from the SEC.

Their basketball money lagged Duke by 20 million, UNC by 7.5 million, and Kentucky by 13.5 million.

Revenue not allocated to gender sports is inclusive of TV Revenue (all tiers), and concessions and a few other incidental categories.

Here N.C. State trailed UNC by 2 million, led Duke by 10.5 million, and trailed Kentucky of the SEC by 39 million.

So it's nip an tuck as to whether UNC or NCState earn the most in football. NCState may nip you this year. Duke has the most balance and trails both in football by 8 million and N.C. State is on par with Kentucky in football.

The SEC's Network and TV contract make up most of the 39 million difference in non allocated revenue.


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - mj4life - 09-25-2017 07:15 PM

(09-25-2017 06:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 06:38 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:42 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 12:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  These numbers are predominantly based on football value. In the pinned section of this board is a thread on Total Revenue by school. It has 2 links. You will find at the bottom of that thread a post by me that breaks down the conference rankings by Total Revenue. Kansas is roughly in the same position in the Big 12 in total revenue as they are here. In most conferences basketball only reflects 15-20% of the total revenue.

But, look at both lists and the lopsided valuation for football will be reflected with minor exceptions in both lists.

NOTE: I'VE PINNED THE LINK TO REVENUE TOTALS TO THE BOTTOM OF THE OP. LOOK FOR POST #10.
I was referring to football only also, their is no metric that I would use like total revenue, sponsorship, local media etc that any of the schools listed ahead of UNC generate more value. Even the biggest NCSU homer doesn't believe their football program is 40 million more valuable than UNC period.

I didn't create the numbers, I just posted them for discussion. Usually the WSJ has credible methodology. Too bad we can't ask them how they came up with the figures.
I'm not knocking you, just based on my knowledge of what each football program brings in so just don't see state being worth that much more. Their average attendance is higher but their sponsorship, donor base etc is still significantly lower than UNC even though our football base is extremely fickle.

I have a site (Wedge first posted it) where you can look at Revenue Totals as they are broken down by sport. You might find more data to explain the valuations by checking that sight. It is a government site and the totals are as reported on tax info: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/search
That's my point, state generates 39 million in revenue while UNC generates 40 million while averaging 5,000 less in attendance. The same year their athletic foundation raised 32 million versus 62 million & the list goes on .


RE: WSJ Values for College Football Teams by Conference: - JRsec - 09-25-2017 09:51 PM

(09-25-2017 07:15 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 06:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 06:38 PM)mj4life Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-25-2017 05:42 PM)mj4life Wrote:  I was referring to football only also, their is no metric that I would use like total revenue, sponsorship, local media etc that any of the schools listed ahead of UNC generate more value. Even the biggest NCSU homer doesn't believe their football program is 40 million more valuable than UNC period.

I didn't create the numbers, I just posted them for discussion. Usually the WSJ has credible methodology. Too bad we can't ask them how they came up with the figures.
I'm not knocking you, just based on my knowledge of what each football program brings in so just don't see state being worth that much more. Their average attendance is higher but their sponsorship, donor base etc is still significantly lower than UNC even though our football base is extremely fickle.

I have a site (Wedge first posted it) where you can look at Revenue Totals as they are broken down by sport. You might find more data to explain the valuations by checking that sight. It is a government site and the totals are as reported on tax info: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/search
That's my point, state generates 39 million in revenue while UNC generates 40 million while averaging 5,000 less in attendance. The same year their athletic foundation raised 32 million versus 62 million & the list goes on .

It depends on where the donations are recorded for Federal Tax purposes as to how they are tabulated and what they are attributed to. Remember however the WSJ piece is about what they perceive the market worth to be of a program. So......?