SEC Gross Total Sports Revenue:

1. Georgia: $174,042,482
2. Alabama: $166,812,799
3. Texas A&M: $160,101,611
4. Louisiana State: $157,787,780
5. Auburn: $152,455,418
6. Florida: $143,627,997
7. Kentucky: $143,481,480
8. South Carolina: 140,295,659
9. Arkansas: $139,504,649
10. Tennessee: $135,818,717
11. Mississippi: $96,790,426
12. Missouri: $94,612,498
13. Mississippi State: $93,389,557
14. Vanderbilt: $84,191,143
Total: $1,882,912,216
AVG: $134,493,730
Diff: +$997,201




Big 10 Gross Total Sports Revenue:

1. Ohio State: $209,102,666
2. Michigan: $175,006,632
3. Penn State: $164,529,325
4. Wisconsin: $151,369,153
5. Iowa: $144,070,825
6. Nebraska: $130,313,578
7. Indiana: $126,358,047
8. Minnesota: $122,667,963
9. Michigan State: $116,186,933
10. Northwestern: $111,421,226
11. Purdue: $110,844,907
12. Maryland: $108,796,303
13. Illinois: $100,156,079
14. Rutgers: $83,053,040
Total: $1,853,876,677
AVG: $132,419,763
Diff: *+$4,802,088

* This is the result of the first full year of their FOX contract. It was a nice bump per school. If they get that much again in 2024 we should be 10,000,000 per school ahead.




Big 12 Total Gross Sports Revenue:

1. Texas: $215,829,101
2. Oklahoma: $159,286,136
3. Kansas: $119,768,008
4. T.C.U.: $118,496,653
5. Baylor: $101,243,920
6. West Virginia: $101,095,223
7. Oklahoma State: $91,066,952
8. Kansas State: $89,919,819
9. Texas Tech: $86,442,709
10. Iowa State: $79,860,045
Total: $1,163,008,566
AVG: $116,300,857
Diff: -$2,673,779



ACC Gross Total Sports Revenue:

1. Florida State: #$198,407,201
2. Louisville: $148,667,940
3. Miami: $127,170,251
4. Clemson: $124,601,614
5. Duke: $116,021,513
6. Virginia: $108,854,006
7. North Carolina: $105,407,867
8. Syracuse: $99,815,688
9. Pittsburgh: $98,866,362
10. N.C. State: $92,724,547
11. Virginia Tech: $83,767,722
12. Boston College: $82,680,712
13. Georgia Tech: $79,491,714
14. Wake Forest: $76,520,111
Total: $1,592,997,248
AVG: $110,214,089
Diff: #+$8,637,760

#Florida State's revenue was skewed by 78 million in contributions outside of sports revenue. This accounted for a 5.6 million average bump per school in the conferences payout average for Gross Revenue.
The ACC really received a nice 3 million bump per school over the previous year.


**Notre Dame: $169,547,675



PAC 12 Gross Total Sports Revenue:

1. Stanford: $139,390,932
2. Washington: $133,792,677
3. U.C.L.A.: $127,339,042
4. U.S.C.: $118,687,120
5. Oregon: $108,500,370
6. Arizona: $102,275,918
7. Arizona State: $101,836,361
8. Colorado: $98,413,285
9. California: $94,646,123
10. Utah: $94,177,912
11. Oregon State: $82,364,021
12. Washington State: $75,957,792
Total: $1,277,381,553
AVG: $106,448,463
Diff: +$1,421,440

I’d be interested to read the article, do you have a link?

(03-26-2020 10:51 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  I’d be interested to read the article, do you have a link?

It's not an article 10th. Google Equity in Athletics and you may look up the nitty gritty on any school via their public tax records. It's time consuming and must be done 1 school at the time so there is no link to the work which was mine in compiling the list but you may verify at the site any information I've listed. I took me roughly 4 hours to assemble the information on these 65 schools, do the calculations, and post it.

Lol ah okay yeah no I’ll just wait till Forbes does their next “most valuable programs” list

Last one was pretty darn good!

As has already been said, thank you for such a precise breakdown of the data, JR! I poked around with this a bit the last two years of reporting (2016-17 and 2017-18), and a few things are standing out:

1) Texas better watch its back, because Ohio State is right on its heels. Ohio State has undergone a nice positive slope in revenue while Texas is hanging in the low 200's. They are undoubtedly the cream of the cream.

2) Kansas came back down to Earth. They went from 101 to 164 and back down to 119. the 164 year (2017-18) must have been a big fundraising year. If they hang in the low 100's, I think that makes them a little less intriguing as a package deal expansion candidate for the SEC.

3) The top 10 earners in the SEC have been incredibly consistent earners at a very high level. I think you can bank on them for generations. Those saying that Arkansas, Kentucky, or South Carolina should be swapped out in some sort of realignment grand scheme with programs that makes 10's of millions less per year in revenue are nuts. The top 10 SEC earners have consistently been among the top 25 earners in all of college sports. That is a silly percentage of revenue that is just about as close as you will get to guaranteed ROI for the SEC for decades to come.

4) I get the splits in revenue that drive down the Mississippi schools to hovering around $100 million each, and Vanderbilt is what it is. However, Missouri just keeps hanging in the low 90's every year. They are the only major college game in a state with a significant population, financial resources, and rural communities who are the heartbeat of SEC culture. They need to be showing better growth by now. They don't need to be top tier, but they should at least be in the same sentence with Arkansas and Kentucky.

5) Our realistic expansion candidates for the future remain Texas, Oklahoma, and Florida State. Louisville's revenue numbers are due in large part to a deftly negotiated partnership with the YUM! Center, but good on them. Louisville has been pulling SEC revenue numbers for some years now; it is no fluke, and they have weathered PR nightmares that would bury many other programs.

(03-27-2020 02:03 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  As has already been said, thank you for such a precise breakdown of the data, JR! I poked around with this a bit the last two years of reporting (2016-17 and 2017-18), and a few things are standing out:

1) Texas better watch its back, because Ohio State is right on its heels. Ohio State has undergone a nice positive slope in revenue while Texas is hanging in the low 200's. They are undoubtedly the cream of the cream.

2) Kansas came back down to Earth. They went from 101 to 164 and back down to 119. the 164 year (2017-18) must have been a big fundraising year. If they hang in the low 100's, I think that makes them a little less intriguing as a package deal expansion candidate for the SEC.

3) The top 10 earners in the SEC have been incredibly consistent earners at a very high level. I think you can bank on them for generations. Those saying that Arkansas, Kentucky, or South Carolina should be swapped out in some sort of realignment grand scheme with programs that makes 10's of millions less per year in revenue are nuts. The top 10 SEC earners have consistently been among the top 25 earners in all of college sports. That is a silly percentage of revenue that is just about as close as you will get to guaranteed ROI for the SEC for decades to come.

4) I get the splits in revenue that drive down the Mississippi schools to hovering around $100 million each, and Vanderbilt is what it is. However, Missouri just keeps hanging in the low 90's every year. They are the only major college game in a state with a significant population, financial resources, and rural communities who are the heartbeat of SEC culture. They need to be showing better growth by now. They don't need to be top tier, but they should at least be in the same sentence with Arkansas and Kentucky.

5) Our realistic expansion candidates for the future remain Texas, Oklahoma, and Florida State. Louisville's revenue numbers are due in large part to a deftly negotiated partnership with the YUM! Center, but good on them. Louisville has been pulling SEC revenue numbers for some years now; it is no fluke, and they have weathered PR nightmares that would bury many other programs.

I agree wholeheartedly with the bolded. These programs pull their weight and provide a very nice balance.

There are some schools I would like to add, but I'm not interested in getting rid of anyone.