Value of College Teams

[swvacsas2 15]

Interesting Forbes article.

http://www.forbes.com/special-report/2012/business-of-college-football.html

[Deleted Account 5,203]

Interesting? More like common sense: the most valuable teams are those (1) with huge stadiums and (2) teams who win. I just saved everyone the 10 minutes of my life that I wasted reading something so unbelievably obvious.

 

I mean no ill will, friend. My issue is more with Forbes in general. Forbes gets this overblown reputation as some financial wizard when 95% of their reporting is something anyone with any life experience can deduce themselves. And their 'sports' articles are pure birdcage liner.

[HurricaneWarning 212]

And no surprise that seven out of the ten are from SEC.

[deuceswild 15]

Interesting Forbes article.

http://www.forbes.com/special-report/2012/business-of-college-football.html

 

I still think it's interesting little buddy. Thanks for posting.

[RichlandsAlum 678]

Interesting? More like common sense: the most valuable teams are those (1) with huge stadiums and (2) teams who win. I just saved everyone the 10 minutes of my life that I wasted reading something so unbelievably obvious.

 

 

I think there is a number 3 which is the single biggest factor -- membership in a conference with a rich television contract.

 

I looked just to see of there might be any potential "outliers" on that list. Didn't see any, although South Carolina comes close. The Gamecocks don't really have a victorious tradition of any kind on the gridiron, but they pump insane capital into that program. Williams-Brice has been a state of the art facility throughout its history and it has been constantly maintained over the years, with the first major renovation occurring in the 1940's.

 

Clemson has the same commitment to capital (apparently there's never been much else to do in the Palmetto State) and with a comparatively better winning experience. But they're not on the list because of factor #3 which I mentioned in my opening.

 

If anyone could peel out the television revenue and other money that schools receive due to conference affiliation, I think that would be kind of enlightening.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

I think there is a number 3 which is the single biggest factor -- membership in a conference with a rich television contract.

 

I looked just to see of there might be any potential "outliers" on that list. Didn't see any, although South Carolina comes close. The Gamecocks don't really have a victorious tradition of any kind on the gridiron, but they pump insane capital into that program. Williams-Brice has been a state of the art facility throughout its history and it has been constantly maintained over the years, with the first major renovation occurring in the 1940's.

 

Clemson has the same commitment to capital (apparently there's never been much else to do in the Palmetto State) and with a comparatively better winning experience. But they're not on the list because of factor #3 which I mentioned in my opening.

 

If anyone could peel out the television revenue and other money that schools receive due to conference affiliation, I think that would be kind of enlightening.

 

Also a good point. The teams higher up tend to be SEC/Big MMCCDLXXVIII teams, the two conferences that have the most lucrative contracts.