OT: - Top 75 Most valuable athletic programs | The Boneyard
.-.

OT: Top 75 Most valuable athletic programs

bendm said:
www.cnbc.com

CNBC's Official College Sports Valuations 2025: Top 75 athletic programs

The programs are worth a combined $51.22 billion, 13% more than the top 75 in last year's rankings.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com

71. UConn

I don’t get it. If it’s all about football how is Duke 33? How is BC ahead of BYU, Utah, Zona and ASU?
Expand ...

Duke and UNC have built basketball brands that nearly transcend the paradigm (and I say nearly, because they are still in the 30’s). And they still cash the ACC football checks.

These exceptions still don’t prove the rule - if they did, schools like Syracuse, BCU, Rutgers, Wake Forest, BYU, etc. wouldn’t be valued at double or more what UConn’s program is.
 
whiffnutmeg said:
Duke and UNC have built basketball brands that nearly transcend the paradigm (and I say nearly, because they are still in the 30’s). And they still cash the ACC football checks.

These exceptions still don’t prove the rule - if they did, schools like Syracuse, BCU, Rutgers, Wake Forest, BYU, etc. wouldn’t be valued at double or more what UConn’s program is.
Expand ...
But how is BC ahead of huge schools like Utah, BYu, ASU and Zona? BYU was in the Big12 chip this year, Utah lived in the PAC final and ASU was in the cfp last year. BC has sucked for yearsz
 
bendm said:
But how is BC ahead of huge schools like Utah, BYu, ASU and Zona? BYU was in the Big12 chip this year, Utah lived in the PAC final and ASU was in the cfp last year. BC has sucked for yearsz
Expand ...
BC has been collecting ACC money for years. Plus it has wealthy donors. For example, BC's endowment is $4.3 billion compared to UConn's endowment of $634 million.

"BC also attributed increased revenue growth for FY25, which ended May 31, to strong endowment returns. The University’s endowment reached a record-high $4.3 billion, an increase of approximately 10 percent from $3.7 billion in 2024.

In March, the University also issued $373 million in bonds, which will fund future capital projects."

BC’s Assets Totaled $7.7 Billion in 2025, Records Show.
 
Presumably these valuations are derived from the revenue streams from the athletic departments and it looks like the valuations are between 4-5x revenue. So, were UCONN in a P4 conference it would pick up about $30-40 million in incremental revenue just from the conference affiliation. Revenues would increase even more than that with a better slate of competition, especially in football. UCONN would then have a valuation under this methodology right around where BC and Syracuse are, which makes some sense.

That all said, it's at best a hypothetical excercise.......
 
.-.
jostar1 said:
BC also attributed increased revenue growth for FY25, which ended May 31, to strong endowment returns. The University’s endowment reached a record-high $4.3 billion, an increase of approximately 10 percent from $3.7 billion in 2024.

In March, the University also issued $373 million in bonds, which will fund future capital projects.
Expand ...
But this is just the athletic department valuation, you’re saying thats just a reflection of a schools general finances?
 
bendm said:
But this is just the athletic department valuation, you’re saying thats just a reflection of a schools general finances?
Expand ...
Some of the endowment is used for the Athletic Department.
 
jostar1 said:
Some of the endowment is used for the Athletic Department.
Expand ...
Endowment investment returns (interest & gains), sure. Principal balances, most frequently restricted unless specifically permitted by donor. Or, possibly with a term endowment contribution which may enable access after a specified time period.
 
I think the methodology places additional value when the TV contract has numerous years remaining. So, the ACC benefits from their 2036 duration and UConn is penalized by our short term and low value football tv contract. So, the UConn multiple suffers as opposed to every other school.
 
uconndogs said:
Presumably these valuations are derived from the revenue streams from the athletic departments and it looks like the valuations are between 4-5x revenue. So, were UCONN in a P4 conference it would pick up about $30-40 million in incremental revenue just from the conference affiliation. Revenues would increase even more than that with a better slate of competition, especially in football. UCONN would then have a valuation under this methodology right around where BC and Syracuse are, which makes some sense.

That all said, it's at best a hypothetical excercise.......
Expand ...

Why would they value the athletic departments off revenue? Other service businesses with high compensation costs are not valued off revenue.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Why would they value the athletic departments off revenue? Other service businesses with high compensation costs are not valued off revenue.
Expand ...
They are not a service business and there is no competition from another group of universities outside the NCAA
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
Why would they value the athletic departments off revenue? Other service businesses with high compensation costs are not valued off revenue.
Expand ...

Per the table, BC's revenue is $137 million vs UConn's $106 million, or 29% higher, but their value is $530 million vs UConn's $249 million, or 113% higher. Some factor other than revenue is figuring in to BC's advantage. Intangible brand? They must be counting university endowment or some other non-athletic factor.
 
Kolumbo said:
They are not a service business and there is no competition from another group of universities outside the NCAA
Expand ...

There is lots of competition for entertainment dollars, and there is not a similar example to a minor league being a multi billion dollar business anywhere else in the world. College athletics are unique, and the business model is more fragile than most people understand.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
There is lots of competition for entertainment dollars, and there is not a similar example to a minor league being a multi billion dollar business anywhere else in the world. College athletics are unique, and the business model is more fragile than most people understand.
Expand ...

This is an excellent point. Major college athletics is in the process of disconnecting itself from the underlying schools. Professional mercenaries are not student athletes, they are simply professional athletes playing for the highest bidder. Eyeball competition will come more and more from the NFL and NBA as the alternatives, or fans will lose interest and watch a movie. Totally agree with Nelson here that the risks have been largely ignored.
 
UConn isn't benefitting from being a P4 brand cashing P4 checks. If the playing field were leveled, we'd probably be in the 40s
 
.-.
This ranking by CNBC is just stupid and worthless since it is way too simple, and based on revenue generated. Obviously, teams in P4 would get higher ranking simply based on revenue.

AI provided far better ranking.

Here’s an evidence-based estimate of where UConn would rank if we ranked college athletic programs using the broader criteria* outlined below (instead of just revenue like the CNBC valuations): competitive success, efficiency, academic outcomes, fan engagement, athlete experience, and institutional balance.

🏆 1. Competitive Success — Among the Nation’s Elite

UConn would clearly rank very high (likely top 5–10 overall) when you account for championship success and sustained competitive excellence:
🎯 Basketball Success (Huge Drivers of Rank)
Women’s basketball: UConn has 12 NCAA championships, the most of any Division I program in basketball history (men’s or women’s). �
SI +1
Men’s basketball: UConn has 6 NCAA men’s titles, including recent back-to-back championships and dominant tournament runs. �
NBC Connecticut
Combined, UConn’s basketball programs are among the most successful in any NCAA sport.
Both teams regularly finish high in national polls and deep in NCAA tournaments. �
CT Insider +1
Most comparable programs historically (across sports): Duke, North Carolina, Kentucky (men’s hoops), Tennessee or Stanford (women’s athletics). But UConn’s combined basketball dominance puts it near the very top of all schools in this category.

🏈 Other Sports
UConn’s football program is less prominent nationally, but successful bowl appearances and improving All-American talent suggest it’s competitive within the Group of Five tier. �
Reddit
Several other programs (track & field, soccer, etc.) consistently compete and win regionally.
Competitive Success Rank Estimate: Top 5 nationally when weighted across all major team sports, largely because no other school matches UConn’s basketball championship haul in two programs.
🎓 2. Academics & Athlete Outcomes — Above Average to Very Strong
UConn scores well academically compared to many Power 5 athletic departments:
UConn achieved an overall 94% Graduation Success Rate (GSR) and outstanding APR scores, with many teams posting perfect scores and high GPA averages. �
University of Connecticut Athletics +1
Multiple teams (basketball, golf, women’s soccer, etc.) achieved 100% multi-year APR, signaling strong support for student-athlete success. �
University of Connecticut Athletics
Academic/Athlete Development Rank Estimate: Top 15–25 nationally, likely higher than many high-revenue, high-income programs that struggle academically.
📈 3. Efficiency & Competitive Return
If we measure championships per dollar spent or wins relative to program resources:
UConn’s success in basketball dwarfs many richer programs with significantly larger revenue bases.
Many Power 5 football programs generate more revenue but fewer championships or national titles in any sport.
This suggests UConn ranks even higher on efficiency metrics — possibly top 10 in the country.

📣 4. Fan Engagement & Cultural Impact
UConn boasts national recognition especially for basketball:
The women’s team historically draws strong national TV ratings and high attendance relative to program size.
The men’s team’s recent dominance has expanded UConn’s brand beyond traditional Big East markets.
While not exactly KU, Duke, UNC, or Ohio State sized in total fanbase, UConn is a cultural powerhouse in basketball and respected academically, which elevates its fan engagement significantly.
Fan Engagement Rank Estimate: Top 20–30 nationally.

🏅 5. Composite Ranking Estimate
If we create a simple composite (e.g., 40% competitive success, 20% academic outcomes, 20% efficiency, 10% engagement, 10% athlete experience), UConn would likely slot as follows:
Category
Approx. Rank Estimate
Competitive success
Top 5
Academics & outcomes
Top 15–25
Efficiency & ROI
Top 10
Fan engagement
Top 20–30
Athlete experience & balance
Top 25–35
Composite Overall Ranking
~Top 10 nationally
Bottom line: UConn would rank significantly higher (likely top 10 overall) compared to most revenue-based lists, and in some systems it could plausibly be top 5, owing to its sustained championship success, academic excellence, and competitive efficiency.

🧠 Comparison with Revenue-Only Ranks
Many revenue-based rankings place schools like Texas, Alabama, Ohio State — with massive TV and ticket income — ahead of success-rich but lower-revenue programs like UConn. Your broader ranking shifts emphasis to meaningful success and institutional performance, not just income.
In short: UConn’s athletic program stands out as more than just financially successful — it’s historically elite in performance, academics, and efficiency, and that should reflect in more holistic rankings.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
There is lots of competition for entertainment dollars, and there is not a similar example to a minor league being a multi billion dollar business anywhere else in the world. College athletics are unique, and the business model is more fragile than most people understand.
Expand ...
I don't disagree with these points and for some reason college football and basketball are extremely popular while baseball and hockey are not. They are popular not because they are the minor leagues but because of other factors including decades of history and tradition.

The valuations based on revenue make sense because we know that at least the P4 will be making those $100's of millions for several more years. Basing on Net Income probably makes more sense. The whole system could eventually collapse but using a multiplier of 4 seems reasonable. We don't even know what they mean by "valuation." You would think it means the program is worth that much if one wanted to purchase it and at least break even or maybe it's simply to compare the programs to each other. Some don't seem to understand that it's simply a financial comparison and not a popularity contest.

this is a huge difference based on ACC revenue
bcu $530M and $137M
smu $385M and $100M

"CNBC's list reflects the current enterprise value of each program, starting with a base revenue multiple of four for all institutions, and then adjusting the multiple for variables, including conference affiliation, estimated NIL spend, school subsidies, number of alumni and other factors that can catalyze revenue growth and profitability."
 
Here is the more realistic ranking:

This will be an analytical, composite re-ranking, not a revenue list and not a prediction market. Think of this as:
“If we ranked athletic departments by what they actually accomplish and how well they do it.”

Method (explicit and consistent)
Composite score weighted roughly as:
40% Competitive success (titles, deep runs, consistency across sports)
20% Efficiency / ROI (success relative to resources)
20% Fan impact & national relevance (TV draw, attendance, cultural footprint)
10% Academics & athlete outcomes
10% Program breadth & sustainability
⚠️ This penalizes football-only brands and rewards multi-sport excellence.
🏆 Top 100 College Athletic Programs (Holistic Ranking)

🔥 Tier 1: National Athletic Powerhouses (1–10)

Programs that combine championships, consistency, and national impact.

Stanford
UConn
UCLA
Ohio State
Michigan
Florida
Texas
USC
North Carolina
Alabama

👉 UConn lands here because no school matches its combined men’s + women’s basketball dominance.

🏅 Tier 2: Elite Multi-Sport Programs (11–25)

Georgia
LSU
Oklahoma
Duke
Notre Dame
Oregon
Penn State
Tennessee
Auburn
Wisconsin
Kentucky
Florida State
Virginia
Clemson
Arkansas

🏟️ Tier 3: Strong Power Programs (26–50)

Kansas
Michigan State
Iowa
Washington
Texas A&M
Arizona
Arizona State
Baylor
Louisville
NC State
Virginia Tech
Minnesota
Nebraska
Colorado
Indiana
Maryland
Illinois
Purdue
Utah
Mississippi State
Ole Miss
South Carolina
Missouri
Cincinnati
BYU

🎓 Tier 4: High-Efficiency & Regional Powers (51–75)

Gonzaga
San Diego State
Boise State
Iowa State
UCF
Houston
Memphis
SMU
Wake Forest
Syracuse
Pitt
Boston College
Cal
Stanford (football-penalized version would still be here alone)
Northwestern
Temple
UNLV
Fresno State
Utah State
Appalachian State
Tulane
Rice
Air Force
Army
Navy

🌍 Tier 5: Depth, Sustainability, Emerging Impact (76–100)

Colorado State
San Jose State
Nevada
San Diego
Loyola Chicago
Dayton
VCU
George Mason
Wichita State
Old Dominion
Liberty
Marshall
James Madison
Coastal Carolina
Troy
Montana
Montana State
North Dakota State
South Dakota State
Princeton
Harvard
Yale
Penn
Columbia
Cornell

📌 What This Ranking Fixes vs CNBC
UConn jumps from ~30s–40s → Top 2
Basketball schools are properly valued
Olympic sports dominance matters
Efficiency is rewarded
Academic alignment counts
Football is important — not tyrannical

🔍 Key Takeaways (especially relevant to UConn)

UConn is the best basketball athletic department in NCAA history
No school has more combined elite titles in a revenue-efficient model
Revenue rankings dramatically understate programs without P4 football windfalls
This model better reflects what universities claim athletics are for.
 
WestCoastHusky said:
👉 UConn lands here because no school matches its combined men’s + women’s basketball dominance
Expand ...
And don't forget that it is actually quite good in many sports. Men's and women's hockey, baseball and softball. Soccer also had a solid year this year.

But keep in mind that the two rankings are looking at different things. You are looking at athletic department success, and they are looking at athletic department finances.

Their approach tends to be a circular analysis. "The P4 conferences consist of the most successful programs in the country. We are ranking, most successful by income received. The P4 conferences have automatic distributions that are more than every other conference. Therefore P4 programs have better finances. Therefore, they are the best programs in the country and deserve to be in P4 conferences.
 
CL82 said:
And don't forget that it is actually quite good in many sports. Men's and women's hockey, baseball and softball. Soccer also had a solid year this year.
Expand ...
Ranking has to be based on performance vs just revenue.

If a multi billionaire or billionaires decide to donate $100B to UConn tomorrow, does that make UConn #1 on the CNBC ranking instantly? It can be said for San Jose State too, which is why that list is just stupid.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
48
Guests online
5,201
Total visitors
5,249
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,921
Messages
4,460,438
Members
10,331
Latest member
Sir Oolick


Top Bottom