https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach...e840f42189
Just found this interesting article on My Google start up

Thank you! This is interesting. I don’t exactly know their methodology but here is the list.

Ohio State
Michigan
Alabama
Texas
Penn State
Notre Dame
LSU
Georgia
Auburn
Texas A&M
Florida
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Clemson
Wisconsin
Nebraska
South Carolina
Iowa
Michigan State
Arkansas
Florida State
Virginia Tech
Southern Cal
Miami
Washington
Oregon
UCLA
Mississippi
Kentucky
Mississippi State
Oklahoma State
Texas Tech
Missouri
Georgia Tech
Arizona State
Minnesota
West Virginia
North Carolina
BYU
Iowa State
Utah
NC State
Kansas State
California
Louisville
Illinois
TCU
Stanford
Pittsburgh
Arizona
Rutgers
Indiana
Colorado
Purdue
Kansas
UCF
Virginia
Maryland
Baylor
Syracuse
Northwestern
Boise State
Oregon State
Boston College
USF
Washington State
Duke
Vanderbilt
Memphis
Houston
Cincinnati
Wake Forest
SMU

The highest ACC teams are Clemson (14), FSU (21) and VT (22).
The highest among the left over Big 12 teams are OK State (31), TTU (32) and WVU (37).

The original article lists the criteria evaluated but not how those criteria are weighted.

There are severe problems as Nate Silver used the fabricated data set created by CommonCensus from a voting website where you could vote as much as you wanted. That's the infamous data set the concluded that Rutgers was the most popular football team in NY and that NC State had less football viewership than Duke, and that ECU was more popular than UNC and NC State in Eastern North Carolina. It's very poor social science and I would not sign off on this if it were a dissertation, let alone a masters thesis.

The instrument is also not calibrated to compare schools sharing the same demographic and dma footprint.

This would affect Michigan and MSU, NC State/Duke/UNC, UCLA and USC, Ole Miss and MSU, Georgia and GT. The result seems to be the division of the market based on aggregated revenue for all sports.

Most normal football only valuations put NC State 5-6 notches ahead of UNC. UNC's basketball program pushes them ahead in total. The WSJ estimated NC State's football program to be worth 180M, and UNC's 155M and even that is somewhat skewed by the schools in the same market issue.

There is an intrinsic value and a value within the competition of a market. Get rid of State or UNC and the remaining entity would be of more value, but not double the value. There are more P-5 college football and basketball tickets being sold in the Research Triangle market than any other market in the United States, but they are split between State, Carolina, and Duke.

Of 1,690,000 P-5 football and basketball tickets in the RTP, Duke sells 18%, State sells 40.5% and UNC sells 41.5%, but of this, UNC sells at least a 100K more basketball tickets.

(07-31-2021 03:21 PM)Statefan Wrote:  There are severe problems as Nate Silver used the fabricated data set created by CommonCensus from a voting website where you could vote as much as you wanted. That's the infamous data set the concluded that Rutgers was the most popular football team in NY and that NC State had less football viewership than Duke, and that ECU was more popular than UNC and NC State in Eastern North Carolina. It's very poor social science and I would not sign off on this if it were a dissertation, let alone a masters thesis.

The instrument is also not calibrated to compare schools sharing the same demographic and dma footprint.

This would affect Michigan and MSU, NC State/Duke/UNC, UCLA and USC, Ole Miss and MSU, Georgia and GT. The result seems to be the division of the market based on aggregated revenue for all sports.

Most normal football only valuations put NC State 5-6 notches ahead of UNC. UNC's basketball program pushes them ahead in total. The WSJ estimated NC State's football program to be worth 180M, and UNC's 155M and even that is somewhat skewed by the schools in the same market issue.

There is an intrinsic value and a value within the competition of a market. Get rid of State or UNC and the remaining entity would be of more value, but not double the value. There are more P-5 college football and basketball tickets being sold in the Research Triangle market than any other market in the United States, but they are split between State, Carolina, and Duke.

Of 1,690,000 P-5 football and basketball tickets in the RTP, Duke sells 18%, State sells 40.5% and UNC sells 41.5%, but of this, UNC sells at least a 100K more basketball tickets.

Nate Silver’s analysis seems to be very dated too. Cincy’s number can’t be that bad.

(07-31-2021 06:12 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 03:21 PM)Statefan Wrote:  There are severe problems as Nate Silver used the fabricated data set created by CommonCensus from a voting website where you could vote as much as you wanted. That's the infamous data set the concluded that Rutgers was the most popular football team in NY and that NC State had less football viewership than Duke, and that ECU was more popular than UNC and NC State in Eastern North Carolina. It's very poor social science and I would not sign off on this if it were a dissertation, let alone a masters thesis.

The instrument is also not calibrated to compare schools sharing the same demographic and dma footprint.

This would affect Michigan and MSU, NC State/Duke/UNC, UCLA and USC, Ole Miss and MSU, Georgia and GT. The result seems to be the division of the market based on aggregated revenue for all sports.

Most normal football only valuations put NC State 5-6 notches ahead of UNC. UNC's basketball program pushes them ahead in total. The WSJ estimated NC State's football program to be worth 180M, and UNC's 155M and even that is somewhat skewed by the schools in the same market issue.

There is an intrinsic value and a value within the competition of a market. Get rid of State or UNC and the remaining entity would be of more value, but not double the value. There are more P-5 college football and basketball tickets being sold in the Research Triangle market than any other market in the United States, but they are split between State, Carolina, and Duke.

Of 1,690,000 P-5 football and basketball tickets in the RTP, Duke sells 18%, State sells 40.5% and UNC sells 41.5%, but of this, UNC sells at least a 100K more basketball tickets.

Nate Silver’s analysis seems to be very dated too. Cincy’s number can’t be that bad.

It's from 2011, and he was not made aware of the junk input until about 2016.

The WSJ puts a value on football teams and it's not perfect either because of the market overlap and their unfamiliarity with the actual viewing footprint of some schools.

For the ACC in 2019 it was:

26 CU - 300 M 32nd CSA size 1.5 M
27 FSU - 290 M sub CSA size @ 400 K
28 VT - 280 M sub CSA size @ 400 K
36 GT - 215 M 10th CSA size 7.2 M
41 Miami - 195 M 11th CSA size 5.8 M
46 NC State - 180 M 31st CSA size 2.3 M
47 Louisville - 175 M sub CSA size 1.1 M
50 UNC - 155 M 31st CSA size 2.3 M
55 UVa - 153 M sub CSA size 1.2 M
57 Syracuse - 120 M sub CSA size 720K
58 Pitt - 110 M 25th CSA size 2.5 M
62 BC - 80 M 6th CSA size 8.2 M
64 Wake - 75 M 36th CSA size 1,7 M
66 Duke - 65 M 31st CSA size 2,3 M

Part of the value of a sports franchise is the market in which it located. If markets are defined by just the Combined Metro Statistical Area - I've pegged those to the above schools. One of the first things you see is VT and FSU punching above their weight in relationship to the size of their home Combined Statistical Area. Then you have GT whose location in Atlanta no doubt drives some of it's value. What would Clemson or UNC be worth in Atlanta for example. Then you have Duke, NC State, and UNC sharing a home CMSA. That would seem to suggest that the Triangle could support a college football program with seating capacity rivaling Michigan, Ohio State, or Penn State.

The problem with comparing values is also the conference you are in - WF is worth X in the SEC and X in the ACC and X as an independent.

The data seems to suggest that if you move WF and Duke to a non football status, UNC and NC State and perhaps VT would rise in value to a degree that fully offsets the loss. And that's the problem, in a football world it does not matter how good Duke's basketball program is or what their degree is worth - football no longer matches the fan and university base. Wake is so small it doesn't matter how many games they win unless they can win 10 a year - their entire undergraduate student body would fit in the VT or NC State away sections. WF medical doctors and WF attorneys do not drive the imagination of fans outside the general area.