Started By
Message
Quantifying the Value of Expansion Candidates
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:15 am
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:15 am
I created a formula to try to quantify which brands were the most valuable for college football expansion / breakaway to a new division. Here's what I came up with:
Television Viewership past 10 seasons: 50%
All-time AP poll points: 30%
Home game attendance (avg past 5 seasons): 10%
Student Enrollment: 5%
Academic ranking: 5%
At the end of the day, what matters most to these leagues is a brand that will bring in extra eyeballs on TV so that's why I have allocated 50% to TV viewership. I took only regular season games 2016-2025 and ranked teams 1-80 on how many total viewers they brought in.
AP poll points (1936-2025) insure that a program's ability to compete at a high level historically is a major factor (30%).
Home game attendance (10%) helps show the commitment level of a fan base.
Enrollment (5%) is really the only easy way to try to calculate the size of an alumni base. Large enrollments lead to large alumni bases and this helps large schools like UCF (70,000 students) and hurts small schools like Wake Forest (9,000 students).
Academics is constantly touted as a big deal to some of these leagues... particularly the BIG 10. I used the US News and World Report rankings.
Here are the top Expansion Candidates based on this data (not currently in the BIG 10 / SEC):
1. Notre Dame (#5 highest valued program by this formula)
No surprise here. Both the BIG 10 and the SEC would jump at the chance of landing the Irish.
2. Florida State (#15 highest valued program by this formula)
Like it or not, the Noles rank relatively high in nearly every category.
3. Clemson (#16 highest valued program by this formula)
Clemson was barely edged out by FSU. Clemson came in above Florida State in TV viewership (14th vs 17th), however Florida State lead slightly in most every other category.
4. Miami (#24 highest valued program by this formula)
The Canes do really well in AP points thanks to their 5 national titles, but are mediocre in every other category. Their small enrollment is also a killer.
The next 6 to round out the top 10:
5. Colorado (#27 overall)
6. TCU (#29 overall)
7. Georgia Tech (#30 overall)
8. Oklahoma State (#31 overall)
9. Virginia Tech (#35 overall)
10. Pittsburgh (#36 overall)
Notably NOT in the Top 10 are North Carolina (#11 and 38th overall) and Virginia (#31 and 65th overall). These schools are often mentioned as the most desirable on the table other than Notre Dame but it just doesn't show up in the numbers.
UNC is 47th in TV viewership and UVA is 64th. Thats bad. Neither are in the Top 40 in attendance. They do rank Top 10 in academics but that's about it.
So who would add value?
For the SEC, only Notre Dame. Florida State and Clemson would enter the SEC as the 10th and 11th most valuable programs... so back half. They would not increase the average value of the SEC in anyway.
For the BIG 10, Florida State and Clemson would rank 5th and 6th in value in a league that already has 18 teams... so they would be well in the Top half. Miami falls just short.
Conclusion:
The SEC doesn't need to expand. Only Notre Dame would add value and that gain might not be worth the geographical disruption. The BIG 10 would massively gain by adding Notre Dame (geographically in its yard) and one other.
Television Viewership past 10 seasons: 50%
All-time AP poll points: 30%
Home game attendance (avg past 5 seasons): 10%
Student Enrollment: 5%
Academic ranking: 5%
At the end of the day, what matters most to these leagues is a brand that will bring in extra eyeballs on TV so that's why I have allocated 50% to TV viewership. I took only regular season games 2016-2025 and ranked teams 1-80 on how many total viewers they brought in.
AP poll points (1936-2025) insure that a program's ability to compete at a high level historically is a major factor (30%).
Home game attendance (10%) helps show the commitment level of a fan base.
Enrollment (5%) is really the only easy way to try to calculate the size of an alumni base. Large enrollments lead to large alumni bases and this helps large schools like UCF (70,000 students) and hurts small schools like Wake Forest (9,000 students).
Academics is constantly touted as a big deal to some of these leagues... particularly the BIG 10. I used the US News and World Report rankings.
Here are the top Expansion Candidates based on this data (not currently in the BIG 10 / SEC):
1. Notre Dame (#5 highest valued program by this formula)
No surprise here. Both the BIG 10 and the SEC would jump at the chance of landing the Irish.
2. Florida State (#15 highest valued program by this formula)
Like it or not, the Noles rank relatively high in nearly every category.
3. Clemson (#16 highest valued program by this formula)
Clemson was barely edged out by FSU. Clemson came in above Florida State in TV viewership (14th vs 17th), however Florida State lead slightly in most every other category.
4. Miami (#24 highest valued program by this formula)
The Canes do really well in AP points thanks to their 5 national titles, but are mediocre in every other category. Their small enrollment is also a killer.
The next 6 to round out the top 10:
5. Colorado (#27 overall)
6. TCU (#29 overall)
7. Georgia Tech (#30 overall)
8. Oklahoma State (#31 overall)
9. Virginia Tech (#35 overall)
10. Pittsburgh (#36 overall)
Notably NOT in the Top 10 are North Carolina (#11 and 38th overall) and Virginia (#31 and 65th overall). These schools are often mentioned as the most desirable on the table other than Notre Dame but it just doesn't show up in the numbers.
UNC is 47th in TV viewership and UVA is 64th. Thats bad. Neither are in the Top 40 in attendance. They do rank Top 10 in academics but that's about it.
So who would add value?
For the SEC, only Notre Dame. Florida State and Clemson would enter the SEC as the 10th and 11th most valuable programs... so back half. They would not increase the average value of the SEC in anyway.
For the BIG 10, Florida State and Clemson would rank 5th and 6th in value in a league that already has 18 teams... so they would be well in the Top half. Miami falls just short.
Conclusion:
The SEC doesn't need to expand. Only Notre Dame would add value and that gain might not be worth the geographical disruption. The BIG 10 would massively gain by adding Notre Dame (geographically in its yard) and one other.
This post was edited on 8/14/26 at 9:19 am
13
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:17 am to AUTiger789
Great post. You put a lot of effort into it which is much appreciated.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:21 am to AUTiger789
If we’re trying to keep it regional, Virginia tech, Florida State or Georgia Tech. Oklahoma state because Oklahoma is here. Georgia tech was already in the conference which makes me think of Tulane. But I agree with you that there are enough already.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:25 am to AUTiger789
quote:
Conclusion: The SEC doesn't need to expand. Only Notre Dame would add value and that gain might not be worth the geographical disruption. The BIG 10 would massively gain by adding Notre Dame (geographically in its yard) and one other.
This is the way. No expansion. The money element changes.
But we will add teams that have current money value that have no football value.
We’ve already done it.
But since we are talking g about football additions that have the best fit,
I’d look east and not west, anymore.
Clemson
FSU
VT
And I guess Miami just to keep Big10 out of Fla.
Also thanks for this.
This post was edited on 8/14/26 at 9:30 am
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:26 am to OU Guy
quote:
Great post. You put a lot of effort into it which is much appreciated.
Thanks. The numbers also back up that adding Oklahoma and Texas was a very wise decision from a value standpoint.
Texas came in at #4 and Oklahoma #8.... both top 4 in value out of 16 SEC teams. That's a no-brainer.
A&M made sense at the time they were added. They come in at #14 which is now 9th in the SEC out of 16 teams. That's questionable but they would be 7th out of 14 at the time they joined.
Missouri will always be a questionable decision in hindsight. They rank 28th nationally and 12th in the SEC.
We can debate Mizzou all day long, but they were a much better addition than some of the teams the BIG 10 has added in recent years.
Rutgers ranks 66th according to this formula... dead last in the BIG 10. Maryland comes in at 47th. Those are some real head scratchers. I bet they wish they had those back.
This post was edited on 8/14/26 at 9:27 am
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:27 am to bigjohnson
Okie St has no shot.
UNC, UVA, FSU, Clemson would probably be the top 4.
FSU and Clemson are probably unlikely though due to UF and SC.
UNC, UVA, FSU, Clemson would probably be the top 4.
FSU and Clemson are probably unlikely though due to UF and SC.
This post was edited on 8/14/26 at 9:31 am
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:28 am to AUTiger789
What would the SEC gain by cutting loose some of the dead wood?
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:33 am to Go Go Gata
quote:
UNC, UVA, FSU, Clemson seem most likely IMO
Again, the numbers just don't show why UNC or UVA would ever make sense.
Yes I know UNC is a big basketball brand, but basketball just doesn't move the needle. Only 10 or so regular season basketball games hit 1 million television viewers for all teams during the whole season.
An OK State football game on ESPN2 at noon would get more than that.... not saying OK State should be added, it just shows basketball prestige is a non-factor.
North Carolina averages just over 48,000 fans per game in attendance. That would rank 15th in the SEC, only above Vandy. Virginia averages just 42,000 fans per game.
I feel like those are glaring red flags that say neither school is SEC worthy.
This post was edited on 8/14/26 at 9:34 am
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:36 am to AUTiger789
This is a much more thoughtful way to analyze the candidates than 99% of internet slop arguing about the "best" candidates. That said, some suggested tweaks:
1. Television viewership is not an impartial metric so I think giving it 50% in the formula skews some of your results. I think this should account for 10-15% of the formula, at most.
Call it a chicken or egg situation, but blue bloods/historic winners that are already well-represented by your All-time AP poll points tend to get the best network and time slots. Of course Notre Dame, for example, is going to come up smelling like roses here - it has its own tv deal and has all its games on a giant network, while schools like North Carolina or Virginia Tech will perform poorly as they are rarely playing in primetime on a major network. That does not necessarily indicate that North Carolina would be a worse network draw than any of your #4-10 ranked candidates if it were an SEC member.
2. I think you need a "fit" metric. I realize that's adding a somewhat subjective rather than quantifiable data point to the formula, but it could be done. Expansion candidates, in my mind, are basically a simple formula of big brand + fit + economics.
Colorado may rank better overall in your formula, but there is no way it's a better fit in the SEC than North Carolina or Georgia Tech or Virginia Tech. I propose calculating the geographic center of the SEC, and then distance (miles) to the expansion candidate's campus. Combine this with number of games played against current SEC schools, and you've got something.
Clemson and Florida State are obvious candidates not just because they are good football brands, but because they are effectively SEC programs wearing ACC badges. Clemson instantly gives you incredible match-ups that would be ratings bangers: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, etc. They sit in the midst of the existing footprint. This ain't about cable boxes and footprint anymore, and you rightfully left those factors out of your formula.
1. Television viewership is not an impartial metric so I think giving it 50% in the formula skews some of your results. I think this should account for 10-15% of the formula, at most.
Call it a chicken or egg situation, but blue bloods/historic winners that are already well-represented by your All-time AP poll points tend to get the best network and time slots. Of course Notre Dame, for example, is going to come up smelling like roses here - it has its own tv deal and has all its games on a giant network, while schools like North Carolina or Virginia Tech will perform poorly as they are rarely playing in primetime on a major network. That does not necessarily indicate that North Carolina would be a worse network draw than any of your #4-10 ranked candidates if it were an SEC member.
2. I think you need a "fit" metric. I realize that's adding a somewhat subjective rather than quantifiable data point to the formula, but it could be done. Expansion candidates, in my mind, are basically a simple formula of big brand + fit + economics.
Colorado may rank better overall in your formula, but there is no way it's a better fit in the SEC than North Carolina or Georgia Tech or Virginia Tech. I propose calculating the geographic center of the SEC, and then distance (miles) to the expansion candidate's campus. Combine this with number of games played against current SEC schools, and you've got something.
Clemson and Florida State are obvious candidates not just because they are good football brands, but because they are effectively SEC programs wearing ACC badges. Clemson instantly gives you incredible match-ups that would be ratings bangers: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, etc. They sit in the midst of the existing footprint. This ain't about cable boxes and footprint anymore, and you rightfully left those factors out of your formula.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:36 am to AUTiger789
quote:
Missouri will always be a questionable decision
This.
Also, never UNC. We don't need another program with a way overinflated view of themselves.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:37 am to AUTiger789
I'm completely against further expansion but we already have a gentlemen's agreement with North Carolina. So the real question is who the other member would be.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:38 am to AUTiger789
Here’s the footprint. To note, this region is the fastest growing states in the country. Meaning they will continue to add TV households while the other conferences lose TV households.
This post was edited on 8/14/26 at 9:42 am
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:40 am to AUTiger789
quote:
1. Notre Dame (#5 highest valued program by this formula)
No surprise here. Both the BIG 10 and the SEC would jump at the chance of landing the Irish.
Notre Dame HATES the Big 10. They tried to enter the conference back when it started and Michigan black-balled them. So, Notre Dame has always had a hatred for both the Big 10 and Michigan.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:40 am to New Money
quote:
What would the SEC gain by cutting loose some of the dead wood?
Here's how the SEC ranks according to the formula.
1. Alabama (3 nationally)
2. Texas (4)
3. Georgia (6)
4. Oklahoma (8)
5. Florida (9)
6. LSU (10)
7. Tennessee (12)
8. Auburn (13)
9. Texas A&M (14)
10. Arkansas (21)
11. Ole Miss (23)
12. Missouri (28)
13. South Carolina (33)
14. Kentucky (39)
15. Mississippi State (40)
16. Vanderbilt (67)
There's just not much dead weight other than Vandy. Even MSU ranks well ahead of four BIG 10 programs.
In hindsight, adding Clemson back in 1992 rather than South Carolina would have been a better call, but what's done is done. Florida State would have been great too but they passed on the opportunity.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:41 am to Landmass
quote:
we already have a gentlemen's agreement with North Carolina
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:45 am to AUTiger789
quote:
UNC is 47th in TV viewership and UVA is 64th. Thats bad. Neither are in the Top 40 in attendance.
Nah we dont have to bring in more football powerhouses. We can diversify and adding UNC would be the way to go.
UNC is a great program for basketball and baseball and a pretty nice candidate for the athletic director's cup. The school also has historical relevance and a premier state school. The SEC would love to have UNC.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:48 am to BreakawayZou83
quote:
Colorado may rank better overall in your formula, but there is no way it's a better fit in the SEC than North Carolina or Georgia Tech or Virginia Tech.
Colorado scores big because they've been bringing the eyeballs to the TV under Dion. They rank 24th in TV viewership the past 10 seasons but since Dion came those numbers are much higher.
In 2023, Colorado was 4th nationally in regular season TV viewership behind only Ohio State, Alabama, and Michigan. In 2024 they fell slightly to 6th... behind same 3 schools plus Georgia and Texas. In 2025 they fell back to 16th... but still ahead of programs like Clemson, USC, Texas A&M, Penn State, etc.
The Dion factor seems to be fading a bit, and there's no guarantee that Colorado will have as much allure once he leaves, but there is no denying that the Buffs have been a major tv draw these past few years.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:49 am to AUTiger789
quote:
Colorado scores big
Turn your big ole brain off for the day because this is not it.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:50 am to clamdip
Posting this just for source information. The way it was worded and Sankey alluded to the same, makes me pretty damn certain that a back-room deal has already been struck.
https://tarheelswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/tarheels/2025/07/22/unc-athletics-sec-conference-realignment-insidecarolina-acc-kickoff/85330380007/
Also this:
UNC has a handshake agreement with SEC
I also believe that UVA has a gentlemen's agreement with the B1G.
https://tarheelswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/tarheels/2025/07/22/unc-athletics-sec-conference-realignment-insidecarolina-acc-kickoff/85330380007/
Also this:
UNC has a handshake agreement with SEC
I also believe that UVA has a gentlemen's agreement with the B1G.
This post was edited on 8/14/26 at 9:52 am
Posted on 8/14/26 at 9:51 am to OU Guy
quote:
To note, this region is the fastest growing states in the country. Meaning they will continue to add TV households while the other conferences lose TV households.
I almost added a population growth factor into the formula, but I felt it might mess things up overall. States like Texas and North Carolina are growing fast but does that translate at all the the values of schools like Baylor and Wake Forest? Probably not. It probably does help the larger state schools like Texas, Texas A&M, North Carolina, and NC State but I wasn't sure how to accurately capture that into a formula.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News