Started By
Message
The Athletic's Brand Valuations
Posted on 9/1/26 at 8:55 am
Posted on 9/1/26 at 8:55 am
SIAP but I just saw these yesterday.
First the SEC. (National rank; estimated value)
1. Texas- $2.46B
5. Georgia- $1.95B
6. Alabama- $1.80B
7. Oklahoma- $1.60B
9. Tennessee- $1.57B
11. LSU- $1.32B
12. Florida- $1.16B
14. Auburn- $1.11B
17. Texas A&M- $1.05B
23. Arkansas- $690M
27. Ole Miss- $636M
29. South Carolina- $597M
34. Missouri- $500M
40. Kentucky- $400M
59. Vanderbilt- $250M
60. Miss State- $248M
Looks about right. Giant gap between the top 9 and the bottom 9.
Now for the BIG 10:
2. Ohio State- $2.30B
4. Michigan- $2.00B
7. USC- $1.60B
13. Oregon- $1.13B
15. Nebraska- $1.06B
15. Washington- $1.06B
19. Wisconsin- $922M
21. Iowa- $806M
22. Indiana- $696M
23. Michigan State- $686M
28. Minnesota- $629M
30. Illinois- $568M
36. Northwestern- $498M
39. Purdue- $450M
45. UCLA- $363M
46. Maryland- $356M
52. Rutgers- $314M
I find it super interesting that their 3 weakest brands were all added through expansion in the last 15 years or so.... seems like adding these three is absolute malpractice by the league. There were far better candidates both at the time and now.
I feel like USC is severely overvalued. Sure the LA market is massive, but if no one in it watches college football, why does it matter? Conversely, the gap between USC and UCLA seems ridiculously wide. I feel like the Bruins are being a bit underrated. Does anyone truly believe that Purdue's brand is worth nearly $100M more than UCLA's?
The Top Expansion Candidates by brand value:
3. Notre Dame- $2.1B
18. Miami- $950M
20. Florida State- $819M
25. Clemson- $674M
26. Utah- $638M
31. North Carolina- $560M
32. Virginia Tech- $520M
37. TCU- $495M
38. NC State- $480M
41. Georgia Tech- $398M
UVA comes in way down at #57... as I was saying last week I don't know why UVA's name gets tossed around as a viable expansion candidate. They make nonsense.
Also Duke is #49 just behind Louisville and Iowa State... echoing what I've been saying for years: Basketball brand is worth almost nothing and does not translate over to football. Kansas State's brand is #54 ahead of rival Kansas who is at #62.... again, basketball means almost nothing.
First the SEC. (National rank; estimated value)
1. Texas- $2.46B
5. Georgia- $1.95B
6. Alabama- $1.80B
7. Oklahoma- $1.60B
9. Tennessee- $1.57B
11. LSU- $1.32B
12. Florida- $1.16B
14. Auburn- $1.11B
17. Texas A&M- $1.05B
23. Arkansas- $690M
27. Ole Miss- $636M
29. South Carolina- $597M
34. Missouri- $500M
40. Kentucky- $400M
59. Vanderbilt- $250M
60. Miss State- $248M
Looks about right. Giant gap between the top 9 and the bottom 9.
Now for the BIG 10:
2. Ohio State- $2.30B
4. Michigan- $2.00B
7. USC- $1.60B
13. Oregon- $1.13B
15. Nebraska- $1.06B
15. Washington- $1.06B
19. Wisconsin- $922M
21. Iowa- $806M
22. Indiana- $696M
23. Michigan State- $686M
28. Minnesota- $629M
30. Illinois- $568M
36. Northwestern- $498M
39. Purdue- $450M
45. UCLA- $363M
46. Maryland- $356M
52. Rutgers- $314M
I find it super interesting that their 3 weakest brands were all added through expansion in the last 15 years or so.... seems like adding these three is absolute malpractice by the league. There were far better candidates both at the time and now.
I feel like USC is severely overvalued. Sure the LA market is massive, but if no one in it watches college football, why does it matter? Conversely, the gap between USC and UCLA seems ridiculously wide. I feel like the Bruins are being a bit underrated. Does anyone truly believe that Purdue's brand is worth nearly $100M more than UCLA's?
The Top Expansion Candidates by brand value:
3. Notre Dame- $2.1B
18. Miami- $950M
20. Florida State- $819M
25. Clemson- $674M
26. Utah- $638M
31. North Carolina- $560M
32. Virginia Tech- $520M
37. TCU- $495M
38. NC State- $480M
41. Georgia Tech- $398M
UVA comes in way down at #57... as I was saying last week I don't know why UVA's name gets tossed around as a viable expansion candidate. They make nonsense.
Also Duke is #49 just behind Louisville and Iowa State... echoing what I've been saying for years: Basketball brand is worth almost nothing and does not translate over to football. Kansas State's brand is #54 ahead of rival Kansas who is at #62.... again, basketball means almost nothing.
7
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:03 am to AUTiger789
Also... the five weakest brands in the sport (Power 4 only);
61. UCF
62. Kansas
63. Boston College
64. California
65. Stanford
66. Wake Forest
67. Cincinnati
68. Houston
Judging by Stanford's crowd Saturday, I'd say they got that one right.
*Edit: Sorry I left the last 3 off... added those to the very bottom.
61. UCF
62. Kansas
63. Boston College
64. California
65. Stanford
66. Wake Forest
67. Cincinnati
68. Houston
Judging by Stanford's crowd Saturday, I'd say they got that one right.
*Edit: Sorry I left the last 3 off... added those to the very bottom.
This post was edited on 9/1/26 at 9:19 am
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:08 am to AUTiger789
quote:
Looks about right. Giant gap between the top 9 and the bottom 9.
Math is hard
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:10 am to AUTiger789
quote:The Rutgers and Maryland additions were, in essence, defensive moves. The Big Ten had heard complaints from Penn State for years that they were isolated out East, and worried that, at some point, Penn State might look for alternatives. And, with the SEC going to 14, the Big Ten also felt like matching numbers. It was a dumb move that will never payoff.
I find it super interesting that their 3 weakest brands were all added through expansion in the last 15 years or so.... seems like adding these three is absolute malpractice by the league. There were far better candidates both at the time and now.
I feel like USC is severely overvalued. Sure the LA market is massive, but if no one in it watches college football, why does it matter? Conversely, the gap between USC and UCLA seems ridiculously wide. I feel like the Bruins are being a bit underrated. Does anyone truly believe that Purdue's brand is worth nearly $100M more than UCLA's?
When it comes to USC and UCLA, once again, the Big Ten was reacting to an SEC move (adding OU and Texas). While USC has some brand cachet and has their stadium situation sorted out, UCLA is a basket case. Just to get free of UC-Berkeley, they had to agree to make solidarity payments, and this for a department that was already spread thin. Their stadium problem is only getting worse, and their campus location is a real limitation--they got evicted temporarily from their baseball facility and haven't really locked in a long term solution for finding a place to play a sport where they have won a national championship in recent memory. I don't think they are undervalued, at all.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:13 am to AUTiger789
Not one investor with basic understanding of finance would pay a dollar for a negative revenue generating investment with no cost control mechanisms or liquidity.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:16 am to AUTiger789
These valuations appear to be extremely subjective.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:41 am to AUTiger789
quote:
again, basketball means almost nothing.
That's true. And given that, just imagine how meaningless baseball is. "Big 3" is hilariously wrong.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:49 am to idlewatcher
How so? I believe a large component of brand value is ability to draw eyeballs to the TV. There are a million ways to analyze TV data but I think to get the clearest picture of brand value, you've got to look at regular season data only over a wide range of time.
So here is that data since 2013, using only games played on a metered network that got at least 2 million viewers... listed in 3 different ways: total games played, total viewership, and average viewership:
Total 2 Million+ Viewer Regular Season Games 2013-2025:
121- Alabama
116- Notre Dame
109- Ohio State
100- Michigan
98- Georgia
94- Oklahoma
94- LSU
84- Texas
84- Florida
82- Auburn
76- Texas A&M
74- Penn State
71- Tennessee
65- Clemson
61- Florida State
61- Ole Miss
61- USC
Total Regular Season Viewership in 2+ Million Viewer Regular Season Games 2013-2025:
788M- Alabama
692M- Ohio State
572M- Michigan
533M- Georgia
493M- Notre Dame
466M- LSU
400M- Auburn
388M- Oklahoma
379M- Texas
358M- Florida
344M- Texas A&M
337M- Penn State
331M- Tennessee
287M- Florida State
274M- Clemson
Average Regular Season Viewership in 2+ Million Viewer Regular Season Games 2013-2025 (min 25 games):
6.5M- Alabama
6.3M- Ohio State
5.7M- Michigan
5.4M- Georgia
5.0M- LSU
4.9M- Auburn
4.7M- Florida State
4.7M- Tennessee
4.6M- Penn State
4.5M- Texas A&M
4.5M- Texas
4.2M- Florida
4.2M- Notre Dame
4.2M- Clemson
4.2M- Miami
Based on TV viewership alone over the past 13 seasons, Alabama is clearly the #1 brand. However, I think brand potential is weighing heavily in some of these brand valuations as it should. Alabama only has so much room to grow considering it resides in a state ranked around #25 in population and #25 or so for population growth... plus it shares that state with another top 15 brand in Auburn.
Texas and Texas A&M are getting a lot of brand valuation boost from unrealized potential.
So here is that data since 2013, using only games played on a metered network that got at least 2 million viewers... listed in 3 different ways: total games played, total viewership, and average viewership:
Total 2 Million+ Viewer Regular Season Games 2013-2025:
121- Alabama
116- Notre Dame
109- Ohio State
100- Michigan
98- Georgia
94- Oklahoma
94- LSU
84- Texas
84- Florida
82- Auburn
76- Texas A&M
74- Penn State
71- Tennessee
65- Clemson
61- Florida State
61- Ole Miss
61- USC
Total Regular Season Viewership in 2+ Million Viewer Regular Season Games 2013-2025:
788M- Alabama
692M- Ohio State
572M- Michigan
533M- Georgia
493M- Notre Dame
466M- LSU
400M- Auburn
388M- Oklahoma
379M- Texas
358M- Florida
344M- Texas A&M
337M- Penn State
331M- Tennessee
287M- Florida State
274M- Clemson
Average Regular Season Viewership in 2+ Million Viewer Regular Season Games 2013-2025 (min 25 games):
6.5M- Alabama
6.3M- Ohio State
5.7M- Michigan
5.4M- Georgia
5.0M- LSU
4.9M- Auburn
4.7M- Florida State
4.7M- Tennessee
4.6M- Penn State
4.5M- Texas A&M
4.5M- Texas
4.2M- Florida
4.2M- Notre Dame
4.2M- Clemson
4.2M- Miami
Based on TV viewership alone over the past 13 seasons, Alabama is clearly the #1 brand. However, I think brand potential is weighing heavily in some of these brand valuations as it should. Alabama only has so much room to grow considering it resides in a state ranked around #25 in population and #25 or so for population growth... plus it shares that state with another top 15 brand in Auburn.
Texas and Texas A&M are getting a lot of brand valuation boost from unrealized potential.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:49 am to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
And given that, just imagine how meaningless baseball is. "Big 3" is hilariously wrong.
Exactly.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:51 am to AUTiger789
A&M surprisingly low tbh
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News