PonyFans.com

Interesting article on a study valuating college FBS programs. Texas #1 but falling. It doesn't show SMU, but Temple makes the WSJ list at 69 and northwestern is at #35 just ahead of Stanford. TCU at #59.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... l?mod=e2tw

Note that fellow Big East members are:

# 52 UConn
# 53 South Florida
# 68 Cincinnati
# 69 Temple

And, there are no MWC members, including BSU and, presumably, SDSU, while TCU, as mentioned, is # 59

Treadway21 wrote:Interesting article on a study valuating college FBS programs. Texas #1 but falling. It doesn't show SMU, but Temple makes the WSJ list at 69 and northwestern is at #35 just ahead of Stanford. TCU at #59.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... l?mod=e2tw

Water Pony wrote:Note that fellow Big East members are:

# 52 UConn
# 53 South Florida
# 68 Cincinnati
# 69 Temple

And, there are no MWC members, including BSU and, presumably, SDSU, while TCU, as mentioned, is # 59

They don't show SMU, other current CUSA teams, or MWC teams because they only studied teams that were in AQ conferences this season.

Here is the list from last year that includes all the schools. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 0520120105

This should be titled "BSC doing as intended, rich get richer'. Other than BYU, no other non AQ team is on the list. Hummmm, wonder why? The sutdy specifically included "major-conference" with ND adn BYU included. And ND is an AQ school.

ponyte wrote:This should be titled "BSC doing as intended, rich get richer'. Other than BYU, no other non AQ team is on the list. Hummmm, wonder why? The sutdy specifically included "major-conference" with ND adn BYU included. And ND is an AQ school.

As I posted, the study did not include non-AQ teams.

CalallenStang wrote:

ponyte wrote:This should be titled "BSC doing as intended, rich get richer'. Other than BYU, no other non AQ team is on the list. Hummmm, wonder why? The sutdy specifically included "major-conference" with ND adn BYU included. And ND is an AQ school.

As I posted, the study did not include non-AQ teams.

Sorry, I forgot BYU was in an AQ conference.

I think we got a sample of the football press last night---Outland trophy winner, a no show! ND, a pretender--wouldn't have finished in the top five of the SEC or Big 12. Hardly wait until we impress in the Big East, we will be in top ten shortly, if only in print.

I am not as critical of ND.

The game was more of a statement on Saban, his coaching staff and the size and strength of a well prepared Crimson Tide team. Remember the Irish did beat a good Oklahoma team and ND's return to prominence was actually faster than anticipated, given that their improved recruiting is just now kicking in.

I am not saying that they could have been the top three SEC teams this year, but they are on the rise and are credible with a national recruiting engine that has been missing in action since Lou Holtz.

ponyte wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:

ponyte wrote:This should be titled "BSC doing as intended, rich get richer'. Other than BYU, no other non AQ team is on the list. Hummmm, wonder why? The sutdy specifically included "major-conference" with ND adn BYU included. And ND is an AQ school.

As I posted, the study did not include non-AQ teams.

Sorry, I forgot BYU was in an AQ conference.

Okay, so there is one exception. Bottom line is, SMU and the rest of non-AQ (sans BYU) were NOT STUDIED.

It says in the article he studied all 115 teams. It appears to me the WSJ only posted the top seventy. No doubt the full list is out there.

I believe all 115 FBS teams were studied, however they only published the 'big six' plus ND & BYU. If you look at previous year's study, all FBS schools got published, and once you get past the top schools, many of them run together in value. The study's scope & background is interesting and up for debate, however it is interesting to look at value rather than cash flow, which is generally what is people look at with college athletic departments.

Treadway21 wrote:It says in the article he studied all 115 teams. It appears to me the WSJ only posted the top seventy. No doubt the full list is out there.

Given that there are something like 124 FBS teams out there (it is more than 120 for sure), I wonder what he skipped to get it down to 115...

And the thing says "major conference...plus Notre Dame and BYU"

surprising to me that Iowa is that high on the list, considering the teams around them and their complete lack of relevance anytime in recent memory

Water Pony wrote:I am not as critical of ND.

The game was more of a statement on Saban, his coaching staff and the size and strength of a well prepared Crimson Tide team. Remember the Irish did beat a good Oklahoma team and ND's return to prominence was actually faster than anticipated, given that their improved recruiting is just now kicking in.

I am not saying that they could have been the top three SEC teams this year, but they are on the rise and are credible with a national recruiting engine that has been missing in action since Lou Holtz.

But that UND was even in the national championship game shows just how wrong the system and so-called experts (that vote) really are. And who cares if they are on the rise or not (see ND boards if you do)?