Welcome to The Holy Land of Hoops

X has made this list every year: http://www.forbes.com/pictures/emdm45ehefd/17-xavier-musketeers-2/

It's a nice list to make. Xavier essentially has and continues to make it because of the Cintas Center and its NCAA Tournament success.

I never understand Forbes' rankings of anything. Not a shot at Xavier, but they do this for a lot of things where the full ranking doesn't make sense. One example is listing Marquette as the #2 spender, only behind Duke, in college basketball spending. How do they calculate that?

How is Wisconsin ahead of Syracuse and Duke. Xavier gets in but Villanova, Marquette and Georgetown don't...not too mention Dayton was an honorable mention with Marquette listed behind them (freaking Dayton?!). Minnesota in any sport????

They explained their methodology this way, actually wish they went into more detail about it. Also, X is up there because of a few factors, one being the continued NCAA tourney appearances, and the seat licensing that happens.

"we use a weighted methodology to determine how much value the top college basketball teams generate for their athletic departments, universities and fellow conference members. Athletic value is team profit directed toward other sports programs, university value is team income that goes back toward academic programming and conference value measures the money generated for fellow conference members from NCAA Tournament play"

PMThor wrote:They explained their methodology this way, actually wish they went into more detail about it. Also, X is up there because of a few factors, one being the continued NCAA tourney appearances, and the seat licensing that happens.

"we use a weighted methodology to determine how much value the top college basketball teams generate for their athletic departments, universities and fellow conference members. Athletic value is team profit directed toward other sports programs, university value is team income that goes back toward academic programming and conference value measures the money generated for fellow conference members from NCAA Tournament play"

Seat licensing? Also, where in Gonzaga then if NCAA tourney appearances are big, 16 straight or something for them? They probably drop in other areas.

aughnanure wrote:

PMThor wrote:They explained their methodology this way, actually wish they went into more detail about it. Also, X is up there because of a few factors, one being the continued NCAA tourney appearances, and the seat licensing that happens.

"we use a weighted methodology to determine how much value the top college basketball teams generate for their athletic departments, universities and fellow conference members. Athletic value is team profit directed toward other sports programs, university value is team income that goes back toward academic programming and conference value measures the money generated for fellow conference members from NCAA Tournament play"

Seat licensing? Also, where in Gonzaga then if NCAA tourney appearances are big, 16 straight or something for them? They probably drop in other areas.

Xavier though has gone further than Gonzaga in the tourney.

last 10 years, Xavier has played in 1 more game than Gonzaga same period.

this year- Xavier is responsible for 14 units to the A10. Gonzaga 12 units to the WCC. Even with not being in the tourney 1 year for Xavier.

Dayton was just outside the top 20. Food for thought.

Are they adjusting revenue and spending for the cost of living in various parts of the country?

dmac80 wrote:Are they adjusting revenue and spending for the cost of living in various parts of the country?

Good question. I tend to doubt that they take it that far.

I believe the primary driver for Xavier's ranking is the Cintas Center. It's an on-campus arena that is owned by X and is configured with about 20 suites and thousands of seat licenses with a solid season ticket base. Most importantly, X has managed to achieve at least 98% cap utilization to make it all work. The Tournament participation is an important piece of the pie, but the on campus arena as configured is the driver.

UL is on top because of what they recently built. Wisconsin and Ohio State play in modern arenas with the same kind of amenities.

I sat in a presentation last month where it was conveyed that the Cintas Center is out of date, given where things are headed. X will pursue a multi-million dollar campaign for Cintas Center upgrades. And that comes on top of what Learfield just invested in the place (i.e. new center scoreboard and ribbons, etc.). Let that one sink in for a moment.

NCAA DIVISION I SPORTS: Welcome to big business.