http://www.tomahawknation.com/2016/3/19/11269070/economics-of-the-2016-ncaa-basketball-tournament
"So what does this mean for FSU, and since the ACC splits the money evenly, are the Noles propping up other programs or vice versa?
Last year's tourney was the best in ACC history. The ACC played in 21 eligible games, which is remarkable, considering the previous year saw only nine games. Already in 2016 the ACC is guaranteed to play in at least 13, so times are good.
Regardless, here's how that distribution looked after last year. Each unit from this year's tournament is worth $265,791, though past units are not worth quite as much. For simplicity, we'll average them out and assign each unit (game played) with a value of $258,000.
2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | Total | Value | |
Duke | 5 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 19 | $4,902,000 |
North Carolina | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 15 | $3,870,000 | |
NC State | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 8 | $2,064,000 | ||
Florida State | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6 | $1,548,000 | |||
Virginia | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6 | $1,548,000 | |||
Notre Dame | 4 | 4 | $1,032,000 | |||||
Louisville | 4 | 4 | $1,032,000 | |||||
Clemson | 1 | 2 | 3 | $774,000 | ||||
Miami | 3 | 3 | $774,000 | |||||
Maryland | 2 | 2 | $516,000 | |||||
Wake Forest | 2 | 2 | $516,000 | |||||
Georgia Tech | 2 | 2 | $516,000 | |||||
Syracuse | 2 | 2 | $516,000 | |||||
Boston College | 0 | $0 | ||||||
Virginia Tech | 0 | $0 | ||||||
Pittsburgh | 0 | $0 | ||||||
13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 21 | 76 | $19,608,000 |
So last year's conference distribution was $19,608,000, or $1,307,200 per team. FSU had brought in $1,548,000 over the six-year window, and thus was slightly subsidizing ACC teams, though not nearly to the tune of North Carolina or Duke. Eleven teams all brought in less than they received."
Good job by FSU, but a little misleading since Syracuse, Pitt, Notre Dame and Louisville all had to forfeit their NCAA units prior to joining the ACC (if they had been allowed to bring them, those would all be ahead of FSU, and the per team payout would be quite a bit higher).
ReplyDelete