Which college football teams have the most success per dollar

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/3/24/11283338/ncaa-football-teams-costs-spending-expenses?_ga=1.98685598.185746018.1440342154

The most successful programs, like Alabama and Ohio State, have been rewarded with national championships after they splurged on big-name coaches. However, there are many other programs, like Texas and Miami, who continue pumping money through the system without much recent success.

Since there are anecdotes to back up both, I decided to look at each FBS program to see which schools are getting the best and worst bang for their buck.

To see how much each school spent on football, I looked at data from the U.S. Department of Education. To measure on-field results, the Massey composite, an index that averages dozens of rankings including the AP Poll and computer ratings. (That means Alabama finishes a little lower than you'd expect. The Tide had 13 combined losses in 2006 and 2007, for what it's worth.)

Spending data was not available for the service academies, so Army, Navy, and Air Force are excluded, as are schools that have been FBS for fewer than 10 seasons.

The result spans from Auburn ($32.1 million on football-related expenses per year and one national championship) and Alabama ($31.4 million and four titles) to ULM ($3.1 million, though with at least more football success than some schools)."

 

 

"

Maryland and NC State had the smallest discrepancies between their spending and on-field performance, which puts them right on our chart's dotted line.

Syracuse, Colorado, and Virginia had the most distance between their spending and on-field rankings. Those teams have been so awful on the field, they don't come close to living up to their pedestrian spending. The Orange have spent an average of $18.2 million, with only three bowl trips to show for it.

Before you make too much fun of Syracuse, take these with several grains of salt.

The accounting methods many of these schools use are quite dishonest. Schools will report inflated costs in order to keep their reported profits lower, so they can cry poor when asking taxpayers and students for financial assistance. To inflate costs, schools will charge their athletic programs for things like "overhead," "university fundraising," and even "library renovations." And when athletic programs give out scholarships, programs can get charged the full price for an out-of-state student even though the marginal cost to the school for bringing on an extra student is minimal.

In the 2014 fiscal year, 26 of the 115 schools in our data set (22.6 percent), reported profits of $0, meaning their football-related expenses and revenues were exactly equal. If we are to believe the accounting, about one-fourth of college football programs at the top level neither profit nor lose a single dollar.

The most entertaining case that stuck out was TCU, which claimed that in every single year from 2005 to 2011, the school perfectly balanced its football expenses and revenues.

And while this data has its limitations, it's good for giving you a ballpark estimate. It's uncertain which schools most exaggerate their spending, but it is certain that no matter how much they exaggerate there's no way in hell a school like Iowa State can report spending levels similar to Ohio State.

For what it's worth, there was a 0.79 correlation between schools' on-field rankings and their football-related expense rankings. In other words, there's a pretty strong relationship.

Here's everything.

This sortable table shows each team's average Massey ranking, average spending ranking, and average difference.

	Conf.	Success	Spending	Diff.
Akron	MAC	103.7	100.8	-2.9
Alabama	SEC	11.6	5.9	-5.7
Arizona	P12	41.6	43.1	1.5
Arizona State	P12	40.5	20.5	-20
Arkansas	SEC	33.9	12.8	-21.1
Arkansas State	SBC	79	112	33
Auburn	SEC	29.4	2.5	-26.9
Ball State	MAC	81	101.9	20.9
Baylor	B12	44	45.8	1.8
Boise State	MWC	20.6	83.3	62.7
Boston College	ACC	54.5	28	-26.5
Bowling Green	MAC	77.4	109.1	31.7
Buffalo	MAC	96.3	101.6	5.3
BYU	FBSI	29.1	63.3	34.2
Cal	P12	48.5	27.9	-20.6
Central Michigan	MAC	77.1	97.7	20.6
Cincinnati	AAC	37.5	65.9	28.4
Clemson	ACC	24.6	28	3.4
Colorado	P12	85.9	44.8	-41.1
Colorado State	MWC	86.9	77.6	-9.3
Connecticut	AAC	69.5	51.8	-17.7
Duke	ACC	76.6	42.1	-34.5
East Carolina	AAC	63.2	77.6	14.4
Eastern Michigan	MAC	114.2	104.9	-9.3
Florida	SEC	20.1	11.3	-8.8
FAU	CUSA	97	102.9	5.9
FIU	CUSA	103.7	88.2	-15.5
Florida State	ACC	21.4	30.4	9
Fresno State	MWC	70	83.7	13.7
Georgia	SEC	19.5	16.8	-2.7
Georgia Tech	ACC	41.2	44.9	3.7
Hawaii	MWC	79.7	76.3	-3.4
Houston	AAC	51.5	80.7	29.2
Idaho	SBC	108.6	110	1.4
Illinois	B10	71.4	56.1	-15.3
Indiana	B10	83.4	50.5	-32.9
Iowa	B10	40	15.1	-24.9
Iowa State	B12	78.1	56.8	-21.3
Kansas	B12	78.2	47.7	-30.5
Kansas State	B12	46.5	57.1	10.6
Kent State	MAC	98.2	110	11.8
Kentucky	SEC	65	51.5	-13.5
UL-Lafayette	SBC	87.8	106.9	19.1
ULM	SBC	97.7	115.7	18
Louisiana Tech	CUSA	74.5	106.5	32
Louisville	ACC	44.7	44	-0.7
LSU	SEC	11.7	13.2	1.5
Marshall	CUSA	74.5	88.2	13.7
Maryland	B10	65.7	65.3	-0.4
Memphis	AAC	90.9	73.4	-17.5
Miami	ACC	44.9	17.2	-27.7
Miami (Ohio)	MAC	105.8	93.8	-12
Michigan	B10	38.8	19.9	-18.9
Michigan State	B10	30.3	24.2	-6.1
MTSU	CUSA	83	87.9	4.9
Minnesota	B10	65.9	45.4	-20.5
Mississippi State	SEC	42.1	64.1	22
Missouri	SEC	28.8	49.6	20.8
NC State	ACC	61.9	61.7	-0.2
Nebraska	B10	30.3	26.3	-4
Nevada	MWC	64.4	100.3	35.9
New Mexico	MWC	96.5	87.3	-9.2
New Mexico State	SBC	115.3	97.9	-17.4
North Carolina	ACC	49.5	43.7	-5.8
North Texas	CUSA	107.3	104.9	-2.4
NIU	MAC	60.1	90.4	30.3
Northwestern	B10	57.3	36.3	-21
Notre Dame	FBSI	32.8	10	-22.8
Ohio	MAC	79.1	92.1	13
Ohio State	B10	10.4	7	-3.4
Oklahoma	B12	11.2	13.2	2
Oklahoma State	B12	25.1	41.6	16.5
Ole Miss	SEC	45.1	55.1	10
Oregon	P12	11.3	33.1	21.8
Oregon State	P12	44.8	60.2	15.4
Penn State	B10	33	14.9	-18.1
Pitt	ACC	47.3	36.5	-10.8
Purdue	B10	77.7	52.2	-25.5
Rice	CUSA	83.4	67.2	-16.2
Rutgers	B10	52.9	27.8	-25.1
San Diego State	MWC	73.4	71	-2.4
San Jose State	MWC	85	101	16
SMU	AAC	88.4	59.6	-28.8
South Carolina	SEC	32.8	20.7	-12.1
South Florida	AAC	62.2	67.8	5.6
Southern Miss	CUSA	75.8	95.5	19.7
Stanford	P12	30.9	40	9.1
Syracuse	ACC	77	30.9	-46.1
TCU	B12	22.5	18.4	-4.1
Temple	AAC	80.2	65.5	-14.7
Tennessee	SEC	42	25.7	-16.3
Texas	B12	26.5	8.1	-18.4
Texas A&M	SEC	35.2	30.6	-4.6
Texas Tech	B12	75.1	40	-35.1
Toledo	MAC	73.9	94.4	20.5
Troy	SBC	105.7	109.5	3.8
Tulane	AAC	66.9	81.2	14.3
Tulsa	AAC	101.1	74	-27.1
UCF	AAC	65	69.6	4.6
UCLA	P12	43.9	27.8	-16.1
UNLV	MWC	102.6	87	-15.6
USC	P12	17.5	13.3	-4.2
Utah	P12	33.5	63.6	30.1
Utah State	MWC	77.9	106.4	28.5
UTEP	CUSA	98.4	82.5	-15.9
Va Tech	ACC	28.5	20.9	-7.6
Vanderbilt	SEC	67.1	36.7	-30.4
Virginia	ACC	68.9	30.6	-38.3
Wake Forest	ACC	67.5	54.5	-13
Washington	P12	51.5	17.7	-33.8
Washington State	P12	76.3	69.3	-7
West Virginia	B12	31	44.7	13.7
Western Michigan	MAC	80.8	99.1	18.3
Wisconsin	B10	21.4	12.1	-9.3
Wyoming	MWC	90.3	95.9	5.6