How Much Is an NCAA Basketball Tournament Bid Worth?

Every year, millions of dollars change hands during the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament. Which teams make the most?

Mar 19, 2014 at 7:40AM

March Madness is here, and beyond the contests, pools, and predictions, an important question exists: What about the schools themselves? Does a bid to attend the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament pay off, financially speaking?

The cost of getting there
This is a question that has been asked before, recently by The New Yorker. It estimated that in 2013, the NCAA Tournament field spent an average of $5 million per team on men's basketball. At 68 teams, that's a total of nearly $350 million, and as the outlet points out, spending has correlated loosely with tourney success over the past decade.

"The team that spent the most won twice -- Syracuse (2003) and Duke (2010)," Nick Traverse wrote, adding, "In other years, the winner wasn't far behind: the eventual victor has always had a budget in the top 18." According to Traverse, who mined Department of Education data, championship teams typically spent 44% more than average -- a little over $7 million.


A first round NCAA Tournament game between UNC and Radford. Image via BP6316, Flickr.

In 2014, half of the field's top 16 teams have spent above this mark. Louisville ($15.6 million) and Duke ($15.1 million) have two of the deepest pockets.

How the revenue is split
Currently in the midst of a 14-year media contract with CBS (NYSE:CBS) and Time Warner's (NYSE:TWX) Turner Sports, the NCAA divvies up this revenue based on a system known as the Basketball Fund. According to its most recent distribution plan, a little under $190 million will be split between conferences this year. The system isn't overly complex -- the further an individual team advances in the NCAA Tournament, the bigger the reward for its conference.

Participation in each tournament round excluding the championship is worth what's known as a "unit share." For every unit share a team earns, its conference is awarded close to $250,000 a year over the next six years -- $1.5 million total. A team that loses in the first round, for example, has earned one unit share for its conference, worth $1.5 million over the next six years. A team that loses in the second round has earned twice this amount, and so on.

First given to conferences, the money is then distributed to individual teams. As Forbes points out, "some conferences equally split the revenue among all conference schools, while some provide a disproportionate share to the teams that were actually responsible for the "unit creation."

Regardless of how the dollars are split, though, one thing is clear: It pays to be in a major conference.

Screen Shot

Source: NCAA. Graph compiled by author.

Last year, the six largest conferences by unit shares -- the Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, ACC, Pac-10, and SEC -- took home an average of seven times as much fund money as their peers.

The bottom line
If you're wondering whether it's worth it to increase expenditures in search of tournament success, that depends. Most college programs generate some ticket, concession, and merchandise sales, and a surprising level of March Madness exposure could boost these revenue sources in the years that follow.

After making the Final Four in 2006, for example, George Mason generated more than $650 million in free publicity, according to a university professor, and monthly bookstore sales increased by 1,300%.

Cinderella stories like that don't happen every year, though. And with all else constant, a team could only justify a $1 million budget hike with an Elite Eight appearance (or beyond) if it were given 100% of its share of Basketball Fund money. Given that many conferences split funding equally among teams, though, this scenario's not the likeliest.

More reasonably, a slight budget increase of a few hundred thousand dollars could be offset by a deep tournament run, and assuming you're in a top conference, there's more leeway. Why? There's more distribution money available. Duke, for instance, is better off than someone like Wichita State because it plays in the ACC, which typically sends far more teams to the tournament than Wichita's Missouri Valley.

At the end of the day, the direct value of a March Madness bid is worth about six installments of $250,000. This amount increases by $1.5 million for every additional round a team advances. So the next time you see players cheering for their teams in the NCAA Tournament, remember that it will, quite literally, pay for them to win. 

The next step for any college basketball fan
Sports events such as March Madness and other "DVR-proof" programming are helping to drive the costs of programming -- and your cable bill -- through the roof. As a result, no matter how much money changes hands during the tournament, cable is going the way of the dodo bird. Do you know how to profit? There's $2.2 trillion out there to be had. Currently, cable grabs a big piece of it. That won't last. And when cable falters, three companies are poised to benefit. Click here for their names. Hint: They're not Netflix, Google, and Apple. 

Jake Mann has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

4 in 5 Americans Are Ignoring Buffett's Warning

Don't be one of them.

Jun 12, 2015 at 5:01PM

Admitting fear is difficult.

So you can imagine how shocked I was to find out Warren Buffett recently told a select number of investors about the cutting-edge technology that's keeping him awake at night.

This past May, The Motley Fool sent 8 of its best stock analysts to Omaha, Nebraska to attend the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholder meeting. CEO Warren Buffett and Vice Chairman Charlie Munger fielded questions for nearly 6 hours.
The catch was: Attendees weren't allowed to record any of it. No audio. No video. 

Our team of analysts wrote down every single word Buffett and Munger uttered. Over 16,000 words. But only two words stood out to me as I read the detailed transcript of the event: "Real threat."

That's how Buffett responded when asked about this emerging market that is already expected to be worth more than $2 trillion in the U.S. alone. Google has already put some of its best engineers behind the technology powering this trend. 

The amazing thing is, while Buffett may be nervous, the rest of us can invest in this new industry BEFORE the old money realizes what hit them.

KPMG advises we're "on the cusp of revolutionary change" coming much "sooner than you think."

Even one legendary MIT professor had to recant his position that the technology was "beyond the capability of computer science." (He recently confessed to The Wall Street Journal that he's now a believer and amazed "how quickly this technology caught on.")

Yet according to one J.D. Power and Associates survey, only 1 in 5 Americans are even interested in this technology, much less ready to invest in it. Needless to say, you haven't missed your window of opportunity. 

Think about how many amazing technologies you've watched soar to new heights while you kick yourself thinking, "I knew about that technology before everyone was talking about it, but I just sat on my hands." 

Don't let that happen again. This time, it should be your family telling you, "I can't believe you knew about and invested in that technology so early on."

That's why I hope you take just a few minutes to access the exclusive research our team of analysts has put together on this industry and the one stock positioned to capitalize on this major shift.

Click here to learn about this incredible technology before Buffett stops being scared and starts buying!

David Hanson owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway and American Express. The Motley Fool recommends and owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway, Google, and Coca-Cola.We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

©1995-2014 The Motley Fool. All rights reserved. | Privacy/Legal Information