The financial landscape in college athletics is evolving rapidly, for better or worse.

Perhaps the most recent example is how much school athletic programs are now worth. CNBC senior sports reporter Michael Ozanian on Friday unveiled his rankings of the 75 most valuable college athletic programs in 2025. No. 75 begins at $190 million, going all the way up to nearly $1.5 billion at No. 1.

In 2024, just four schools possessed a valuation of above $1 billion. One year later, that figure has increased to 13 schools. In total, the top 75 programs have a combined valuation of $51.21 billion, up 13% from last year ($45.14 billion).

Leading the way at the top spot is a new school. The Texas Longhorns dethroned Ohio State, soaring to a valuation of $1.475 billion ($1.28 billion in 2024). The Buckeyes did see an increase to stay in second, but went from just $1.318 billion to $1.35 billion.

At No. 3 once again is Texas A&M ($1.32 billion), followed by the Georgia Bulldogs ($1.16 billion) and Michigan Wolverines ($1.155 billion) to round out the top five.

The remaining teams with a valuation of over a billion are as follows: Notre Dame Fighting Irish, Tennessee Volunteers, USC Trojans, Alabama Crimson Tide, Nebraska Cornhuskers, Penn State Nittany Lions, Louisiana State Tigers and Oklahoma Sooners.

The full 2025 top 75 list can be viewed below:

How are Ozanian’s college valuations determined and ranked compared to professional sports such as the NHL?

“We value these athletic programs based on the total revenue of all the sports that they have at the school,” Ozanian said. “And then we apply a multiple, typically around four, to those revenues. So, if revenue is $100 million, then the athletic program would be worth $400 million.”

But the multiple can be adjusted due to different factors, such as the amount of name, image and likeness money a school generates.

Revenue is key because, as Ozanian explained, starting in 2026, “proceeds for name, imaging, and likeness, which now schools can pay the athletes, are gonna be on the athletic program balance sheet … schools based on the court ruling are gonna be paying student athletes money for past performance that they’ve had.”

Ozanian added that schools may look for outside help, such as taking institutional money or private equity money, to “support an athletic program because the athletic program on its own cannot generate the revenue to cover its expenses.”

“It’s not a good thing,” Ozanian said.

For example, top-ranked Texas gets no money from student fees, doesn’t charge its students a fee to support athletics and there are no outside government institutional funds coming in. But for a smaller yet still notable school like Rutgers, which did not make the top-75 cut, it made $137 million in 2024 revenue, though $15 million came from charging student fees and another $14 million from institutional and government support. The landscape will get murky for next year’s ranking.

Another driving factor for the uptick in valuations is how much college football alone brings to the table.

The top five teams are either in the SEC or the Big Ten, and perform well in the major sports within those conferences. The Big Ten has a TV deal worth an average annual value of $1.15 billion, with the SEC in second at $710 million. Those figures then translate to payouts, where each Big Ten school receives $63 million and each SEC school receives $52.5 million.

Then comparing the football numbers to the top five basketball teams in terms of revenue (Duke, Louisville, Kentucky, UNC, Syracuse), for example, the top football teams are generating five times as much.

“This is why these TV deals are so important because it’s the football that’s driving it,” Ozanian said. “And when you look at the ratings on TV, the only thing second to the NFL is college football … Professional basketball, baseball, hockey, they’re a distant third, fourth, fifth, sixth, to college football.”

At an individual level, Texas claimed the top spot with a robust cushion. What has it done so well compared to its counterparts, especially as an SEC school that receives less than the Big 10 programs?

Ozanian explained that with Texas’ $322 million in revenue, $69 million stemmed from corporate sponsorships, advertising and licensing. The Longhorns also brought in $61 million in ticket sales, with names like Matthew McConaughey a regular attendee. They also had $137 million in fiscal donations last year, with second-place Ohio State seeing $53 million. Michigan had $45 million.

CNBC senior sports reporter Michael Ozanian explains why USC is valued so much more than UCLA.

The individual disparity is why a program like No. 8-ranked USC soars over No. 52-ranked UCLA, despite the close geographical distance and overall popularity between the two.

USC recently joined the Big Ten and, being a private school, has done a better job raking in money from revenue sources like licensing, merchandising and donor contributions, whereas the Bruins, a public school, have hibernated in comparison.

But it doesn’t always have to be a difference in private vs. public, as the public University of Florida is No. 14 compared to the private No. 29-ranked University of Miami. It also helps the Gators to be in the SEC, compared to the Hurricanes in the ACC.

Given the financial trends of college sports and where it seems to be headed, is Ozanian more bearish or bullish at this stage? There are things he doesn’t like as a fan, but understands from a business perspective.

“You can’t have these enormous television deals and the schools making all this money and then say to the players, you can’t have any of it, as it’s just become a huge business,” Ozanian stated. “Clearly it’s become professionalized and part of that now is accepting the fact that the athletes are part of the model and drive this revenue and are gonna get some of the money from it.

“So it’s gonna create some turmoil and we’ll see how this all plays out if and when the big outside money comes in. But as far as the popularity of the sport and the business side of the sport, I’m bullish.”