I think this is a trick question because, what exactly are we quantifying when we refer to "value"?
Is it the team that generates the most revenue in sports for the conference? Well then, is there some monetary threshold scale to create enough separation to rank the schools? Ex: Say school A brings in $100K - $400K more than next school B. Practically they're equivalent, but we gotta rank them, no? What is that threshold? $500K? $1M? $5M?
Or, is it the team that if we lost them in say, some conference expansion, the conference would take a serious hit in perceived strength in football? Or basketball? Or both? Well again, I'm not able to peg any school in the conference that is on that level where we're screwed if we lost that one team.
In fact, I don't think individually, we don't have ANY team that is "more valuable" than any other in this conference in any metric that I can think of. Reading through the comments, there's valid points for and against every team as to who is "most valuable", but that just leads to arguments about which of those points are more important, and on and on...
But now, I guess if you wanna talk about the inverse, which team is "least valuable", then we might have a better argument about who the front runners are.