VisorBoy Hokie

That really isn't a lot of completions. We are a running team first (either QB or RB), so we don't really have the bandwidth for more than 1-2 WRs to be stars. His production isn't really an indictment of his potential, it's just a reality of our run-heavy system and our QB completion percentage.

He was drafted in the 6th round 2 years ago and has worked his way into the starting role. He's setting himself up for a real payday if he keeps it up for another 2 years. If he doesn't, then he'll still earn more than what most 6th rounders have earned, i.e. his full rookie contract.

...on that list who's been cut today.

Cal and Stanford are almost certainly within any legal caveats to a pro rata clause.

In twenty years, conference alignments will look different than they do now. The increased (and unnecessary) costs associated with just meeting one's scheduling needs will make it less attractive to remain in these kinds of conferences. Other factors, like reduced exposure to revenue from successful seasons for teams going from "big fish, little pond" to "big fish, enormous pond" will also play a role. The one tailwind I see is that universities with nationwide alumni networks and nationwide recruiting efforts will see an uptick in non-local revenue and recruiting success.

"The band is on the field!" - a classic bit of ACC lore. If those three take partial shares, which they are apparently open to doing, then the delta from the money that ESPN would contractually pay for 3 new full shares could be split among the highest performing teams (read: FSU, Clemson, et al). This would kill two birds with one stone. Of course, it hurts student-athletes, but I'm told those concerns are....not.