Those three schools don't get added if ESPN doesn't want them to be added. That much is for darn certain. And can we be just offer a disclaimer for this entire board that it is TV money that's driving all of this? School presidents aren't sitting around thinking about how they can alter the way the nation consumes college sports on TV. Media companies are. The media companies offer money to the school presidents' athletic programs to make the changes occur in the manner they see fit. So the real question you need to answer is "Why is ESPN OK with adding three 'mid' additions to the ACC"? That is up for debate, but ESPN clearly knows FSU and Clemson want out, but due to the Calford + SMU adds, that must mean that ESPN also wants the ACC to remain a viable athletic conference. My guesses (2) as to ESPN's reasoning are: (This is long, if you want to just get to key points, scroll down to the ****Basic Summary statement*****) 1) Because of the revenue and profit BOTH the ACC Network and SEC Network produces. First the ACC Network $$$- Everybody knows the $$ situation at Disney/ESPN and the simple fact is the ACC Network adds 9 figures of revenue per year to ESPN's books and will continue to do so for the next 13 years. Extinguishing that cash stream is bad business. Who says "No" to what will likely amount to $1.5 Billion dollars over a decade-plus? Yes, cord cutting will continue to be a thing and paid subscriber fees to Dish, DirecTV and Comcast will continue to drop, but it's not going away, because subscriptions to YouTube Live and Hulu Live continue to rise. There are over 12 Million subscribers to those Live TV services. It's not disappearing, it's just shifting. It won't even make a large sized dent before 2036. Live sports will remain a cash cow for most of our lifetimes. Eventually, it will be replaced by paid streaming subscribers, but not likely by the end of the ACC Media Rights deal. But, what if FSU and Clemson go to the B1G? Well, the ACC Network still pulls in Florida revenue with Miami and losing South Carolina is more than offset by adding Texas and California, so ESPN still makes their ACCN revenue if FSU and Clemson leave. Now - SEC Network $$$ On the other hand, what if ESPN could add FSU and Clemson to the SEC Network? NOTHING, they add zippo to SEC Network revenue. The SEC Network has ~70 million subscribers paying $1.40 per sub. (These are somewhat old numbers, but it probably isn't much different today...keep that in mind) If the SEC adds FSU + Clemson, the SEC Network adds exactly........zero subscribers. Multiplying 0 times $1.40 = $0 added subscriber fees. Now, what about the rest of the SEC? 70 million subs x $1.40 = $98 million dollars. Per month. $98M x 12 months = $1.176B per year. (I'm guessing this is about 4-5 times the ACC Network revenue, btw) This $1.176B revenue is most likely split 50/50 just going off the ACC's deal with ESPN. So splitting $1.176B in half means $588 million is generated by the SEC Network that's delivered to the SEC member schools. $588M divided by 16 schools = $36.75M per school per year JUST from the SEC Network. (For comparison, I think ACC schools get about $8M-$10M per school annually from the ACC Network) Now....lets add FSU and Clemson with their ZERO added SEC Network dollars $588M divided by 18 = $32.67M. So every SEC school takes a $4M+ hit to allow FSU and Clemson to join? So, this mean ESPN has to say "Hey Florida/Bama/South Carolina/etc..., can you guys vote to add FSU and Clemson? Your conference will get harder to win, its going to be harder to recruit and we are taking $4M away from you every year!" I don't think so..... Or....ESPN tries to ram a subscriber rate hike down Comcast/Dish/DirecTV's throats to get the money back? In this economy? I also don't think so.... I honestly think ESPN loses money (a lot) if FSU and Clemson jump to the SEC. So, in summary - FSU and Clemson leaving for the B1G does nothing to hurt ACC Network revenue as long as the league stays viable. It also does nothing to hurt SEC Network payout per school nor ESPN's payment to those 16 SEC schools. However, ESPN would have to pay (a LOT) to the current SEC to compensate them for adding FSU and Clemson or ask Comcast/Dish/DirecTV/Hulu/YouTube to pay for it. This is why I could see FSU and Clemson to the B1G as a realistic possibility. **** Basic Summary statement******* - FSU and Clemson want out and are fighting like mad to get out. ESPN will lose money if they go to the SEC, but won't really lose money if they go to the B1G. ESPN also wants the ACC to stick around close to its current form, because it's making good money there, so I could see ESPN working to allow FSU and Clemson to leave, but making it right for the rest of the ACC $$$-wise to allow them to leave, yet stay together afterwards. -This is why UNC was the only remaining ACC school to vote against expansion - because the other schools know there is more money by keeping the ACC together. Only FSU, Clemson and UNC can make more money elsewhere. Miami, VT, UVA, NC State - none of them are getting a better deal from the P2 or Big 12 (for the time being) than what they're getting from ESPN to stay in the ACC and allow FSU and Clemson to leave. ********************************************* 2) It keeps Notre Dame happy and out of the B1G and Fox's control. I think ND's current relationship with the ACC Network is a boon for ESPN. ESPN does get 2-3 ACC home football games vs Notre Dame per year, not to mention full ND inclusion on the ACC Network for all other sports, and they have to be pretty happy with that arrangement. Notre Dame is obviously getting paid like a P2 school to remain independent, so they are certainly good with that as well. Conclusion for the ACC. FSU and Clemson want out. They won't be here much longer. The B1G probably is the right place for them based on the fact the SEC and ESPN probably doesn't want them in the SEC. So, the next domino is UNC, and based purely on finances, I could see ESPN trying to keep UNC in the ACC for the time being. All of that FSU/Clemson -> SEC money talk above kinda extends to UNC. North Carolina has 4.3M TV subscribers. Even if the SEC Network wasn't currently cashing in a full $1.40 per subscriber in North Carolina (I'd find it hard to believe the SEC Network isn't getting a full carriage fee in NC for ESPN), the difference between in-market and out-of-market subscriber fees is around $1.00 per month, so that's roughly $4.3M a month than UNC adds to the SEC Network revenue (MAYBE! Again, I feel like NC subscribers are already paying a full share because of proximity to the SEC). So ($4.3M x 12months)/17 new SEC members = about $3M per year of value added per school on an annual basis. And why would there be 17 schools in the SEC? It's weird, so go 18. You could add UVA and that also probably keeps a fairly consistent $3M value added with the addition of the state of VA's slightly-smaller-than-NC subscriber base. BUT, this is ESPN, and that will be the straw that breaks the ACC's back and ruins the ACC's valuation as a whole. So....while the SEC school's may make more money, ESPN loses big on the ACC falling completely apart. So I don't see that happening for now.