might think. The announcement of the ESPN contract extension, and the new exit penalties are getting most of the attention, as many are focused on which school ends up in which conference. While I too have been guilty of that thinking, I think i have changed my mind. The details of the ACC uneven distribution "system" base on brand and viewership have not been released. It may be the biggest change in how we look at college football moving forward - not the conference media contract, and conference share of the playoff money, but how uneven distributions can actually get more money from the networks (media). Currently, the conferences are in competition for the media dollars, and we all witnessed what happened when the B12 got a decent contract and the PAC imploded. Some thinking that the B12 got in front of the line, and received the contract offered to the PAC. Maybe yes, maybe no, but you see the point. We all assume that when the contracts come up for renewal, that the Big 10 will receive a raise, and add teams to their conference. The same for the SEC, which shows the consolidation of the top schools, and more is better. Think, .... More is better. Would all of the teams in FBS football receive MORE money if there was only one contract? It's why the ACC and B12 both expanded as well, and why most of the discussions surround which school will end up in which conference. How will the details of uneven distribution pan out? It's not the same as the old B12 and Texas (another thread). If the uneven distribution ends up being fair and objective, the ACC may have stumbled into the future by necessity.