Vanderbilt is having an outstanding (for them) season this year because the best QB in the history of the program, a 25-year-old two-time transfer, who had to seek a court injunction to even be eligible to play this year because he'd already played five full seasons before this year, is playing under center for them. Even so, they've lost to both ranked opponents they've played, won't play for the SEC championship, and likely won't make the CFP. So, it's not like Vanderbilt has solved some Rubik's Cube and figured out how to go unbeaten every year with NIL money. SMU is unranked, lost both their good OOC games vs. Big 12 teams, and while they beat a ranked Miami team at home, they also got beat by Wake Forest. Because of tie breakers, they likely won't play for the ACC championship, and they're not going to make the CFP. Another thing to point out about both those schools, and this is very, very important, is that nobody cares. Nobody is watching SMU or Vanderbilt games unless they're playing a high-profile opponent. I watched part of that Vanderbilt Auburn game on Saturday, because I had money on it. Even with their outstanding season, the stadium was 95+% Auburn fans. They don't even have enough fans to even half fill their tiny little stadium. So, do you really think anyone's tuning in to see Vanderbilt play football? And, the same thing goes for Stanford. I don't care if Stanford gets a 700-million-dollar donation - nobody is tuning into a football game to see Stanford. If someone's watching a Stanford game, there's a 99% chance they're watching to see whoever Stanford is playing. Your idea that "if you win, the networks will cover you" is just completely, flat out wrong. For Disney-owned networks, it's always going to be all SEC, all the time. Why? Because 12 of the ACC's 17 football programs have no fans. It doesn't matter if they're winning or not, they're going on ESPN2, the ACCN, or ESPN+.