I assume a pro rata in The ACC. Don't Know for sure. ESPN current Big 12 contract pays $0.00 while the new contract will pay $20 million for Arizona. In either case ASU will pay an exit fee to PAC. I often repeat that adding schools isn't the same as adding positive income or wealth. New members have to be paid. A suggestion: When you get an idea for expansion, examine the transaction from the perspective each party involved. Does each party get an acceptable benefit (not just better travel distance.) Consider each party's downside; is it worth the benefit or cost? Can you project into the future and see these benefits in the long term? Consider Arizona's other choices. Maybe The Big 12 looks like the safe haven for now, but will it be the place you want to be in six, seven, years? Starving for a few years in The PAC is scary, but the future is a crap shoot. Might as well aim for the future you prefer rather the give that up for a gamble on, what... $20 million a year. I'm not saying AZ should stay in The PAC; not saying leave The PAC. Not easy. The language we use when we're talking realignment is silly: B1G 12 should "take" these three schools," "ESPN should move these two schools." Nobody "takes" a school; nobody "moves a school." These schools, these conferences, these media moguls, they are all constrained in what they do, and when, by contracts, varying objectives, and cultural conflicts. Yes, a certain amount of money, at a certain time and place can be persuasive. But every one of the parties has choices to make. It's extremely complex. This late in the game can anyone say for sure why The B1G has not adopted Oregon and Washington? We all believe it will happen, that it should have happened already. I think it somehow has to do with Notre Dame. But I'm not sure. When we find out it still may not make sense, because it's damn complicated. ** Edited by 33laszlo99 at 3/6/2023, 9:01:32 PM