bigger picture, it's the Florida, Virginia, and NC schools that bring the value, not South Carolina. Using your metric, GT jumps to the front of the line as well. Clemson and FSU have not developed that fierce rivalry game the country is salivating to watch. The Clemson USC rivalry is like the Egg bowl - only diehards like me find them compelling, mostly because there usually isn't anything on the line but bragging rights -but those games have history, and make for excellent television, but they have to be playing for something. The back yard brawl recently got a prime time slot, but it was the history and rarity that made that a compelling game. I can certainly see why those schools you mentioned don't want them in the conference, so the driving metric would have to be money. Does Clemson and FSU help the SEC get more money? There is an argument that FSU does, but they do not bring the intangibles that the SEC doesn't already have (recruiting and new markets for their network). If your the Big 10, what does Clemson bring to the table? Good football for sure, but a market and recruiting hot bed? Not so much. They are more like an Oregon - a decent football program, but it falls off a cliff after that. Oregon has Nike, and they, like Clemson, have had some success on the field. I think they are more a travel partner for Washington, where those two together were worth more together than they would have been individually. Maybe I'm off the reservation here, but if you step out of your geography, does FSU and Clemson bring the same value? More importantly, does FSU need a travel partner? If it's just football brands - then my argument falls apart. When you look at markets, eyeballs, and recruiting, it's the State of Florida that jumps off the page, not Clemson. Also, look at where all of those people that have migrated South from Big 10 country over the decades. They have moved to Virginia, NC, Georgia, and Florida. Those donors, and potential donors are very important, not only for the football eyeballs, but the academic side. Atlanta an Charlotte would be the places for the University President to connect with wealthy alumni, not Columbia or Greenville. I think Clemson brings tremendous value to the ACC, but it just isn't something the University Presidents in the Big 10 are falling over themselves to include in their club. I also think that a VT brings more value to the SEC than Clemson, and VT's proximity to DC, combined with their academics, would be a better fit in the Big 10 then Clemson. The competition for you guys, is Virginia.