you're saying the SEC and Big 10 want to get into "markets," and, in using that term, you clearly mean defined geographic areas like states or major metros. I think that's an incorrect way to think about it if you want to understand how the people writing the media rights checks will be analyzing the books going forward. My position - when it comes to conference realignment, to the extent the SEC and Big 10 (and really, we mean Disney/FOX/CBS/Netflix/Apple/etc. here) want to get into this or that "market," the term "market" must now be thought of as "college football program that people will turn on and leave on for the entire game." That's what they'll be looking for now when determining media rights value. The idea of a major metro or statewide TV "market" having anything to do with conference realignment is a relic of a time where nationwide access to literally any FBS football program's game broadcasts was not a possibility. Example: because of the legacy linear cable business model and the myriad contractual issues that came with it, in 2003, it was impossible for me to watch a September Oregon State vs. San Jose State football game live on TV in Virginia, even if I was willing to pay a premium to do so. In 2026, I can easily pay to access every single Oregon State and San Jose State football broadcast all season long, in HD. The rub going forward when it comes to media rights valuations, and, by extension, conference realignment, will be, "how much will people pay to access this or that program's football content," and the media conglomerates are going to be able to utilize granular data to make that decision. I suppose we don't have to agree, but I hope that clears up my position. ** Edited by Baltimore_Hokie at 7/28/2026, 9:46:28 AM