Y'know. Like many of you, I am not sure what to make of the latest developments of considering adding Cal, Stanford, and SMU. So help me out here and tell me if and where I am going wrong. While the adding of these three schools way outside of our region seems absurd, I don't want to simply reject it out of hand without giving the idea its due diligence. All this brought me to thinking about the bigger picture of the GOR and TV contract. I think most of us think of these deals as an albatross around our neck. And of course the worst part of it is the length, until 2036. However, maybe we shouldn't be bashful about using what might be some good things about the deal (if there are any). There are two parts of the deal that for me need confirmation (so anyone in the know, please weigh in). 1. Do new additions get "pro rata" payments from the network? If so, what exactly does that mean? 2. If the ACC accepts a new member from a new state, does this mean that the ACCN automatically is put on cable/satellite packages in said new state at a higher rate? And if so, how much will the pay off impact the existing members in terms of payout? If the answer to the above questions are favorable financially to existing ACC members, I don't see why adding the three members, and maybe some others in new states (if the states are large enough to pay out), is such a bad idea. In other words, we are living and dying by the bad aspects of the GOR. Why not turn the tables, and take advantage of it where we can? Yeah, taking SMU from the state of Texas will be looked at as a money grab. But so was the B1G taking Rutgers and they never apologize for it. In the end, how much money will these seemingly crazy moves bring in, and if it is only a marginal amount (even after adjusting for travel expenses), is it worth it from an image standpoint? ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 8/9/2023, 4:03:51 PM