Please explain to me how paying more for the same states you already have makes you more revenue? Except for the ACC haters or the Big 12 expanders who want the top football ratings schools (can we stop with the brand as an explanation for expansion, if it was brand, Stanford would have gotten an invite to the B1G, and Oregon would have gotten a full share). None of the expansions to date has been based off selling merchandise, what brand mostly does.Honestly I think it’s John Skipper promoting his alma mater to his ESPN/SEC. He hates the thought of losing them to Fox, so all of sudden expansion is about brand. Good for him for being loyal to his alma mater, but football ratings for games dwarfs all of that, and has for at least 30 years, probably more like 40-50 years. Anyway, back to ESPN making more money. They have a sweet heart deal with the ACC thanks to John. So ESPN already has Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia for John’s sweet heart deal. So why pay more for those states? Successful Business Owners are into the math. It’s just like sports, score more than your opponent. The opponent is cost, and the winner gets profit. So please explain to me in numbers (not emotions like fans do) how ESPN is better off with blowing up the sweet heart deal they have with the ACC. What is the Math Path as any Successful Business Owner over time would ask? ** Edited by Stech at 4/11/2024, 9:45:54 AM