"What does this mean for the ACC and its schools? What will happen? Let’s consider three points: -Many pundits believe the P2 cannot wait until 2036. Former Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick predicted the Seismic Shift would happen in the mid-2030s, but it seems like the P2 won’t wait until then. Perhaps the shift will start in 2031, with the official breakaway happening in 2036. -FSU and Clemson cannot wait until 2036. Particularly, FSU wants to leave quickly. Their football attendance is declining, and their renovated stadium will seat fewer than 70,000. By comparison, the SEC's average football attendance in 2024 was more than 80,000. Even if FSU sells out every game, they'd still fall short of the SEC average. If FSU remains in the ACC for another 10+ years, the concern is they may become an average (or slightly better-than-average) ACC team, and the P2 conferences would lose interest in FSU. -The ACC will defend the GoR until the end, and FSU and Clemson have not won their legal fight so far. It’s been delayed and delayed, much to the dismay of anti-ACC pundits. Then what? There’s only one solution that satisfies all three conditions above, and that’s a simple buyout. FSU and Clemson will pay the ACC whatever the media value is as of 2031 and get out. Hale’s article states that “Clemson and Florida State are asking the ACC to agree to reduce penalties for exiting the grant of rights after 2031.” This is NOT the same as shortening the GoR. Back in September 2024, Dellenger reported that the ACC leaders were considering amending the length of the league’s grant of rights, and his report stirred much speculation (link). My hunch is Dellenger just reported what FSU sources told him. But no matter what happened during the last six months, FSU and Clemson's current position is weaker—they essentially accept that the GoR is in place through 2036, and they just want a discount for the buyout at this point. Now that we know the buyout in 2031 is the goal for schools wanting to leave for greener pastures, what’s the strategy? In the short term, FSU and Clemson will have to settle the lawsuit with the ACC, agreeing to stay in the league in exchange for more money. I foresee the following scenario happening: -The ACC agrees to schedule more marquee football games with Notre Dame. -Notre Dame agrees to play a sixth ACC game (including Stanford). -ESPN agrees to pay a bonus for stronger matchups, which will help address the uneven revenue distribution. To me, this is a win-win-win. I bet some people won’t believe Notre Dame would agree to such an arrangement, but I think the sixth ND game is crucial: not for the ACC, but for ESPN, as it would give them the broadcasting rights for three away Notre Dame games. ESPN won’t pay much more for additional marquee games against ND, but for that sixth game? That’s something ESPN would pay for. NBC has been reported to pay a huge amount of money for 6 to 8 ND home games, but ESPN won’t have to pay ND anything for their three away games. Instead, ESPN would pay the ACC for that. Also, remember the ND-Stanford series expired in 2024, but ND agreed to play Stanford again in 2025, meaning they will play six ACC games this year and ND admin (not necessarily their die hard fans) do value the Stanford game. In the long term, FSU, Clemson, and other ACC schools (like Miami, UNC, and maybe even VT) hoping for a P2 invite must continue to strengthen their football programs, much like other ambitious M2 schools such as TCU and Utah. The difference is that these ACC schools not only need to perform well on the field, but they also need to save up for the buyout in 2031. That’s going to be a significant financial constraint, which is why we can’t rule out the possibility of private equity involvement. What about the ACC? Obviously, the ACC will need a contingency plan in case FSU and Clemson bolt in 2031. What would be the best plan for the ACC?"