The ONLY REASON the Big12 is stable is because there are no teams the Big10 and SEC want. The problem with the ACC is it has several desirable teams and thus at risk of getting poached like Texas, Oklahoma, UCLA, USC, Oregon and Washington. The only reason VT would accept a Big12 invite prematurely is if it was certain the ACC was breaking up and it was certain that there would be no invite from the P2. The big12 is a fine conference, but it is a downgrade from the current version of the ACC.

FSU and Clemson are still in the conference. I too don't understand why there are folks who think the Big 12 is superior to the ACC. At this time, they have no national brands except for Kansas men's basketball. The ACC still has FSU and Clemson football (and Miami to a lesser degree) and UNC and Duke men's basketball. Plus the ACC geographic population footprint still has more potential than that of the Big 12 even with the addition of UCF which is #4 in football in the state of Florida. The Big 12 improved with Arizona, ASU, Utah and Colorado but we all have to remember that they lost Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas A&M. So far, the ACC has lost.... mighty Maryland. No reason for any ACC school to leave now for the Big 12. If FSU, Clemson, UNC and Miami leave, then I might seriously consider the Big 12.

these projections are from before the PAC breakup, but nothing the Big12 added will increase payouts for it's schools.

That won’t happen.

but, nothing the B12 did adds revenue to the existing schools. The PAC money on that chart gets divided up to the PAC schools, through other conferences.

They've added Group of 5 schools and bottom feeders of Pac 12 except Utah. Media portrays as if they added Notre Dame, Alabama and UGA

is not what drives dollars. Utah is not a national television brand, BYU was a better add than Utah.

Honestly, the way things have gone down with the Pac10 folding, I think VT is in it's best position yet. I still think a very good chance at B10 or SEC invite, and if that doesn't materialize, I know the B12 would be happy to get VT, and frankly, I think that would be a competitive and compelling football and hoops league.

be lucky if you guys are available. As a fan of the game, VT in the SEC seems like a no brainer, but things have gotten really weird, and who knows how this all ends up. I'm an old Big East fan as I lived in that neck of the woods for just short of a decade - and when in Rome....

stable place and that was with UT, A&M and OU. My 10 year view is not positive. Not sure about ACC either but its longer term stability has been better and its demographics are probably better. Personally I might boot Syracuse and BC

then they got raided and added a bunch of nobodies to keep TX/OU happy. Now it's the nobodies and the 3rd tier PAC plus a bunch of G5 schools, but this time with a better marketing leader. As long as the ACC doesn't get stupid and expand to keep ND happy, they will be fine until the big shoe drops and it all blows up and gets replaced with something that will likely operate under old conference brands and regional rivalries, but under some different governing body.

everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. I like regional conferences and while the SEC is probably the closest alternative remaining, neither the BIG, as currently configured, or the Big 12 would be my choice. However, I am a realist and money and survival trumps individual wants so it's like the Rolling Stones say, "you can't always get what you want......".

no reason to rush it.

We still have the problem with the grant of rights. Plus, big 12 will still be there in 2036 when the grant is rights runs out. So let's first find out if we have a better option.

PAC appeared to be in trouble, Oregon State and Washington State may have had a chance to be in the B12, but they stuck it out with Oregon and Washington. I'm not saying it would have happened, but it may have been their only opportunity to not be relegated to the Mountain West.

any of them from bolting to the B12 any time soon, but if I were in their shoes I would be planning my eventual pitch to the B12. Unless someone comes up with an alternative plan to save the ACC, they should be very concerned. Of course it is very possible only a couple of schools get invited to the P2 and the rest of the ACC stays together and tries to pull a few schools away from the B12, which might be difficult at that point. But until it becomes affordable no one accepts an invitation to anywhere - B12, B10, or SEC. But when the GOR ends anyone with an invite to a P2 conference will probably be running to accept, unless some other solution is found before then. And no one has yet suggested a solution that would prevent such an exodus. So as of now the only questions seems to be: How many schools get invited to the P2, and will what remains of the ACC be enough to keep schools from leaving for the B12 if invited. Meanwhile ACC leadership seems to have their heads in the sand hoping this will all just go away. Then there are those praying for ND to swoop in and save the ACC, which is not happening. It is only a matter of time unless something changes for the ACC. Somehow change is coming for the ACC, and when it does there will be schools who are very unhappy with the results. Right now its schools like FSU and Clemson who seem the most concerned. But ultimately the schools who should be most concerned are the ones at the bottom of the ACC football power structure, not the two at the top. BC, Cuse, etc.... are the schools that should be working for a solution to help the ACC compete with the P2, they have the most to lose. They are the ones most likely to be ignored by the P2. ** Edited by wwhokie1 at 8/21/2023, 6:24:36 PM ** Edited by wwhokie1 at 8/21/2023, 6:25:45 PM

why would the homeless go to the Big12? They, along with any other schools that don't get P2 invites in that scenario, could add a bunch of other schools with no homes like the Big12 did and create a second second tier conference to go along with the Big12. Either way, they are not getting the amount of money they are getting now (Big12 is not going to be able to add a bunch of schools that don't bring in their ACC payouts and keep payouts the same for all it's schools). The reality is, the ACC is going to survive, the only question is, is it a contender for 3rd or an also ran with the Big12.

To keep up with the big 12 financially. The Big 12 has done a good job recovering from losing their top two elite teams. By the time the ACC loses it's top two elite teams, there's not going to be much to pick from for recovery. And there's going to be more than two teams trying to leave. Don't know how successful other schools will be in trying to get invites. But I do believe there's a reasonable chance the ACC falls clearly behind the big 12.

on those schools left behind when 4 or 5 of the magnificent 7 find homes in the P2. Also assume that none of them go to the B12, and they pick up the pieces and form a competitive conference. There are currently 4 P5 teams looking for a home. There are also some very good G5 teams ready to make the jump. So right now, the ACC left behinds could form a pretty darned good conference - Without FSU, CU, Miami, NC and VT. The problem as I see it, is that the aforementioned schools going to the P2 DO NOT want to expand, as it "dilutes" the conference. Good grief, you guys are going to let your conference sit back to "hopefully" keep the top schools in the conference happy, when they will leave anyway. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the PAC4 could very well form a conference with the top 3-4 AAC and top 3-4 Mountain West, plus Uconn. Then what are the leftovers going to do. Who is left? The deer in the headlight look is not good for the ACC. The GOR is good, or the GOR is bad, only if you are, or are not, invited to the P2. The non mag 7 just might be the biggest threat to the ACC staying together, NOT FSU and Clemson. ** Edited by Big12 guy at 8/21/2023, 8:05:46 PM

either the conference stays as is, or a couple schools leave and pay a huge fee that the remaining schools get. Adding schools that do not create additional revenue for each school that is in the conference now, makes no sense, ever. Adding 4 leftover west coast schools makes no sense, ever. AZ/ASU/Colo and UT actually make sense for the B12, it is regional, you can build on that, not adding much value, but really doesn't hurt. It is not deer in the headlights, it is patient non-reaction. I know you will never admit it, but you know if the B12 could undo UCF and Cinci at this point they would in a minute. They did it as an emotional reaction. Not doing something that makes no sense just to do something is always a better response. This stuff hasn't all played out and there is no school out there that moves the needle at all, thus no reason to do anything until more data is in on where things are going. If doing nothing means missing out on 3 schools no one else wants, oh well, no loss.

The B12 will never be a P2, but I think you completely underestimate UCF and Cincy. They were no brainers for your conference, but you guys are taking the PAC position that you are just too good. When the top 5 teams leave the ACC - and they will, no matter how long it takes, The ACC will either be in a position to thrive without them, or they will be absorbed into other conferences. OUT and USCLA changed everything.

The GOR is for 13 more years. In that time, this whole thing is going to go upside down. This is nothing about being arrogant like the PAC12, once again, the difference is we have a solid, if not remarkable payout for 13 years, the PAC had no contract at all. If you don't see how that is different , then you are just being obtuse. If nothing else changes in the next 10 years, there is reason to start looking at this. If the top teams pay huge money to leave, then you look at it. Adding a bunch of additional welfare cases at this point, just ensures the end, probably sooner.

that passes the argument will become clearer as to what the real truth will be. Is the GOR and long-term TV deal a yoke around the necks of conference schools or a wise long term plan for stability and, should it become necessary, a tool to allow the orderly winding down of conference affairs for the benefit of the majority of its members? IMO it is still too early to say one way or another and, depending on how things break, a number of alternatives are still possible. The only things that can be definitively said so far are that the ACC remains alive and competing ably and has already outlasted one or more, depending upon how one chooses to look at it, major conferences that possessed substantially more resources and advantages than the ACC. I am not sure when enough information will become available to reach a conclusion. I think in chronological order 2025/26, 2030/31 and 2033/34 are the most likely determinative time frames.

There are already groups screaming about the non-revenue sports and travel, that isn't going to go away. Gloria Alred or someone like her is going to jump on that bandwagon, pols are going to get involved, Condi is already yapping and the NCAA owes her big for using her contacts to get them out from under the RICO case with Addidas and keeping Nike out of it (Addidas wasn't competing against itself). Three big state U's are now looking at joining the MWC. FSU is making waves and is not happy with the mouse...who btw is in an ongoing pursefight with their governor. The NCAA (where all the anti-trust protections come from) is being marginalized and can't be happy. This is not going to last, too many aggrieved parties not getting their taste.

what i do know, is that there are no longer any blue bloods out there that can raise the value of the ACC's contract closer to the BIG than the B12. It's just my opinion, but if the ACC is going to make a move to assure its existence after the top programs leave, they are going to have to make it now. God bless, when the B12 lost texas and OY, then added 4 G5's, they actually got a raise with their media deal (reported). The raise in their media deal allowed them to be decent landing spots for the 4 corners. The ACC currently has teams lined up to be a part of your conference, different time zones, more content, and when you look at the G5 options, schools that are investing into their football programs - those bring value. I would point to the UCF and Cincy acquisitions for the B12. Apparently there is data to support the idea that they actually brought value to the B12, otherwise, ESPN and FOX would not have inked the deal they did. The ACC will not get a Big 10 type of contract - ever in my opinion. The only reasonable alternative for the top schools is to leave and join the P2 - but as we know, the GOR is still in place. The ACC can not just sit back, I mean they are good for now, but it's the down the road thing that they should be looking at.

No, the ACC is not getting a BIG/SEC deal anytime soon. But, I don't believe the BIG is going to see those numbers either, they are projections from FOX and partners to drive the BIG to their deal. ESPN did the same with the ACC and the B12 will see the same. So, when it all shakes out in 5 years, if this mess holds together that long, the BIG and SEC will be likely aroundd $60mil, the ACC will be pushing $50mil and the B12 will be mid $40mil. The simple fact is, there is only so much money and the projections have the overall revenue doubling in like 6 years, that is just not going to happen. College football is at peak viewership, there aren't a bunch of people that are sitting around on saturdays to attract. It's all about carving up that pool, which will grow a bit because of some new matchups that this mess has created, but that is not going to be good for the B12 and will be not great for the ACC, but not as bad. Look at the TV ratings by week I posted above. All the teams that draw big, no matter who they are playing will be in the BIG SEC and a couple in the ACC, none are in the B12. There are 4 broadcast slots that matter now at noon, 5 at 3:30 and 4 in primetime. Starting this season, there will be an additional one in each of those time slots. So that's another game to divide the existing eyeballs. Since the 4th place finisher in those time slots is now drawing between 100k and 500k viewers, what happens when you add another game to compete? Most weeks, that 4th place in each time slot is going to be a B12 or ACC game. The difference is, once in a while Clem or FSU will be there to move the ACC up the ladder, but that is not likely for the B12, because you don't have any brands that create national interest. Also remember, the ACC has been as bad as it has ever been in both football and basketball for the last few years and has managed to put $40 mil in the pockets of each school, just reverting to the mean brings those numbers up. The B12 on the other hand has been where they have never been in basketball, when things revert to the mean, as they do (especially after Tex and OU leave, though AZ will help a bit) they'll be struggling for viewers when competing against more broadcast games. So, that said, your initial statement is true, there is no one out there that adds value. Once again, the ACC has a 13 year deal in place, you keep saying when the top teams leave, well it's gonna be 10 years at least before that happens without a huge financial windfall which changes the entire discussion. What's more likely to happen is the real payouts are going to come in, the gap between the ACC and the BIG/SEC will be there, but not the absurd projections that are out there now. The B12 will be behind that. The incentive for the top teams to leave will be marginalized and we will likely see the feds get involved which will do lord knows what. Your entire argument is based on the top teams leaving the ACC, which is not likely for a decade. During that decade, the reality of the revenue gap will become real. If the projections are real, then fine, they'll leave. But the entire landscape is going to change in that decade. Adding more welfare cases now just takes away options in the future. The B12 is going to have to deal with those WNBA level ratings for UCF, Cin and HOU every week and will soon be wishing they'd not knee jerked and had some flexibility to operate. Last thing the ACC needs is to replicate that. Being a solid 3rd through a period of structural change is not a bad place to be.

imploded, the idea that the B12 was going to "poach" any P5 school was so far out there, that is wasn't even discussed by the click baits. Now there are discussion of teams from the ACC going to the B12? OSU and WSU put their eggs in one basket, and Ray Charles could see that in the worst case scenario, they would have been left out. They hoped for the best, but did not plan on the worst - same with Cal and stanford. Instead of trying to break up the ACC, make it better.

the Big12 model of a bunch of schools all over the country with nothing to tie them together is not better. The 4 PAC schools that are going to the Big12 actually make sense, the 3 on the east coast do not (nor do they make sense for the ACC, they are 2 group of schools and WV who really doesn't fit anywhere (thus the reason it was in the Big12). The ACC is fine as it is right now despite the rumblings from FSU. The PAC schools didn't make the call before because even without USC and UCLA, it was at least on par with the B12. Colorado was no loss either, the call came because OR and WA got BIG invites and B12 is better than MWC. Until Clem, FSU, Miami and UNC have homes and leave (and figure out how to get out of the GOR) no ACC school has any reason to even consider the B12. ** Edited by Vienna_Hokie at 8/21/2023, 5:58:26 PM

no one else wants any of the teams out there, why should the ACC rush to get them until there is a reason (the top teams leaving still wouldn't be a reason to add 3 schools that are 3k miles away). Worst is 3 teams that no one considers to have any value aren't there, oh well. If you're just picking up dead weight, it can be local dead weight. I bet the B12 would be glad to give up WV and UCF in 2 years.

was never an offer made.

We already have total control over the ACC without being a full member, so why would we ever do that?

If they are so damn desirable then you ACCholes can keep them.

Than a made up rival in Chestnut Hill.