2 of the 3 of Pitt, Cuse and BC will get a hard look, not because of what they have done but because of the POTENTIAL viewers in the NE. That still matters as does the strong VT presence in NOVA/DC.

a more easily identifiable demarcation within the conference. (Is there more balance/talent across the Big 12 or just fewer slam dunks?) But overall, another indicator a 32 super league of the current P2 would have some significant holes. I still think 48 is probably the minimum number for a college football super league. If you want a smaller super league, look at regional sports fewer schools sponsor...like lacrosse. 32 can work for a pro league because those teams are franchises of an overall effort to maximize profit. Back in the day, the AFL relatively quickly demonstrated the NFL was undersized. On the other hand, spring pro football efforts, and occasional NFL movement show that they are now probably pretty close to right-sized. TV $ in college sports is mostly about profit for the networks and maintaining a competitive advantage for the schools' sports programs. Does it have residual benefits for academics? Of course. But at their heart colleges are still academic non-profits. UVA may not be able to field a great football team but it could readily afford to buy an NFL franchise as an investment.

and Iowa State. I think they need to at least be at least 20, because they need more markets to get numbers IMHO. *Remember you could easily have 4 leave the ACC, FSU, Clemson, Miami and if the reports are correct, UVA. In that case grab USF and UCF, grab maybe Syracuse or UConn and maybe SMU. That way you have two in Florida and two in Texas, and have something in the Northeast. However I am just spitballing at the end. ** Edited by Stech at 6/1/2025, 8:31:01 AM

Big 10 (20): FSU, GT SEC (20): NC, UVA, Miami, Clemson Big 12 (20): Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, UConn ACC (10): USF, Tulane The Big 12 team adds are curious. VT, NC State, Pitt, Louisville and then maybe Duke are the ones they probably want. Big 12 offers 4. After the shock of the Big 10 and SEC blowing up the ACC, VT, NC St, and Duke resist, Louisville is a lean Yes, and Pitt a moderate No. Yormark always wanted a NY presence, and he convinces the Big 12 to pivot to add Syracuse and UConn. Pitt and Louisville then quickly say Yes. Big 12 stop at 20. After a couple months later, ACC adds the 2 to get to 10. ** Edited by HouClone at 6/1/2025, 10:23:01 AM

also move their athletics to the Big East. They would continue to have no difficulty scheduling football. If the BIG and SEC raid the ACC, the only lifeboat left will be the B12. The only chance the ACC has is to make the top schools happy, and financially competitive enough to stay. Unfortunately, that money must come from the other member schools, as ESPN passed on the opportunity to alter the contract.

away. Big 12 also doesn't want another school like Utah bad mouthing the conference while in the conference. Big 12 thought it ended with Texas and OU moving on. Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville wouldn't be too pleased either, but these schools don't have a shot at an even future Big 10 and SEC invite (Utah thinks they do). Plus, these 3 were new additions to the ACC and have sort of been treated as step-sister by the rest of the ACC.

didn't want to play in the Midwest either.

** Edited by Stech at 6/1/2025, 4:25:37 PM

every single game is on their network, versus Fox having the B12 too. So if one of the conferences takes from the other one, bet that ESPN will be helping the conference that they own 50% of their conference channel. That just makes good business sense. When ESPN signed the exclusive with the ACC, their words were we now have the strongest Football and the strongest Basketball Conference. I will admit that the ACC has to build the basketball part back up. However, why wouldn't they do that by helping the ACC acquire some of the better basketball schools from the B12 if they let some of the football schools go to the SEC? Seems like a much better business decision than splitting the B12 with Fox. ** Edited by Stech at 6/1/2025, 2:22:33 PM

partnered with the Big 10 not too long ago. ESPN will go where they can make the most money. The ACCN may turn out to be the difference, but with ESPN's new streaming service, they really do not need it. They have 100% of the rights to the ACC content. I'm not privy to the contract details of the network, but if their streaming bundle is a success, they may not need the SECN or the ACCN. They own the rights to the content until their contract expires, and may have no obligation to actually use that content on the ACCN, or the SECN for that matter. They can just put that content on their streaming platform if the finances make sense. We aren't ther yet, but things are changing very fast. ** Edited by Big12 guy at 6/1/2025, 3:10:38 PM

certain. However, I think with more points designated to higher ranked wins, then overall record for playoff selection, that the SEC goes to 9 and 5+11 happens, right now. Emphasis on right now. :-) PS If the Sankey says the heck with the House vs NCAA case and the SEC leaves the NCAA. All of these scenarios could be null and void. ** Edited by Stech at 6/1/2025, 4:24:09 PM

but, as things continue to progress the only chances any conferences have to make the top schools happy is to take money from other member schools. The Big 12 is likely the most insulated as there is not a lot of difference in their top and bottom schools. Does anybody aside from the networks really have any understanding of the monies that may or may not be involved in the individual conference contracts? The second piece is who knows what about formulas already in place or being considered for unequal revenue sharing programs? The situation is getting murkier rather than clearer at present and both the SEC and B1G may not have as much control as they once thought they did. The old adage that sunlight is the best disinfectant may be prophetic once again. ** Edited by 2hhoop3 at 6/1/2025, 1:58:32 PM

to tell me" as I concur with your post. Tell you what though, uneven distributions in conferences have failed everywhere they have been tried - without exception. USC/UCLA tried to get uneven distributions from the PAC, not in the failed contract negotiations that failed and imploded the PAC, but the contract that was expiring. The PAC conference voted it down, and back then, USC had warned their conference mates. I don't have a link to the article, as it was a while ago, and since USC had already announced they were going to the BIG, I thought is was irrelevent. Texas. ant their self worth, caused Colorado, Nebraska, and A&M to bolt. Even then, a uneven distribution system wasn't nearly good enough to keep them in the B12. Then you have Boise State in the MW, and Gonzaga in the West Coast, and now, the ACC is on the clock. There may be an uneven distribution system that develops for "FBS" football, but that will only be if there is one media contract, not conference independent contracts (an opinion). Who really knows where this dust settles, but I think you and I can agree, where we are now isn't it. If the ACC succeeds, and can thrive with the yet to be determined uneven distribution, they will be the first. *The original break up of the B12 were the 4 upper mid tier teams (Nebraska, Missouri, A&M, and Colorado). It is entirely possible that if FSU, Clemson, Miami and UNC are happy with the new distribution system, it will be the next 4 schools that will be unhappy - and they may be the ones to leave the ACC, not the other way around.

Uva will not be left out nor GT.