The ACC may lose a few teams (max 4) in 2030. 2030 is a good time because the new B10 contract will start in 2030. The current B12 contract expires in 2031. The B12 itself may lose schools to the P2 but regardless the ACC will target the B12 schools like Utah, ASU, or Zona to backfill if any schools leave the ACC. If they don't come, potential western schools are SDSU, UNLV, and Oregon State. The weakest link (or lowest hanging fruit) in the B12 is actually WVU but I doubt the ACC will invite them. Houston or Cincy have better chance. UConn if UNC leaves. USF if both Miami and FSU leave. I doubt ND is going to "lead" the ACC. The ACC has been run by tobacco road (particularly UNC). My expectation is that the new ACC will continue to emphasize the academics and a tie to NCAA (meaning no break away).

So it's somewhat unclear what's going to happen next. There will be still three NC schools and one or two VA schools left in the ACC so they may become a big voting block. Or Duke and Standford may lead the conference. ND will be vocal for things that matter to them but I don't see ND actually leading a conference. That is just not a ND thing. Just my thought.

ND will shape the league for future stability. They already have.

ND is supposed to love independence and hate being in a conference. Them being a leader of the ACC in order to maintain their football independence sounds paradoxical

there is a possibility they do not get a bump when they renegotiate, but I wouldn't bet on it. There is also a possibility they lose a few schools to the P2 - but all in the B12 have been passed over. Also, the ACC had an opportunity for every singe school in the B12. The ACC didn't come to the rescue when OUT left, and they had about 3 opportunities to add WVU in the past, not to mention Cincy, UCF, and Houston that would have taken an invite to the ACC any time it was offered in the past - but there was never any offer. With uneven distributions coming in the ACC, it is HIGHLY likely that UCF will be making more money than the bottom 1/2 of the ACC. Think about that for a few seconds. I will give you credit though, you have not changed your position.

but once some schools leave, the ACC will need to backfill. It's EXTREMELY unlikely UCF will be making more money than the bottom 1/2 of the ACC but good luck.

ACC payout. Unless the ACCN comes up with more money than projected, the media contracts are set, and the amounts are publicly available. We should find out somewhere in May what the ACC payouts are. If FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami are going to make closer numbers to the P2, the money comes from the other ACC membership. How much less do you think VT will get compared to ast year with the 5 year moving average? Not trying to dis VT, but again, the money gets moved from the lower performing schools to the higher performing schools based on metrics I still don't understand. 25% of that money that goes the the performers is basketball, so Duke and UNC should be OK. Not sure about BC and others though. FSU filed a suite because UCF was making close to the same media money has they were. Remember, we are talking media money, but we can go to total distributions as well. So tell me, does the 5 year rolling average work for any school that you guys might poach from the B12? Anyone - tell me where I'm wrong on this. I just do not see the math of any B12 school going to the ACC around 2030. However, if the distribution calculations leave a Louisville or Pitt behind, and they are not in the top 1/2 of the uneven distributions, will they stay in the ACC? UCF will indeed make more money than the bottom 1/2 of the ACC, I just don't see how the top half makes enough money to stay in the conference otherwise.

That's between the full pay members. More like $10+ million if you look at the real average. Let's see what they report for 2024-2025 numbers.

with Oklahoma and Texas in that long post. Now, I just skimmed it, as dinner with my wife got in the way, and I'll try and decipher it more tomorrow, but just for the sake of argument - which is false, the ACC gets $10M more now than the B12 schools. UCF will still receive more than the bottom 1/2 of the ACC (maybe the same). Keep in mind that CalFord and SMU will not skew the numbers up indefinitely. Ya - the 2024 - 2025 numbers are the ones to compare, not the numbers of the B12's old contract.

I sometimes post guest articles there. 2024-2025 was still under B12 old contract, wasn't it? It doesn't really matter though. My understanding is B12's new contract ($31.7M) is basically extention of its old contract. As I said, it's extremly unlikely UCF will still receive more than the bottom 1/2 of the ACC. Too many pundits but not many with business/finance sense.

got a raise when they added BYU, Cincy, Houston, and UCF. No one was more surprised than me, but it is what it is. The 4 corners were added pro rata, and I'm very curious what their additions add to the media contract for the next round of negotiations. Also, keep an eye on Yormark, as he seems to be determined to separate the basketball rights. If he does that, no matter where the numbers land, the entire landscape will have a real understanding of where the basketball schools are in proportion to the football schools. It could be a game changer when adding other schools to the mix if the B12 does indeed expand.

with an annual low single % increase. The ACC payout increases by 4.5% annually. The next contract at 2031 is a big uncertainty. We will see.

The casual fan doesn't tune in until the tournament unless it's a game like Duke-UNC or Duke-Kentucky. College basketball is a niche sport until March, when it goes mainstream for a few weeks. It is what it is

it will establish the worth of basketball only schools. The Big East currently gets around $10M a year. If the B12 comes in at around $15M (not a prediction), then it would make real sense for the likes of Villanova, UConn (basketball only), Gonzaga, and maybe another Big east school or three, to give the B12 a look. Yormark REALLY likes the NY market for some reason.

The current Big East deal is about $7.3M/school if my AI machine is correct....FOX, NBC, and TNT hold the rights. So there's three entities that probably aren't going to be particularly incentivized to bid up the Big 12 basketball rights vis a vis the Big East. And ESPN has been selling off Big 12 content en masse since it re-upped the deal in 2022.

From BOV urgency, to 1 ramp up budget to 220-250 milliion athetlic budget 2.reorganization of football with immediate goal 1-2 years, National playoff competition every year (narrative not goal is within ACC but national) 3. complete reorganization and immediate business acumen into the athletic dept. BOV goal . VT will be a Power 2 player wihen the big divide happens, not IF. With that hire national experts to operate athletics, leading expert in fund raising/reorg of hokie club, and leading coaching staff (HAVE done). and accountability Just being an alumni or experience living in SWVA will not be the prime factor but demonstrated experience in the 2026 sports business, and top associates in the business (not like the tradition of hiring everyone from the john belien family

If VT performs well enough to be inconsideration the ACC allocation systems means that they will be earning a lot more than average in the conference. If we assume that the p2 conferences adopt a similar pay for performance scheme, all we would be doing is moving from the top tier in the ACC to the bottom tier of the P2. My guess is that financially it is a wash, and Competitively, it is a lot less fun for the fan base. ** Edited by VT ChemE 1986 at 4/27/2026, 10:08:28 PM

But if a number of schools leave, that would change everything.

From VT's perspecitve, we should strive to get into the the SEC. That would be the best scenario. The second best is to stay in the ACC and make sure the ACC doesn't fall out too far. This is a more likely scenario IMO.

it definitely is, then I think it would actually harm interest in their primary sport to leave the Big East for the ACC, particularly an ACC that has lost its best football brands, and schools leaving is the only way I see the window opening for UConn to get an invite. As the CFP continues to balloon, either to 16, or 24, or however many teams, ND further and further loses any incentive they currently have to join a conference. In a 24 team CFP structure, which is, for better or worse, clearly where we're going, because it's the model that generates the most content and revenue, ND will be in the field basically every year. Why would they ever choose to join a conference under those circumstances, and water down your own influence? I don't think ND will ever be a "leader" in the ACC - to ND, the ACC is little more than a place to park its basketball and non-rev sports. To the extent the ACC ever becomes more of an inconvenience to ND than its worth, it would take approximately 10 minutes worth of phone calls for ND to move those sports and park them in the Big East. And, people can say what they want to about the difficulties of building ND's football schedule independently - it's not difficult. The USC situation was an isolated case. It would take about another 10 minutes worth of phone calls for ND to establish three different scheduling agreements with the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12 if it decides it no longer wants to do business with the ACC. It continues to be my opinion that the SEC and Big 10 (especially the Big 10) are already way too big, with more content than their broadcast partners actually want or can actually use. The vast majority of the content, even football, ends up buried on streaming-only, so why does anyone think they're going to be looking for even more? And that's before you take into account that additional members equates to additional losses that someone has to eat each and every Saturday. If we're going to continue doing the separate conferences paradigm, and there's no reason to believe we won't, then there's no reason for the Big 10 or SEC to further expand - there's no additional value in it. This is why my opinion has turned to and remains that the next realignments will not be further expansion of the P2, but are going to be the creation of new conferences to allow for further consolidation of football brands while also trimming the dead weight. The only other way forward that makes sense would be to blow up the conference paradigm altogether, at least for football.

the ACC and Big 12 makes sense; I know you posted about it recently and its intrigued me for a while.

have known them may be coming to an end if they expand to 24 in the playoffs. The ACC currently has uneven distributions, and the BIG is looking into it, so if you are a blue blood, it might be time to look at the ND model. ND recently inked a 10 year scheduling agreement with Clemson - so, lets step out of the box for a moment. What if tOSU, Michigan, USC, Texas and one or two other big boys went independent, but signed a 10 year scheduling agreement with each other, including ND. A 6 or 7 game schedule with themselves. What would NBC pat ND for that kind of schedule? What would NBC (just an example) pay tOSU for that schedule? What if one networked stepped up to the plate, and offered those six or 7 blue blood programs over $100M+ a year for the rights to those games, both home and away? They could suck the oxygen out of paying large conferences for that content, as there isn't a single mid to lower P4 school that would not schedule them moving forward. With the playoffs at 24, a 3 loss school in that kind of set up would almost be guaranteed a playoff spot - which means that even playing each other every year, they could ALL get into the playoffs. With an agreement with only 6 or 7 schools, the OOC could be a tremendous draw as well depending on how the individual schools wanted to schedule. They do not share revenue with anyone, including the post season. Drop the Mic, as any school could go independent in the same manor, but would not come close to the money of the top 6 or 7 brands. What about basketball and non revs you say? It would be a LOT easier to form a new basketball and non rev conference that is based on geography than it would be to form a new all inclusive conference that exists today.