action against its own member...

about the Big 12, IMO - the conference is actually unified against what Texas Tech is trying to do and is pre-emptively seeking an injunction so they won't be able to just tie it up in court until Sorsby's eligibility is exhausted and it becomes a moot point. Nobody is suing to get out of the Big 12 because being a member of the conference sucks.

That's not unity or stability. Let's face it. Every school is for itself. The argument that the Big 12 is inherently stable is just laughable. Every Big 12 or ACC school would leave its conference if a better offer were given.

conference has already been picked over. Another difference between the Big 12 and the ACC is that there are no Wake Forests or Boston Colleges in the Big 12. Their crappiest football brand, Kansas, is one of the major national blueblood basketball brands. There are better brands at the top of the ACC, sure, but the entire bottom half of the ACC from a football brand perspective is the conference's major problem. The ACC has managed to stay financially ahead of the Big 12 largely due to contractual obligations that either couldn't be or were too financially painful to wriggle out of. That's about to go right out the window.

significantly less than other ACC schools. Unless the B12 adopts the unequal revenue distribution, thier top schools will find they would make a lot more money in the ACC. ($20M+ annually)

considered a powerhouse in football. You could probably make a similar case for Iowa State and Kansas State. So when those programs are going through a few "down years" or a "down decade," then their "value" may not be that much different than BC's or Wake's. At least in terms of people's perception when comparing the ACC vs. Big XII.

with the Atlantic coast. However, K-State and Iowa State continue to have rabid passionate fans, fill up their not so small stadiums whether they are winning or losing, and get consistent media ratings if and when they are on a channel. Out here in flyover, many put VT into the same basket as you just put Iowa State and K-State.

the question from a more national audience perspective. Historically (going back to the Big 8 days), when Kansas, K-State, and Iowa State were in the cellar, the only times they seemed to get on the RSN station was when they were playing either the marquee Big 8 team or whichever Big 8 team was "hot" that season. So for those games, how much of the ratings can be attributed to them vs. their opponent? If the rivalry games made it to the RSN (including Kansas-Mizzou), then it was usually because their was a bigger Big 8 game on one of the other channels. That trend seemed to continue into the Big XII until those 3 programs had their various "magical runs" that changed people's perceptions even for a brief moment.

really bad. probably no differently than VT getting on TV before the Big East and then Vick. It was a game changer for VT, at least in my perspective.

from a media exposure. At least VT didn't become more of a regular on TV (RSN or national broadcast) until that point. Prior to joining the BEFC, VT seemed to be on TV only for "rivalry games" during the 80s. Particularly after the SCOTUS ruling in the early '80s. Since I was born in '77, I can't say how much exposure VT got on TV. Keep in mind that was also the period of time when the NCAA decided which games would be broadcasted each week. I suspect most of the games the NCAA selected involved the blue bloods in some form.

is the least valuable brand in the P4 by a significant margin. Boston College was pretty far down the list as well. When it was founded in the 1950s, the ACC was not founded with TV money or football at front of mind, and that handicap carries over to present day. It is what it is. Half of the ACC are either tiny private schools with tiny little fanbases, have no football pedigree to speak of, or both.

ACC that will probably be its downfall. Hence why I asked the question from the perceptive perspective. It seems to me there is a certain group of Big XII schools that if they experience their own Hurricanes-like dry spell (Is Da U back?) where they only win 0-4 games each year, then I would be surprised to see their football programs are able to retain their value. Especially if the other metrics show a declining trend. Kansas has basketball to prop up football during the dry spell. However, most of the other Big XII schools don't have that luxury unless sports like baseball, wrestling, track, etc. now how "real value."

Same for the ACC. IIWII.