(04-24-2013 06:12 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(04-24-2013 04:07 PM)Rich52c Wrote:  

(04-24-2013 02:17 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(04-24-2013 02:09 PM)Rich52c Wrote:  

(04-24-2013 01:58 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Yes, I was going to edit my post and add that, but I am accused of being too long winded in my posts. :)

Also, you beat me to it. Absolutely correct.

ND could not be happier about all of this. It got just about everything it wanted out of realignment.

Besides, what was the alternative? Stay in the AAC? Join the Big East (C7)?

ND got a great deal.
They got the most and gave the least.
They are happy with BC,Syracuse,Miami,Wake and Duke.
They are with Pitt.

Thats not the real question.
Did the ACC get their money's worth with ND?
I think not.

There are real good football programs in VaTech,FSU andClemson.

However ,the size of their tv package is not near that of the SEC or Big 10.ACC has 3 real great bb programs inLouisville,Syracuse and Duke who all have hc over 60.The price paid by television for good bb leagues is a lot less that for great football leagues.

So surely then Louisville,Syracuse and Duke will all fail when their coaches move on? Is that what you are getting at? That seems to be Yukon fans' favorite line...of course forgetting they just replaced Calhoun.

The ACC doesn't have to be #1 in TV revenue...just close enough. TV revenue is only a part of the total picture.

Failure is incorrect.
However,not being as good as they currently are is a much better description.
Having a tv package which 50% of the best is another story.

STOP BELIEVING THE TROLLS!

The ACC is not and will not be 50% less.

So how is Ollie working out?

The B10 is scheduled to be $40 million plus per school,The ACC is going to be $20million per school.Could it be ESPN is low-balling the ACC?

Nothing like reality!!!!

By the way who are the ACC football conference champs likely to play in the first round?