I’d bet Houston, Baylor, Tech, and TCU are quite fine with taking their television shares and having a somewhat regional conference. SMU has no nearby opponents and has at least 3 schools trying to get out of the conference they desperately gave up tons of money to join.

Doesn’t seem like a better situation to me.

Looks like op has some support lol

50th

(09-01-2023 05:42 PM)513Alex Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 02:56 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:42 PM)Realigned Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:35 PM)thrill_house Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 12:51 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  Why? The Big 12 didn't need SMU. Look at who the Big 12 picked up going forward. In the first round they took the top G5 schools in the country. Next they took Utah, ASU, UA, CU. The ACC, making about the same money, took Stanford and Cal. Two schools with below avg football and basketball (men's) programs who reside on the West Coast. They than took SMU who bought their way in, won't get paid for years, but are desperate enough to just move up they were willing to take a massive financial gamble. I'd say the Big 12 are in solid shape, the ACC still has a group (at the top) of the league looking to get out.

I would rather play SMU than every single program in the Big 12.

Except maybe UCF.

A biannual trip to Orlando to watch my old schools hired mercenaries play sportsball against another schools hired mercenaries parlayed with a Disney vacation would make the family happy.

ONE CONDITION: All of UCF's conference home games must be past October 15th. Our 6-month time shares run Mid-October to Mid-April.

Arizona State can join on those terms and conditions too. We have a lot of snowbirds in Phoenix.

I would guess that SMU would prefer to be in the Big 12 over the ACC.

Maybe for travel...but SMU can recruit students from high income areas along the Atlantic Coast. Academic and Olympic Sports wise...the ACC is better

Do you have any idea how many high income areas there are in Texas? It's about football. Jeez. All of this retarded faux elitism is hilarious.

Mr 513 area code...I lived in Tejas for 20 years
SMU student body comes primarily from high income areas...and yes from all those TX suburbs. They now can recruit more successfully to east coast areas.

(09-01-2023 07:08 PM)UIWElite Wrote:  I’d bet Houston, Baylor, Tech, and TCU are quite fine with taking their television shares and having a somewhat regional conference. SMU has no nearby opponents and has at least 3 schools trying to get out of the conference they desperately gave up tons of money to join.

Doesn’t seem like a better situation to me.

And a lot can change in 7 years...maybe the TV money dries up

(09-01-2023 05:37 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:39 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think you could argue SMU got a better conference than the B12 schools because the ACC "tent pole" members are still there for now (where as the Big12 will officially lose its UT/OU tent pole programs in 2024). That said---the two leagues are still fairly comparable---and its quite clear everyone in the Big12 (including the newbie members) have a MUCH better financial deal than SMU was forced to accept.

If they are gonna essentially be given an additional $200,000,000 towards athletics from the boosters to balance it all out that alone is $28,571,428.57 each year. Add in all other non media revenue and SMU will be fine. They are one of the few G5 type programs that could make this happen. Good for them!

Obviously with Houston, UCF, Cincy, and BYU getting the full deal they'll be more than good too. I am excited to see what you all can do with 5x-7x better funded athletic departments!

Huh? They already had $75m budgets. They'll be making $45m more in the Big 12 counting everything, or more like $20m more for SMU in the ACC. Still a big raise, but hardly 5x-7x.

They are going from about $7-$8 mil annually to about $45-$50 mil annually. Was talking more so media/cfp money vs what they were getting.

(09-01-2023 05:43 PM)513Alex Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 03:49 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I think the big 12 set themselves up to be raided one day by the acc by letting the acc take smu, cal and Stanford

Why do you think that?

Allowing the ACC to grab Cal and Stanford is not ideal for the Big 12. Yormark killed off the Pac when he had the chance, if he could have won the looming ACC war before it even started then I'm confident he'd have done so. Unfortunately, he had 3 problems:

1. The networks wouldn't pay for it. Any money he offered Calford would have to have come out of his schools' pockets.

2. His Presidents were probably not on board b/c of what Calford did to the Pac, how they left almost every school in the Big 12 hanging numerous times over the decades, the extremely poor institutional fits, and their below Big 12 average media rights values. Also, would you willingly dilute your vote on Athletic conference matters with a school like Cal or Stanford?

3. Calford were probably not on board b/c it makes way more sense to travel 3k miles for all road conference games than to travel 500-1500 for most of them.

SMU won the conference lottery for sure (or rather paid for a winning ticket)! Pretty cool that 7 of 8 SWC teams have power conference homes now. It should have never happened that half were on the outside and long time coming to remedy the fall (sorry, Rice!). Is the ACC a better conference? Debatable. I think not but it is a moot debate since both conferences inhabit the same non- SEC/ Big 10 space in the college sports landscape. Is the SMU in a better conference situation than the Big 12 Texas schools? Absolutely not. The Big 12 has traditional rivalries, easier travel and better stability. And of course there is the small detail that SMU gets no TV money until the 2030s.

(09-01-2023 05:34 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:26 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:20 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:14 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  You have to ask yourself. Why is the Big 12 more stable?
Why is the ACC not stable?

A conference is stable, in part, when members do not want to leave. The Ivy League is stable. The SEC is stable.

The ACC is is stable, and moreso today, because schools want out. The GOR is an impediment but will not stop the exit. What's left after all is said and done will not be a power conference:

Boston College
California
Duke
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Southern Methodist
Stanford
Syracuse
Wake Forest

So no one in the Big 12 would take a B1G or SEC invite if offered? They aren't stable because they all want to stay, they are stable because the SEC and B1G don't want them. The ACC has programs the SEC and B1G want.

That's the answer fwiw.

Or, you could look at it as "The big 12 lost their top 5 programs to the P2 and the ACC has lost zero, yet they're relatively equal in value". What will the ACC look like after losing even 3-4 schools? Better than the Pac, and they might just stick together, but they might be so weakened that the Big 12 hyenas will get to do some work on them after the Lions are done feeding.

You look at things, the way they stand at this very second. No ACC team is officially on the way out. Not one of them have invites. As of this moment not one of them is out of the GOR. If we start getting some announcements that FSU, Clemson, etc.. are on the way out it will shift. Until then you can't just automatically take them out because you want too. If you wanna play the "If" game. What if the Big 12 didn't lose their top 5 brands? Houston, Cincy, and UCF would be in the AAC. BYU would still be independent. The Pac 12 probably never breaks up. USC and UCLA probably don't join the B1G. Those things HAPPENED though. And we're not talking about what conference is better or not better in 3-4-5-6-7 whatever years from now. We're talking this very second with things as is, with no one having an invite or a way out at this point at all.

Adding some lower/mid tier P5 programs, and a bunch of G5 programs doesn't make you equal. The Big 12 will be fun and competitive but in NO world does it look equal with the ACC. That could change in the future, which I already addressed, but as this point the ACC is still superior. I put in the non cherry picked stats already. We can look at whatever other metrics you want too. The ACC is worth a lot more than what they are currently getting, if they were on the market today with their conference as is, they would be around 40-42 mil per team.

We can go team by team if you'd like but I'll just say this.

Clemson > Anyone in the Big 12.
FSU > Anyone in the Big 12.
Miami > Anyone in the Big 12.
UNC > Anyone in the Big 12.

Until those four are gone, it can't be equal regardless of what people say or want it to be. Without them pending whatever additions or reshaping happens things would change but we don't know what direction it would all go.

Lastly, if they lose JUST those four, then it would still be VERY appealing for WVU, Cincy, and UCF to join the ACC in that state. We can't just invent hypothetical futures here and claim it all as fact.

(09-01-2023 07:57 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 05:34 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:26 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:20 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:14 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  You have to ask yourself. Why is the Big 12 more stable?
Why is the ACC not stable?

A conference is stable, in part, when members do not want to leave. The Ivy League is stable. The SEC is stable.

The ACC is is stable, and moreso today, because schools want out. The GOR is an impediment but will not stop the exit. What's left after all is said and done will not be a power conference:

Boston College
California
Duke
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Southern Methodist
Stanford
Syracuse
Wake Forest

So no one in the Big 12 would take a B1G or SEC invite if offered? They aren't stable because they all want to stay, they are stable because the SEC and B1G don't want them. The ACC has programs the SEC and B1G want.

That's the answer fwiw.

Or, you could look at it as "The big 12 lost their top 5 programs to the P2 and the ACC has lost zero, yet they're relatively equal in value". What will the ACC look like after losing even 3-4 schools? Better than the Pac, and they might just stick together, but they might be so weakened that the Big 12 hyenas will get to do some work on them after the Lions are done feeding.

You look at things, the way they stand at this very second. No ACC team is officially on the way out. Not one of them have invites. As of this moment not one of them is out of the GOR. If we start getting some announcements that FSU, Clemson, etc.. are on the way out it will shift. Until then you can't just automatically take them out because you want too. If you wanna play the "If" game. What if the Big 12 didn't lose their top 5 brands? Houston, Cincy, and UCF would be in the AAC. BYU would still be independent. The Pac 12 probably never breaks up. USC and UCLA probably don't join the B1G. Those things HAPPENED though. And we're not talking about what conference is better or not better in 3-4-5-6-7 whatever years from now. We're talking this very second with things as is, with no one having an invite or a way out at this point at all.

Adding some lower/mid tier P5 programs, and a bunch of G5 programs doesn't make you equal. The Big 12 will be fun and competitive but in NO world does it look equal with the ACC. That could change in the future, which I already addressed, but as this point the ACC is still superior. I put in the non cherry picked stats already. We can look at whatever other metrics you want too. The ACC is worth a lot more than what they are currently getting, if they were on the market today with their conference as is, they would be around 40-42 mil per team.

We can go team by team if you'd like but I'll just say this.

Clemson > Anyone in the Big 12.
FSU > Anyone in the Big 12.
Miami > Anyone in the Big 12.
UNC > Anyone in the Big 12.

Until those four are gone, it can't be equal regardless of what people say or want it to be. Without them pending whatever additions or reshaping happens things would change but we don't know what direction it would all go.

Lastly, if they lose JUST those four, then it would still be VERY appealing for WVU, Cincy, and UCF to join the ACC in that state. We can't just invent hypothetical futures here and claim it all as fact.

Fiendishly, this read a lot like some prior Pac12 posts. True, the ACC is worth more than they are getting, especially the four listed.

The issue the conference is facing is semblance of instability that plagued the pac12. Media companies do not like instability. The fact that some of those four schools are threatening to leave inherently devalues the league.

Stanford, Cal and SMU are attempts by Phillips to get ahead of a dam that’s about to break. Band aids on a gaping hole.

If you’re not in the B1G and SEC, you’re out of the power structure.

It all started with ESPN and the BCS……..

(09-01-2023 08:10 PM)Acres Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 07:57 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 05:34 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:26 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:20 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  A conference is stable, in part, when members do not want to leave. The Ivy League is stable. The SEC is stable.

The ACC is is stable, and moreso today, because schools want out. The GOR is an impediment but will not stop the exit. What's left after all is said and done will not be a power conference:

Boston College
California
Duke
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Southern Methodist
Stanford
Syracuse
Wake Forest

So no one in the Big 12 would take a B1G or SEC invite if offered? They aren't stable because they all want to stay, they are stable because the SEC and B1G don't want them. The ACC has programs the SEC and B1G want.

That's the answer fwiw.

Or, you could look at it as "The big 12 lost their top 5 programs to the P2 and the ACC has lost zero, yet they're relatively equal in value". What will the ACC look like after losing even 3-4 schools? Better than the Pac, and they might just stick together, but they might be so weakened that the Big 12 hyenas will get to do some work on them after the Lions are done feeding.

You look at things, the way they stand at this very second. No ACC team is officially on the way out. Not one of them have invites. As of this moment not one of them is out of the GOR. If we start getting some announcements that FSU, Clemson, etc.. are on the way out it will shift. Until then you can't just automatically take them out because you want too. If you wanna play the "If" game. What if the Big 12 didn't lose their top 5 brands? Houston, Cincy, and UCF would be in the AAC. BYU would still be independent. The Pac 12 probably never breaks up. USC and UCLA probably don't join the B1G. Those things HAPPENED though. And we're not talking about what conference is better or not better in 3-4-5-6-7 whatever years from now. We're talking this very second with things as is, with no one having an invite or a way out at this point at all.

Adding some lower/mid tier P5 programs, and a bunch of G5 programs doesn't make you equal. The Big 12 will be fun and competitive but in NO world does it look equal with the ACC. That could change in the future, which I already addressed, but as this point the ACC is still superior. I put in the non cherry picked stats already. We can look at whatever other metrics you want too. The ACC is worth a lot more than what they are currently getting, if they were on the market today with their conference as is, they would be around 40-42 mil per team.

We can go team by team if you'd like but I'll just say this.

Clemson > Anyone in the Big 12.
FSU > Anyone in the Big 12.
Miami > Anyone in the Big 12.
UNC > Anyone in the Big 12.

Until those four are gone, it can't be equal regardless of what people say or want it to be. Without them pending whatever additions or reshaping happens things would change but we don't know what direction it would all go.

Lastly, if they lose JUST those four, then it would still be VERY appealing for WVU, Cincy, and UCF to join the ACC in that state. We can't just invent hypothetical futures here and claim it all as fact.

Fiendishly, this read a lot like some prior Pac12 posts. Carry on.

Blah, blah, blah... I have been 100% supportive of the Big 12, but I am not going to sit here and say that Houston, Cincy, BYU, UCF, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and Arizona State additions to the Big 12 members that couldn't get a lifeline when Texas and Oklahoma left (And yes, they were looking for a way out) is on par with the ACC who have upwards of 6-8 teams that could be moved to the SEC/B1G and bring good or even more value to those conferences. We'll see how it all goes.

(09-01-2023 08:10 PM)Acres Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 07:57 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 05:34 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:26 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:20 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  A conference is stable, in part, when members do not want to leave. The Ivy League is stable. The SEC is stable.

The ACC is is stable, and moreso today, because schools want out. The GOR is an impediment but will not stop the exit. What's left after all is said and done will not be a power conference:

Boston College
California
Duke
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Southern Methodist
Stanford
Syracuse
Wake Forest

So no one in the Big 12 would take a B1G or SEC invite if offered? They aren't stable because they all want to stay, they are stable because the SEC and B1G don't want them. The ACC has programs the SEC and B1G want.

That's the answer fwiw.

Or, you could look at it as "The big 12 lost their top 5 programs to the P2 and the ACC has lost zero, yet they're relatively equal in value". What will the ACC look like after losing even 3-4 schools? Better than the Pac, and they might just stick together, but they might be so weakened that the Big 12 hyenas will get to do some work on them after the Lions are done feeding.

You look at things, the way they stand at this very second. No ACC team is officially on the way out. Not one of them have invites. As of this moment not one of them is out of the GOR. If we start getting some announcements that FSU, Clemson, etc.. are on the way out it will shift. Until then you can't just automatically take them out because you want too. If you wanna play the "If" game. What if the Big 12 didn't lose their top 5 brands? Houston, Cincy, and UCF would be in the AAC. BYU would still be independent. The Pac 12 probably never breaks up. USC and UCLA probably don't join the B1G. Those things HAPPENED though. And we're not talking about what conference is better or not better in 3-4-5-6-7 whatever years from now. We're talking this very second with things as is, with no one having an invite or a way out at this point at all.

Adding some lower/mid tier P5 programs, and a bunch of G5 programs doesn't make you equal. The Big 12 will be fun and competitive but in NO world does it look equal with the ACC. That could change in the future, which I already addressed, but as this point the ACC is still superior. I put in the non cherry picked stats already. We can look at whatever other metrics you want too. The ACC is worth a lot more than what they are currently getting, if they were on the market today with their conference as is, they would be around 40-42 mil per team.

We can go team by team if you'd like but I'll just say this.

Clemson > Anyone in the Big 12.
FSU > Anyone in the Big 12.
Miami > Anyone in the Big 12.
UNC > Anyone in the Big 12.

Until those four are gone, it can't be equal regardless of what people say or want it to be. Without them pending whatever additions or reshaping happens things would change but we don't know what direction it would all go.

Lastly, if they lose JUST those four, then it would still be VERY appealing for WVU, Cincy, and UCF to join the ACC in that state. We can't just invent hypothetical futures here and claim it all as fact.

Fiendishly, this read a lot like some prior Pac12 posts. True, the ACC is worth more than they are getting, especially the four listed.

The issue the conference is facing is semblance of instability that plagued the pac12. Media companies do not like instability. The fact that some of those four schools are threatening to leave inherently devalues the league.

Stanford, Cal and SMU are attempts by Phillips to get ahead of a dam that’s about to break.

Replaying to your edit since I quoted your last post pre-edit:

Yes I agree. If those programs leave things will change. I do still think WVU, Cincy, and UCF would be interested in that ACC depending on who is left. Not just regionally, but Cincy and WVU would literally be in the Big East+++ minus Rutgers. The rivalries they get back, so on and so forth. As long as the money is comparable then, I could see them being interested not saying they would 100% go.

(09-01-2023 07:57 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 05:34 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:26 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:20 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:14 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  You have to ask yourself. Why is the Big 12 more stable?
Why is the ACC not stable?

A conference is stable, in part, when members do not want to leave. The Ivy League is stable. The SEC is stable.

The ACC is is stable, and moreso today, because schools want out. The GOR is an impediment but will not stop the exit. What's left after all is said and done will not be a power conference:

Boston College
California
Duke
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Southern Methodist
Stanford
Syracuse
Wake Forest

So no one in the Big 12 would take a B1G or SEC invite if offered? They aren't stable because they all want to stay, they are stable because the SEC and B1G don't want them. The ACC has programs the SEC and B1G want.

That's the answer fwiw.

Or, you could look at it as "The big 12 lost their top 5 programs to the P2 and the ACC has lost zero, yet they're relatively equal in value". What will the ACC look like after losing even 3-4 schools? Better than the Pac, and they might just stick together, but they might be so weakened that the Big 12 hyenas will get to do some work on them after the Lions are done feeding.

You look at things, the way they stand at this very second. No ACC team is officially on the way out. Not one of them have invites. As of this moment not one of them is out of the GOR. If we start getting some announcements that FSU, Clemson, etc.. are on the way out it will shift. Until then you can't just automatically take them out because you want too. If you wanna play the "If" game. What if the Big 12 didn't lose their top 5 brands? Houston, Cincy, and UCF would be in the AAC. BYU would still be independent. The Pac 12 probably never breaks up. USC and UCLA probably don't join the B1G. Those things HAPPENED though. And we're not talking about what conference is better or not better in 3-4-5-6-7 whatever years from now. We're talking this very second with things as is, with no one having an invite or a way out at this point at all.

Adding some lower/mid tier P5 programs, and a bunch of G5 programs doesn't make you equal. The Big 12 will be fun and competitive but in NO world does it look equal with the ACC. That could change in the future, which I already addressed, but as this point the ACC is still superior. I put in the non cherry picked stats already. We can look at whatever other metrics you want too. The ACC is worth a lot more than what they are currently getting, if they were on the market today with their conference as is, they would be around 40-42 mil per team.

We can go team by team if you'd like but I'll just say this.

Clemson > Anyone in the Big 12.
FSU > Anyone in the Big 12.
Miami > Anyone in the Big 12.
UNC > Anyone in the Big 12.

Until those four are gone, it can't be equal regardless of what people say or want it to be. Without them pending whatever additions or reshaping happens things would change but we don't know what direction it would all go.

Lastly, if they lose JUST those four, then it would still be VERY appealing for WVU, Cincy, and UCF to join the ACC in that state. We can't just invent hypothetical futures here and claim it all as fact.

You can look at them that way if you like, but I prefer to live in the real world. And over here, the ACC is losing a bunch of schools in the coming years.

The ACC is #3 until…well…you know.

(09-01-2023 12:33 PM)513Alex Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 12:07 PM)CoastalVANDAL Wrote:  Weird how that worked out.

BS both conferences are pretty similar. Neither has an advantage over the other. SMU gets to pony up an exit fee of 17 million, then lose approximately 10 million a year vs. staying in the AAC. What is it....9 years with no TV $$$? That's a terrible deal. Feel free to prove your point vs an opinion.

Some back of napkin math.

At $10 m a year in AAc (I think it's actually 7), over the ACC contract that's $130 m + the exit fee. Or $147 million.

0 for 9 years hurts but a payout of $38 m (2022 numbers) x 4 is 152.

So even if the ACC payout is stagnant, SMU comes out ahead by $5 m. Plus more visibility, recruiting ease, etc

(09-01-2023 07:21 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  Looks like op has some support lol

The sad thing about that statement is the fact he has to remind everyone that SMU is in the Dallas metroplex.

(09-01-2023 09:29 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 07:21 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  Looks like op has some support lol

The sad thing about that statement is the fact he has to remind everyone that SMU is in the Dallas metroplex.

Well its probably #1 in lacrosse and soccer!

(09-01-2023 09:29 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The sad thing about that statement is the fact he has to remind everyone that SMU is in the Dallas metroplex.

SMU is not better than fifth or sixth in the metroplex by fan base:

Behind:
- Texas
- Texas A&M
- Oklahoma
- TCU
- Texas Tech

Ahead of:
- Baylor (maybe)
- Arkansas
- North Texas
- UTA
- Rice

(09-01-2023 01:23 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The ACC and Big 12 rivalry has begun

Like arguing over who has the best seat on the Titanic. If you’re not in the P2 does it really matter?

Both The ACC and The Big 12 will get one CFP bid most seasons with perhaps a 2nd bid in an exceptional season.

Sad reality of the new P2 world

(09-01-2023 09:17 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 07:57 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 05:34 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:26 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 01:20 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  A conference is stable, in part, when members do not want to leave. The Ivy League is stable. The SEC is stable.

The ACC is is stable, and moreso today, because schools want out. The GOR is an impediment but will not stop the exit. What's left after all is said and done will not be a power conference:

Boston College
California
Duke
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Southern Methodist
Stanford
Syracuse
Wake Forest

So no one in the Big 12 would take a B1G or SEC invite if offered? They aren't stable because they all want to stay, they are stable because the SEC and B1G don't want them. The ACC has programs the SEC and B1G want.

That's the answer fwiw.

Or, you could look at it as "The big 12 lost their top 5 programs to the P2 and the ACC has lost zero, yet they're relatively equal in value". What will the ACC look like after losing even 3-4 schools? Better than the Pac, and they might just stick together, but they might be so weakened that the Big 12 hyenas will get to do some work on them after the Lions are done feeding.

You look at things, the way they stand at this very second. No ACC team is officially on the way out. Not one of them have invites. As of this moment not one of them is out of the GOR. If we start getting some announcements that FSU, Clemson, etc.. are on the way out it will shift. Until then you can't just automatically take them out because you want too. If you wanna play the "If" game. What if the Big 12 didn't lose their top 5 brands? Houston, Cincy, and UCF would be in the AAC. BYU would still be independent. The Pac 12 probably never breaks up. USC and UCLA probably don't join the B1G. Those things HAPPENED though. And we're not talking about what conference is better or not better in 3-4-5-6-7 whatever years from now. We're talking this very second with things as is, with no one having an invite or a way out at this point at all.

Adding some lower/mid tier P5 programs, and a bunch of G5 programs doesn't make you equal. The Big 12 will be fun and competitive but in NO world does it look equal with the ACC. That could change in the future, which I already addressed, but as this point the ACC is still superior. I put in the non cherry picked stats already. We can look at whatever other metrics you want too. The ACC is worth a lot more than what they are currently getting, if they were on the market today with their conference as is, they would be around 40-42 mil per team.

We can go team by team if you'd like but I'll just say this.

Clemson > Anyone in the Big 12.
FSU > Anyone in the Big 12.
Miami > Anyone in the Big 12.
UNC > Anyone in the Big 12.

Until those four are gone, it can't be equal regardless of what people say or want it to be. Without them pending whatever additions or reshaping happens things would change but we don't know what direction it would all go.

Lastly, if they lose JUST those four, then it would still be VERY appealing for WVU, Cincy, and UCF to join the ACC in that state. We can't just invent hypothetical futures here and claim it all as fact.

You an look at them that way if you like, but I prefer to live in the real world. And over here, the ACC is losing a bunch of schools in the coming years.

The real world lol. You are sitting here living in some futuristic version. The world you live in doesn't exist.

The world that DOES exist is Clemson, FSU, Miami, Virginia, Virginia Tech, UNC, NC State, and so on are 100% in the ACC with no exit plan. No current way out of the ACC. No SEC or B1G invite. No plan to go indy while they wait. Not date set to leave. Nothing. Sure we expect them to leave at some point. Could be 2 years or it could be 5+. There is no timeline yet. That's the world I live in. When those programs leave, the Big 12 will be better, until then the ACC is #3.

Also from your futuristic world, can you look back and tell me the winning lottery numbers for the upcoming Mega Millions and the Power Ball? Thanks in advance! The current date here is 1 September 2023.