Search results

Those comments were regarding the pay gap difference between SEC/BIG10 and ACC. The only comments made in that article about BIG12 was that they get to renegotiate a new deal way earlier than us - which obviously is a major positive for their deal. It also doesn't/shouldn't affect us literally...

Long term the Big12 is better only because the ACC is going to fall apart. If all the teams remained as it is today, the ACC is better.

You used past numbers that included Texas and OU in the revenue figures to show that Big12 has higher payouts. That is an incredibly flawed argument because currently the ACC has not lost any top program, and Big12 lost their top 2. Whether or not the new deal was in effect or not those two were...

…and then Big12 proceeded to lose OU and Texas lol. And replaced them with G5 programs and some mediocre PAC programs whose best offer was only $20M WITH Oregon/Washington… So tell me what the ACC is projected to distribute with CFP expansion? As of TODAY, where the ACC has not lose any school...

The $50M is based on projections and is likely the figure towards like 2030. We’re profkected higher. Regardless even if Big12 made $50M this year why would that be $15M more than us? When we got $40M last year, it’s likely to increase by at least $3M, and there is unequal distribution model now...

Literally, as things stand today, yes. Big12 gets $31.7M/school (depending if Fox is fully paying for all 4 of the PAC additions, or just 2 of them), while the ACC paid $39M/schools last year - and we are now going into unequal revenue distribution. So idk where you're $15M comment is coming...

lol what

Eh what I've seen on here is mostly saying it's a little weird and that something clearly happened that didn't sit right, making him not a 100% clear cut take right this second, but that we're still recruiting him and maybe even still want him... Basically that it's fluid Especially since the CB...