ACC Record Revenue Distribution

[RightSaidFred]

Sorry to hear that you have a fat slop wife.

And, no, we were not formally and unconditionally "invited" to join the SEC, and our admin did not "turn it down". Before the SEC offered Arkansas, they called Tad Foote and gave him some ridiculous 48-hour window, which they knew we could not do, since Tad did not have the unilateral power to join a conference. He had to set up a BOT meeting first, and the SEC did not bother to put together any sort of due diligence or a presentation that would allow our BOT to evaluate joining a conference.

When Miami could not possibly meet the "48 hour take-it-or-leave-it" proposition, the SEC went directly to Arkansas without any similar time limitations or demands.

I don’t doubt that’s the story you heard...but come on, man. Does that pass the common sense test for you?

If they wanted Arkansas, why would they come to us first? Why not just go direct to Arkansas?

If they came to us first, it’s because they wanted Miami.

Again, not calling you a liar and I believe you’re repeating what you heard, but the more likely scenario is that the SEC invited us, Tad Foote ****ed it up, and he invented/spread that 48 hour bull**** story to make himself look better.

Tad Foote was a ******* moron, after all.

 

[No_Fly_Zone]

The answer is always “no” if you don’t ask.

You can tell who on here has a hot wife, and who settled for the fat slop. Gotta sack up, believe in yourself, and ask for what’s owed to you in life, people.

Have some faith in Miami, man. We are still one of the BIGGEST brands in all of college sports. SEC would be stupid not to take us. $$$ talks, and we add to their product value.

I would say they need us more than we need them. We bring something they don’t already have.

As for Florida ****blocking anything...**** that. We all know Alabama runs that conference. What they say, goes. Florida ain’t blocking **** if the other members want us.

And by the way, folks...we HAVE been invited to the SEC before. Our numbnuts admin turned if down, but we could have joined. That’s a fact.

1. Your analogy sucks and you appear misinformed on how conferences add member schools. The total SEC members schools are set by the CEOs of the SEC (one from each school), and then a 75% vote is required to formally extend membership to any other school. On your analogy, I only had to convince my hot wife to marry me, not 75% of her friends/family/sorority.

2. UM was never formally invited to the SEC, but I understand your historical reference point. I assume you are talking about 1990, when the SEC voted to authorize expansion. At that time the SEC identified six schools as "potential" members: Texas, Texas A&M, Forfeit State, Miami, South Carolina and Arkansas. Arkansas was the top target because they wanted to raid the SWC, and not surprisingly they were the first team in that summer. That left 1 spot open. The Texas schools were threatened by the state legislature with retaliation if they left (because it would kill the SWC), so they backed off. F$U was the next school, but they ****ed off the SEC by flirting with the ACC. That left USC(e) and UM. USC(e) had a preemptive vote (before a formal membership was ever extended) approving membership. At that point, Miami went for the Big East (allegedly to help our basketball program, of all things), USC(e) joined the SEC, and the rest is history. Miami was apparently choice five of six, but based on the circumstances UM probably could have joined the SEC at the time.

That said, this all happened over 30 years ago and it is pretty irrelevant to whether UM could join the SEC today. A lot has changed.

3. About 10 years ago when the SEC expanded to 14 schools, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, and Kentucky absolutely formed a blockade to any school from their respective state being offered membership. And they were vocal about it. Because of the 75% majority rule for voting in new members, those 4 members were effectively able to defeat any vote to bring in UM, F$U, GT, and Clemson. As a result, TAMU and Missouri were brought in. Although there are now 14 teams, the rumor around the SEC is that TAMU has aligned itself with the Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, and Kentucky "blockade" in order to keep UT (especially) and other Texas schools from ever joining the SEC (not that it even matters, because those 4 schools alone are enough to block UM). In other words, UM isn't getting in now for political reasons.

4. As far as $$$ is concerned and the SEC needing UM more than UM needs them, the SEC is the most profitable conference in all of collegiate sports. Meanwhile, the ACC's revenue distribution per school was even less than the PAC-12. The SEC may someday expand beyond 14 schools, but it likely will be of a greater financial benefit to the schools joining than to the conference itself.

 

[NC_Canes_11]

There is zero reason for the SEC to ask Miami to join. They already have the biggest tv deal and they already own our recruiting footprint. Not to mention we aren’t competing for National titles. It’s a non starter.

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

Does anyone actually think that Alabama, Georgia, LSU, or Florida, want an SEC Miami competing for recruits?

WrongSaidFred needs to go back to wearing mesh see-through shirts and prancing around like a prison pass-around on stage

 

[RightSaidFred]

1. Your analogy sucks and you appear misinformed on how conferences add member schools. The total SEC members schools are set by the CEOs of the SEC (one from each school), and then a 75% vote is required to formally extend membership to any other school. On your analogy, I only had to convince my hot wife to marry me, not 75% of her friends/family/sorority.

2. UM was never formally invited to the SEC, but I understand your historical reference point. I assume you are talking about 1990, when the SEC voted to authorize expansion. At that time the SEC identified six schools as "potential" members: Texas, Texas A&M, Forfeit State, Miami, South Carolina and Arkansas. Arkansas was the top target because they wanted to raid the SWC, and not surprisingly they were the first team in that summer. That left 1 spot open. The Texas schools were threatened by the state legislature with retaliation if they left (because it would kill the SWC), so they backed off. F$U was the next school, but they ****ed off the SEC by flirting with the ACC. That left USC(e) and UM. USC(e) had a preemptive vote (before a formal membership was ever extended) approving membership. At that point, Miami went for the Big East (allegedly to help our basketball program, of all things), USC(e) joined the SEC, and the rest is history. Miami was apparently choice five of six, but based on the circumstances UM probably could have joined the SEC at the time.

That said, this all happened over 30 years ago and it is pretty irrelevant to whether UM could join the SEC today. A lot has changed.

3. About 10 years ago when the SEC expanded to 14 schools, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, and Kentucky absolutely formed a blockade to any school from their respective state being offered membership. And they were vocal about it. Because of the 75% majority rule for voting in new members, those 4 members were effectively able to defeat any vote to bring in UM, F$U, GT, and Clemson. As a result, TAMU and Missouri were brought in. Although there are now 14 teams, the rumor around the SEC is that TAMU has aligned itself with the Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, and Kentucky "blockade" in order to keep UT (especially) and other Texas schools from ever joining the SEC (not that it even matters, because those 4 schools alone are enough to block UM). In other words, UM isn't getting in now for political reasons.

4. As far as $$$ is concerned and the SEC needing UM more than UM needs them, the SEC is the most profitable conference in all of collegiate sports. Meanwhile, the ACC's revenue distribution per school was even less than the PAC-12. The SEC may someday expand beyond 14 schools, but it likely will be of a greater financial benefit to the schools joining than to the conference itself.

1. Thanks for laying out (some of) the technicalities, but they're not relevant. None preclude or disqualify Miami from joining the SEC. Miami can convince 75% - it's called politics. It's up to the Miami leadership to make the backroom deals and make it happen. Again, if you don't ask, the answer is always "no."

2. Yep

3. If what happened 30 years ago (when we could have joined the SEC) is irrelevant, then so is what happened 10 years ago. The balance of power in the SEC has changed, as has the leadership at each of the universities you mention.

4. If Miami adds more value than the average, middle-of-the road SEC team, then we would be increasing the distributed revenue per school. According to one article, the middle would be either Tennessee or South Carolina. We draw greater national attention than either of those teams. So you could make a strong case that we would be a financial benefit to the SEC.

 

[RightSaidFred]

Does anyone actually think that Alabama, Georgia, LSU, or Florida, want an SEC Miami competing for recruits?

WrongSaidFred needs to go back to wearing mesh see-through shirts and prancing around like a prison pass-around on stage

Recruiting is one of the biggest reasons they would want us. That, and the TV matchups. Alabama vs Miami is going to be watched by a huge audience. Why? Because it's good for television. A lot more people will watch this than South Carolina vs Tennessee.

You really think Alabama is worried about recruiting against Miami? What a joke. They have zero fear of us, it's just how it is. They would probably view it as an advantage to get to play games in South Florida each year, as would the rest of the conference.

And you guys don't think ESPN would like to have Miami vs Alabama matchups every year? Would be great for their ratings. And who do you think is paying for that big SEC contract y'all keep chiming on about?

If you really don't think this is possible, you're just being small minded. It could absolutely happen. The reason it hasn't is because Miami hasn't pursued it, because we think the ACC is a good fit academically and culturally. That's all it is.

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

Recruiting is one of the biggest reasons they would want us. That, and the TV matchups. Alabama vs Miami is going to be watched by a huge audience. Why? Because it's good for television. A lot more people will watch this than South Carolina vs Tennessee.

You really think Alabama is worried about recruiting against Miami? What a joke. They have zero fear of us, it's just how it is. They would probably view it as an advantage to get to play games in South Florida each year, as would the rest of the conference.

And you guys don't think ESPN would like to have Miami vs Alabama matchups every year? Would be great for their ratings. And who do you think is paying for that big SEC contract y'all keep chiming on about?

If you really don't think this is possible, you're just being small minded. It could absolutely happen. The reason it hasn't is because Miami hasn't pursued it, because we think the ACC is a good fit academically and culturally. That's all it is.

You’re wrong. They don’t need us for recruiting. They’re doing just fine with us on the outside looking in.

It’s alternate reality time, if you think that there is any way that Miami would be allowed into the SEC.

Also, you completely contradicted yourself in your own post:

”Recruiting is one of the biggest reasons they would want us.”

vs

“You really think Alabama is worried about recruiting against Miami?”

 

[RightSaidFred]

You’re wrong. They don’t need us for recruiting. They’re doing just fine with us on the outside looking in.

It’s alternate reality time, if you think that there is any way that Miami would be allowed into the SEC.

Also, you completely contradicted yourself in your own post:

”Recruiting is one of the biggest reasons they would want us.”

vs

“You really think Alabama is worried about recruiting against Miami?”

That's not contradictory at all, try to use your head.

And of course, what was I thinking. Alabama ONLY recruits what they need. They never take kids just to stack chips, oh no. They won't take one single five-star unless they absolutely must.

Come on, buddy.

 

[JG14]

I don't think Donna would have ever allowed it. I think I'd like UM to join simply to get the turds panties in a bunch

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

That's not contradictory at all, try to use your head.

And of course, what was I thinking. Alabama ONLY recruits what they need. They never take kids just to stack chips, oh no. They won't take one single five-star unless they absolutely must.

Come on, buddy.

Aren’t you the on-campus stadium guy?

 

[RightSaidFred]

Aren’t you the on-campus stadium guy?

Well I don't have a t-shirt and I'm sure not the only one who believes this.... but yeah, I think we should have a stadium of our own, absolutely.

 

[Macca]

Does anyone actually think that Alabama, Georgia, LSU, or Florida, want an SEC Miami competing for recruits?

WrongSaidFred needs to go back to wearing mesh see-through shirts and prancing around like a prison pass-around on stage

I see your point, I'll leave the prison thing alone. Your point is completely valid... Or, Miami becomes the new Ole Miss. Every time LSU, Georgia and Alabama step out of line, Miami gets bludgeoned with sanctions. Small private university in gigantic state school league may not be the best fit. The ACC blows, the BOT collects checks. Lets work on not being the Mizzou of the SEC and win the conference. My last statement can be refuted in a nano second because all of our recruits get picked of by SEC donut shops. It is a viscous cycle!

 

[No_Fly_Zone]

1. Thanks for laying out (some of) the technicalities, but they're not relevant. None preclude or disqualify Miami from joining the SEC. Miami can convince 75% - it's called politics. It's up to the Miami leadership to make the backroom deals and make it happen. Again, if you don't ask, the answer is always "no."

2. Yep

3. If what happened 30 years ago (when we could have joined the SEC) is irrelevant, then so is what happened 10 years ago. The balance of power in the SEC has changed, as has the leadership at each of the universities you mention.

4. If Miami adds more value than the average, middle-of-the road SEC team, then we would be increasing the distributed revenue per school. According to one article, the middle would be either Tennessee or South Carolina. We draw greater national attention than either of those teams. So you could make a strong case that we would be a financial benefit to the SEC.

1. You are welcome. But, the SEC By-laws regarding the admission of new members are absolutely relevant to any discussion on whether UM could/would be admitted to the SEC. It's arguably the most relevant fact brought to this discussion. To join the SEC, UM would need at least 11/14 SEC schools to support UM's admission. Florida is an automatic no. Georgia doesn't want us in the SEC. And I sincerely doubt Alabama and TAMU want us in the SEC. And the politics of the situation is the reason we won't be getting asked to join any time soon, not the path to getting in.

2. Agreed.

3. It's not a black and white situation. I'd say events 10 years ago are decidedly more relevant to what's possible today than events 30 years ago. Things have certainly changed in those 10 years, sure, but the college football landscape today (and UM's place in it) is much more similar to where it was 10 years ago versus 30 years ago. And while the balance of power may have changed some in those 10 years, all that matters is whether at least 4/14 SEC schools don't want UM in the SEC. Alabama can hold all the power they want, but at the end of the day they have the same 1 vote every other school has, and it isn't like they (or any other SEC school) are leaving the SEC over UM's admissions (or non-admission).

4. There is some truth to this, but you are discounting what Miami's inclusion into the SEC could potentially do to the competitiveness (and profitability) of some of the schools above Miami. It would be incrementally more difficult for schools like Alabama, LSU, UGA, Auburn, and UF to keep claiming "SEC, SEC, SEC" as their recruiting pitch in South Florida once they let UM in. You incidentally alluded to this in your first post in this thread when you said being in the ACC was "bad for recruiting" compared to being in the SEC. If that's true, why would any of these schools want to help our recruiting pitch for the same South Florida talent they are all trying to get their hands on every year?

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

1. You are welcome. But, the SEC By-laws regarding the admission of new members are absolutely relevant to any discussion on whether UM could/would be admitted to the SEC. It's arguably the most relevant fact brought to this discussion. To join the SEC, UM would need at least 11/14 SEC schools to support UM's admission. Florida is an automatic no. Georgia doesn't want us in the SEC. And I sincerely doubt Alabama and TAMU want us in the SEC. And the politics of the situation is the reason we won't be getting asked to join any time soon, not the path to getting in.

2. Agreed.

3. It's not a black and white situation. I'd say events 10 years ago are decidedly more relevant to what's possible today than events 30 years ago. Things have certainly changed in those 10 years, sure, but the college football landscape today (and UM's place in it) is much more similar to where it was 10 years ago versus 30 years ago. And while the balance of power may have changed some in those 10 years, all that matters is whether at least 4/14 SEC schools don't want UM in the SEC. Alabama can hold all the power they want, but at the end of the day they have the same 1 vote every other school has, and it isn't like they (or any other SEC school) are leaving the SEC over UM's admissions (or non-admission).

4. There is some truth to this, but you are discounting what Miami's inclusion into the SEC could potentially do to the competitiveness (and profitability) of some of the schools above Miami. It would be incrementally more difficult for schools like Alabama, LSU, UGA, Auburn, and UF to keep claiming "SEC, SEC, SEC" as their recruiting pitch in South Florida once they let UM in. You incidentally alluded to this in your first post in this thread when you said being in the ACC was "bad for recruiting" compared to being in the SEC. If that's true, why would any of these schools want to help our recruiting pitch for the same South Florida talent they are all trying to get their hands on every year?

Rational points - but he won’t consider a single one. Again this is the guy that argues for an on-campus stadium. Things that are literally impossible are his specialty.

I have a feeling he realizes that there is zero chance Miami would get invited into the SEC.

It’s just his way to shlt on Miami, like he always does.

It’s a no lose for him, he can tout the SEC, and say Miami sucks because they won’t join the SEC when there’s no way Miami would ever join the SEC because they’re not getting invited.

 

[RightSaidFred]

1. You are welcome. But, the SEC By-laws regarding the admission of new members are absolutely relevant to any discussion on whether UM could/would be admitted to the SEC. It's arguably the most relevant fact brought to this discussion. To join the SEC, UM would need at least 11/14 SEC schools to support UM's admission. Florida is an automatic no. Georgia doesn't want us in the SEC. And I sincerely doubt Alabama and TAMU want us in the SEC. And the politics of the situation is the reason we won't be getting asked to join any time soon, not the path to getting in.

2. Agreed.

3. It's not a black and white situation. I'd say events 10 years ago are decidedly more relevant to what's possible today than events 30 years ago. Things have certainly changed in those 10 years, sure, but the college football landscape today (and UM's place in it) is much more similar to where it was 10 years ago versus 30 years ago. And while the balance of power may have changed some in those 10 years, all that matters is whether at least 4/14 SEC schools don't want UM in the SEC. Alabama can hold all the power they want, but at the end of the day they have the same 1 vote every other school has, and it isn't like they (or any other SEC school) are leaving the SEC over UM's admissions (or non-admission).

4. There is some truth to this, but you are discounting what Miami's inclusion into the SEC could potentially do to the competitiveness (and profitability) of some of the schools above Miami. It would be incrementally more difficult for schools like Alabama, LSU, UGA, Auburn, and UF to keep claiming "SEC, SEC, SEC" as their recruiting pitch in South Florida once they let UM in. You incidentally alluded to this in your first post in this thread when you said being in the ACC was "bad for recruiting" compared to being in the SEC. If that's true, why would any of these schools want to help our recruiting pitch for the same South Florida talent they are all trying to get their hands on every year?

Fair enough, but your whole argument (points 1 and 3) rests on the assumption that Florida and Georgia (and possibly others) will block Miami's admittance to the SEC under any scenario. Why is that necessarily the case? What recent evidence do we have for that? Just because that was the rumor 10 years ago does not mean it holds today.

I think we're oversimplifying things if we say that.

You went in to the weeds and brought up SEC by-laws, so I'll go in to the weeds as well and mention that Florida and Georgia are both state schools, and so they are accountable to the state and they can be pressured by the legislature to do things they otherwise wouldn't. Even if Florida was a hard "no," (which I don't assume is true), all it would take is the right political pressure to flip them to a "yes."

That's why Baylor and Texas are attached at the hip, and neither can join a conference if the other doesn't come along. It's not because Texas wants that. It's because Baylor has friends in high places in the Texas state government, and so UT is basically forced to comply.

Not saying that would happen. Just saying it's more complicated than "Florida would never allow Miami to join the SEC"... there are plenty of moving parts and buttons that could be pushed if this was something Miami really wanted.

There is always horse trading that can happen. There are always backroom deals that can be made. Florida and Georgia might be obstacles, but I don't believe for a minute that those obstacles can't be overcome with some good old fashioned politics.

 

[RightSaidFred]

Rational points - but he won’t consider a single one. Again this is the guy that argues for an on-campus stadium. Things that are literally impossible are his specialty.

I have a feeling he realizes that there is zero chance Miami would get invited into the SEC.

It’s just his way to shlt on Miami, like he always does.

It’s a no lose for him, he can tout the SEC, and say Miami sucks because they won’t join the SEC when there’s no way Miami would ever join the SEC because they’re not getting invited.

You have a vivid imagination. I guess I could point out that I said "stadium," not "on campus stadium," but I'm sure that nuance would be lost on you.

 

[Handsome Squidbum]

I don’t doubt that’s the story you heard...but come on, man. Does that pass the common sense test for you?

If they wanted Arkansas, why would they come to us first? Why not just go direct to Arkansas?

If they came to us first, it’s because they wanted Miami.

Again, not calling you a liar and I believe you’re repeating what you heard, but the more likely scenario is that the SEC invited us, Tad Foote ****ed it up, and he invented/spread that 48 hour bull**** story to make himself look better.

Tad Foote was a ******* moron, after all.

I don't get the obsession with wanting to join the SEC. The overall conference revenue isn't that relevant, what matters is the payout per school.

Big Ten Daily: Big Ten Led All Conferences in 2020 Revenue

The Big Ten's total revenue dropped in 2020, but it was still about $40 million higher than the SEC. The conference lowered payouts to its 12 longest-standing members by about $1.3 million per school to $54.3 million.

www.si.com

School Payouts​

• Big Ten: $54.3 million
• SEC: $45.5 million
• Big 12: $37 to $40.5 million
• Pac-12: $33.6 million
• ACC: $30.9 to $37 million

"The 10-team Big 12 reported $409 million, down by $30 million from 2019. Its payouts ranged from $37 million to $40.5 million, a decline of more than $1 million per school. The conference operated at a slight deficit for the year because of issues related to the pandemic, and it used some of its reserves to keep school payouts from being even lower, a spokesman said.


[The ACC] increased payouts ranged from $30.9 million to $37 million, plus $10.8 million to Notre Dame. Despite the revenue increase, the ACC reported a nearly $3 million annual operating deficit. Conference spokesmen attributed that to the timing of supplemental payments to schools that were made after central-office costs fell mainly due to the cancellation of spring 2020 championships. They said conference reserves were not impacted."
---

Long story short, despite a higher overall revenue than the Big 12, the ACC was bleeding money AND still came in last for payouts per school. The Big 12 numbers also don't factor in the third tier rights, which schools keep for themselves- I think for Texas and Oklahoma adds another 6-7 million, which would actually put them AHEAD of the SEC payouts. There aren't a lot of schools that could make a legit play for the spanish speaking market besides Miami so we could make some lucrative side deals (which you couldn't do in the SEC). Big12 is a much better academic conference and you don't have to deal with a coach like Saban who gets his balls stroked daily by the NCAA commissioner.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

---

Long story short, despite a higher overall revenue than the Big 12, the ACC was bleeding money AND still came in last for payouts per school. The Big 12 numbers also don't factor in the third tier rights, which schools keep for themselves- I think for Texas and Oklahoma adds another 6-7 million, which would actually put them AHEAD of the SEC payouts. There aren't a lot of schools that could make a legit play for the spanish speaking market besides Miami so we could make some lucrative side deals (which you couldn't do in the SEC). Big12 is a much better academic conference and you don't have to deal with a coach like Saban who gets his balls stroked daily by the NCAA commissioner.

Big 12 is actually the worst P-5 conference academically. By far.

The ACC sits atop 'Best Colleges' rankings with Big 12 at bottom

U.S. News & World Report recently released their annual “Best Colleges” rankings, which, much like any poll or ranking involving colleges, is up for constant debate. Those who rank highly are happy, those who don’t rank as high as they hoped are mad, and everyone just wants to know that they...

www.google.com

 

[Handsome Squidbum]

Big 12 is actually the worst P-5 conference academically. By far.

The ACC sits atop 'Best Colleges' rankings with Big 12 at bottom

U.S. News & World Report recently released their annual “Best Colleges” rankings, which, much like any poll or ranking involving colleges, is up for constant debate. Those who rank highly are happy, those who don’t rank as high as they hoped are mad, and everyone just wants to know that they...

www.google.com

Fair enough, but it's safe to say they both bring up the bottom of the P5. Adding Miami would boost the Big 12s academics quite a bit. Vandy and UF do the heavy lifting for the SEC's academic rep. In that same vein, Miami would help the Big12 academically- and that could mean the Big12 commissioners would be pleased to have us, and wouldn't constantly be looking for ways to ***** Miami like Tobacco Road does.

Also the numbers in the US News and World Report article don't add up. If you add up all the rankings of the SEC schools and divide by the total # of schools, then you get an average overall rank of 108. I don't see how they came up with 89. If you do the same with the Big12, its 106. So the Big12 would have a higher overall average school ranking. And if they added Miami (ranked #53), it lowers it to 102.


The reality is that there is no way that the powers-that-be at UM would ever go from the top ranked academic conference to either the fourth or fifth ranked academic conference so any discussion of joining either the Big12 or SEC is just a fun barstool conversation, but there is no serious possibility of it ever happening.

One thing we can all agree on is that if FSU ever got its wish and joined the SEC, it would permanently send the conference academic ranking into the toilet.

 

[RightSaidFred]

I don't get the obsession with wanting to join the SEC. The overall conference revenue isn't that relevant, what matters is the payout per school.

Big Ten Daily: Big Ten Led All Conferences in 2020 Revenue

The Big Ten's total revenue dropped in 2020, but it was still about $40 million higher than the SEC. The conference lowered payouts to its 12 longest-standing members by about $1.3 million per school to $54.3 million.

www.si.com

School Payouts​

• Big Ten: $54.3 million
• SEC: $45.5 million
• Big 12: $37 to $40.5 million
• Pac-12: $33.6 million
• ACC: $30.9 to $37 million

"The 10-team Big 12 reported $409 million, down by $30 million from 2019. Its payouts ranged from $37 million to $40.5 million, a decline of more than $1 million per school. The conference operated at a slight deficit for the year because of issues related to the pandemic, and it used some of its reserves to keep school payouts from being even lower, a spokesman said.


[The ACC] increased payouts ranged from $30.9 million to $37 million, plus $10.8 million to Notre Dame. Despite the revenue increase, the ACC reported a nearly $3 million annual operating deficit. Conference spokesmen attributed that to the timing of supplemental payments to schools that were made after central-office costs fell mainly due to the cancellation of spring 2020 championships. They said conference reserves were not impacted."
---

Long story short, despite a higher overall revenue than the Big 12, the ACC was bleeding money AND still came in last for payouts per school. The Big 12 numbers also don't factor in the third tier rights, which schools keep for themselves- I think for Texas and Oklahoma adds another 6-7 million, which would actually put them AHEAD of the SEC payouts. There aren't a lot of schools that could make a legit play for the spanish speaking market besides Miami so we could make some lucrative side deals (which you couldn't do in the SEC). Big12 is a much better academic conference and you don't have to deal with a coach like Saban who gets his balls stroked daily by the NCAA commissioner.

Big 12 would take us in a heartbeat.

I would make that jump, if we could talk Florida State in to joining with us. A conference with Miami, FSU, Texas, and Oklahoma would be fun and make for some great games. Would especially like playing Oklahoma as that brings back memories.

And it would help our recruiting since we'd be able to grab more kids out of Texas. You have teams from Florida and Texas together in the same conference, that could be really potent.

Wouldn't be too thrilled about games against Iowa State, although I suppose it's no worse than Duke or Wake Forest.

Yeah, I don't hate the idea.