The article is mostly the same internet garbage that has been floating around and has little substantive new information.
Some key take-aways, The buy out from the ACC is $120MM. However, the cost of buying out the GOR was set by the Big12 when OU and UT paid more than twice the revenue share/year to buy out one year when everyone benefitted from the buyout. It stands to reason that the ACC left-behinds will not get less per annum of buyout and will certainly demand much more.
Using 12 years and the present payout (2021 was the most recent payout data available) of $36.6MM/team.
Based on the OU/UT buyout at 2.1 factor (the low end of an expected ACC demand), $36.6MM is now $76.86MM per year of buyout. As this season cannot be avoided, there are 12 seasons in play, assuming an immediate change. The price is now $922.32MM plus the $120MM exit fee, or $1,042.32MM or $1.04332 BILLION. Who has that money? Plus the remaining ACC teams are likely to demand more. Even if the remaining ACC teams were stupid enough to agree to the annual payout, the cost to leave is $600MM/team.
Applying logic to the GOR dissolution, recall OU and UT could not find a way to leave several years early, and USC and UCLA simply decided to wait out the PAC12 deal, neither the SEC nor the B1G wanted to attack the the GOR, half the ACC schools have admittedly (based on the McMurphy tweet and the article) no one has figured a way out. Further, media rights tend to be locked tight, see every songwriter, screenwriter, etc. that sold their rights to their songs/stories and the publisher cashed in while the writer was stuck with the bad deal, the failed attempts to overturn the bad deals, and there is sufficient credence to the GOR is airtight argument than there is for an opportunity to dissolve the GOR.
Internet sports fans "lawyers" (used mockingly because everyone knows contracts are made to be broken!) discussing the legal issues have ignored the facts that the best lawyers in the country are working on this issue because it will be a gold mine and they cannot come up with a legal argument to defeat the GOR. (The GOR works as a liquidated damages clause, ensures the ACC owns the broadcast rights to each team's home games for the duration of the GOR, and ESPN has a big say in this matter)
Next, ESPN owns the ACCN and the SECN. not one prognosticator has addressed the basic issue that ESPN is allegedly going to give up properties for no reason and destroy a profitable revenue stream for the sake of enhancing one of its other properties.
And let's not forget that the SEC is a regional, VERY regional conference, Even the B1G lacks true national appeal as it goes coast to coast. No one in the south cares about B1G football and few people outside of the south east care about the SEC. Most college fans watch college sports for their team. Sure, we all watch a good game, but most are not going to devote all of their time for Minnesota v. Rutgers, Vandy v. anyone, or any other number of games that simply lack appeal.
Add to the above that no prognosticator has explained why ESPN would pull out all exposure in the northeast to the Fox Sports network, the primary competitor to ESPN. Forsaking SU, Pitt and BC leaves the heavily populated and projected to remain heavily populated northeast for no reason. Sure, the Big East is there, but they are a Fox owned property going forward. Yes, you can argue that football drives the bus, but hoops allows for double the ad revenue time than football. With the standard claim that football is 75% of a deal and hoops 25%, football must draw six fold the hoops revenue per ad, TV ratings don't support this argument. Thus, hoops has been underpaid for decades, there is money out there for hoops. (see also the B1G's new revenue is based more on hoops than football).
Then there is the problem that there are not enough CFB teams in the two-10-24 team superconferences to represent CFB fans nationwide, nor is there enough fodder for the superconference middle of the pack teams to look impressive (zero sum gain) and fandom will dwindle with the ratings. Does anyone believe Mississippi State, Ole Miss will garner enough wins to get to a bowl game with SEC and B1G games only? Thus, we know they need more teams than the 20-24 superconferences include. Forty to 48 teams is not sufficient. If this is a semi-pro league, they will not be able to play a lower division, nor would is be fair to play semi-pro money teams versus true school teams where academics remain important.
I remain a skeptic of the article and the people that hold to the logic without considering all angles. Dismissing ESPN's interest and Fox' interest and the fan's interest are dangerous assumptions. Assuming the SEC and the B1G hold all the cards is dangerous.
One more point, SU is a money maker and highly regarded for many more reasons that the simplified internet arguments, usually consisting of 2-5 cherry-picked matrices used to analyze teams and their "value". SU is more likely to be taken than left behind in an upper tier conference, especially if it goes beyond 20 teams for each of the supposed superconferences.
I cannot say the ACC will survive, but the current projections need a lot more pieces of the puzzle to fall into place than is happening right now. And I would not be surprised to see teh B1G dump Rutgers if they are stopping at 20 or 24. There simply is no value behind a punching bag game. Combine that with a school AD in such debt that B1G money cannot help.
Just another fan's opinion.
