Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="kingtidge, post: 5447028, member: 994"] Reading the tea leaves, it almost sounds like the conference is doubling-down on a "haves" and "haves-not" revenue distro approach driven by football... at least in the viewership and post-season incentives components... Not surprised by that, since that is where the bread is buttered but some OG ACC b-ball schools aren't necessarily in prime position here... i.e. [INDENT]"...Because football brings in nearly three-quarters of the ACC’s television revenue, it will maintain the largest level of importance. This structure could [URL='https://apnews.com/article/acc-clemson-florida-state-settlement-ff0e963f64e06664c9dc7db18958f1e6']bring an additional $15 million[/URL] to a select group of schools, while others could lose millions."[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT]&[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT]"...Although conferences don’t all pay their member schools the same amount, these [new ACC viewership structures] are the most disproportionate payout distribution frameworks proposed by a major conference."[/INDENT] What is surprising is this can't be sitting well on Tobacco Road when you look at Football viewership numbers by school this past season... Blue blood UNC and Dook with below us in the bottom half... The UNC and Dook "Bubbas" can't be happy about this... [IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/R0mZ5t4q/ACC-2024-Football-Viewership-by-School.jpg[/IMG] It almost seems like this may purposely be the hold-over structure to keep the conference intact until the entire conference is blown-up / raided when the current deal expires?? I.E. they know it's coming and it's like Thanos... Sidenote: Was really surprised that BC is that high up the list... I don't know if that's just residual because they are in a major market in the Boston metro area, but I found that surprising. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?