Getting more TV money is not about winning. It is about drawing fans to TV sets. The ACC weakness is that the league has too few schools, vis a vis the SEC and BT, that truly draw fans to watch. Wake and BC could meet in the ACC Championship, both 12-0, and that game would have trouble drawing anything like the number of fans that would watch the SEC Championship, no matter which 2-loss teams are in it. 10-2 UGA or 10-2 UF vs. 10-2 OU or 10-2 A&M is always going to have a MUCH larger TV audience than 12-0 Wake vs. 12-0 BC.
State flagship and/or Land Grant schools have major built-in advantages in drawing fans. Private schools (with a couple of exceptions) have built-in disadvantages in drawing fans. The ACC has far too few of the former and too many of the latter. The SEC and BT are built almost exclusively upon flagships and land grants.
Do enough ACC power brokers finally grasp that football is at least 4 times bigger than basketball? If so, then they should recognize now also what I've said above. And any new distribution method must accept those facts and aim to maximize the long term value of the conference, which can never come through Wake or BC, Pitt or Syracuse, or even GT - which is State but is neither flagship nor land grant (UGA is both).
State flagship and/or Land Grant schools have major built-in advantages in drawing fans. Private schools (with a couple of exceptions) have built-in disadvantages in drawing fans. The ACC has far too few of the former and too many of the latter. The SEC and BT are built almost exclusively upon flagships and land grants.
Do enough ACC power brokers finally grasp that football is at least 4 times bigger than basketball? If so, then they should recognize now also what I've said above. And any new distribution method must accept those facts and aim to maximize the long term value of the conference, which can never come through Wake or BC, Pitt or Syracuse, or even GT - which is State but is neither flagship nor land grant (UGA is both).
