Am I the only one pumped about Iowa State being

[ISUBryceC]

Again you really think isu’s current recruiting class stays in tact when the Big Ten and SEC separate from the left-over leagues?

Sorry simple logic says great players want to play at the highest level. Will a kid here and there choose differently sure but truly believing isu’s recruiting will go un-affected is delusional.

I think their current recruiting class will not be effected, because that separation won't be fully in effect for a few years. Again, I could be wrong.

The big thing for ISU is that there is a possibility that after all of this they are in what will firmly be the 3rd best conference. I don't think ISU will ever be a program that is going to rely on recruiting even 4 star players. But in the 3rd best conference, they can continue to recruit at the level they are at and be competitive.

Again, most of these kids committed after UT and OU left. What changed since the USC/UCLA announcement that actually effects ISU's status? The Big 10 and SEC were going to leave ISU behind anyway financially.

 

[Gonzo Bloor]

I don’t think anyone would argue the additions are great for the B10 conference. The question for you, as a fan of the Hawkeyes, are these additions going to give Iowa more wins? More chances at championships? Why didn’t you answer those questions?

The end goal of the athletic department is to make more money. As a fan is that your goal for Iowa or would you prefer to see them win more games.

Realistically the answer to the above question is no. If you asked those same questions for ISU in the B12 it might have a different answer. I would be extremely surprised with a 20 team B12 being left out of whatever passes for the playoffs.

I want the Iowa program to succeed at the highest level. I don't want Iowa to compete in a second- or third-rate conference. I think it's a loser mentality to want to avoid the best competition so you can "celebrate" more wins that come simply because you've played a bunch of sh*ttier programs. I think the only way Iowa can elevate to that top tier is by playing the best programs year in and year out, because even if it brings a higher rate of losses early on, that's the only path towards really getting better as a program.

 

[ISUBryceC]

It is safe to say the annual game will be done when this contract is up.

Wouldn't shock me in the slightest and it wouldn't bother me in the slightest. I hate the game.

 

[Lone Clone]

Well I'd think the biggest difference was Covid and the impact it had on your schedule, abbreviated conference schedules, bowl bids, bowl opponents, etc.

OK, we aren't talking exactly about the same thing. I see what you mean, and you're probably right that the competition was stronger last year than the year before. In other words, that could be part of the reason ISU lost instead of won close games.

My point was that it wasn't a case of the team suddenly going into the dumper. It lost 6 games (counting the bowl), and five of them came down to ISU's final possession. A lot of factors contributed.

 

[DodgerHawki]

I want the Iowa program to succeed at the highest level. I don't want Iowa to compete in a second- or third-rate conference. I think it's a loser mentality to want to avoid the best competition so you can "celebrate" more wins that come simply because you've played a bunch of sh*ttier programs. I think the only way Iowa can elevate to that top tier is by playing the best programs year in and year out, because even if it brings a higher rate of losses early on, that's the only path towards really getting better as a program.

If the Big 10 and SEC both go to 20+ teams, they will advocate for an expanded playoff and will probably want at-large only playoff bids, no automatic bids to conferences that have lesser teams. Whether they will get it, who knows. But there is no playoff without the Big 10 and SEC if they are at 20+ teams, and they can dictate how it's structured.

In a 16 or 24 team playoff, good teams could go 8-4 or 9-3 against very good schedules and be totally worth a slot in a playoff.

 

[DodgerHawki]

OK, we aren't talking exactly about the same thing. I see what you mean, and you're probably right that the competition was stronger last year than the year before. In other words, that could be part of the reason ISU lost instead of won close games.

My point was that it wasn't a case of the team suddenly going into the dumper. It lost 6 games (counting the bowl), and five of them came down to ISU's final possession. A lot of factors contributed.

At a place like Iowa or Iowa State, even with the real good teams the programs have put together in the past 20 years, both schools have to win close games in the years they have good years.

There is always context to what goes on in losing close games vs winning them. 2010 Iowa was a good example. Highly ranked pre-season team, lots of returning players. Lost all the close games the team played that year. ISU in 2021, highly ranked pre-season, lots of returning players. Lost all the close games. Pre-season ranked Top 10 teams have to own going 7-5. ISU may not have gone into the dumpster, but certainly did not play like a Top 10 team. Just like the 2010 Iowa team didn't.

 

[Gonzo Bloor]

If the Big 10 and SEC both go to 20+ teams, they will advocate for an expanded playoff and will probably want at-large only playoff bids, no automatic bids to conferences that have lesser teams. Whether they will get it, who knows. But there is no playoff without the Big 10 and SEC if they are at 20+ teams, and they can dictate how it's structured.

In a 16 or 24 team playoff, good teams could go 8-4 or 9-3 against very good schedules and be totally worth a slot in a playoff.

I think if the B1G and SEC go to 20+ teams the CFP could very possibly be done and the new playoff structure may be limited to just those two conferences.

 

[HerkyFan]

I think their current recruiting class will not be effected, because that separation won't be fully in effect for a few years. Again, I could be wrong.

The big thing for ISU is that there is a possibility that after all of this they are in what will firmly be the 3rd best conference. I don't think ISU will ever be a program that is going to rely on recruiting even 4 star players. But in the 3rd best conference, they can continue to recruit at the level they are at and be competitive.

Again, most of these kids committed after UT and OU left. What changed since the USC/UCLA announcement that actually effects ISU's status? The Big 10 and SEC were going to leave ISU behind anyway financially.

No of course this class won’t be affected but if you don’t think the 2024 will be you are delusional. Again for all the high ranked players isu has in this class do you really believe that they would willingly play in a second rate, left-over conference and turn down the chance to play at the highest level in the Big Ten or SEC?

What makes you think even with the additions of ASU, Arizona, Colorado and Utah to the Big 12 that it puts you anywhere near equal footing with the Big Ten and SEC? Why would the Big Ten and SEC let the leftover 12 in their club of 2 for anything other than possibly some non-conference games.

 

[ExcellentBread]

I want the Iowa program to succeed at the highest level. I don't want Iowa to compete in a second- or third-rate conference. I think it's a loser mentality to want to avoid the best competition so you can "celebrate" more wins that come simply because you've played a bunch of sh*ttier programs. I think the only way Iowa can elevate to that top tier is by playing the best programs year in and year out, because even if it brings a higher rate of losses early on, that's the only path towards really getting better as a program.

You’re creating an argument I’m not making. I’m merely pointing out a silver lining for ISU staying trapped in the B12. They have a fighting chance to be a top 5 team in that league.

Do you really believe that a “Higher rate of early losses” is “the only way Iowa can elevate to the top tier”? That doesn’t sound logical to me.

 

[HerkyFan]

I think if the B1G and SEC go to 20+ teams the CFP could very possibly be done and the new playoff structure may be limited to just those two conferences.

Bingo and this is where isu fan find themselves being in a class substantially lower than those in the Big Ten and SEC. It would be like playing for what is currently the FCS championship. Nothing wrong with that but for the most part you don’t see a lot of FCS kids turning down Big Ten or SEC offers.

isu falls further behind Iowa.

 

[pistachio1999]

If the Big 10 and SEC both go to 20+ teams, they will advocate for an expanded playoff and will probably want at-large only playoff bids, no automatic bids to conferences that have lesser teams. Whether they will get it, who knows. But there is no playoff without the Big 10 and SEC if they are at 20+ teams, and they can dictate how it's structured.

In a 16 or 24 team playoff, good teams could go 8-4 or 9-3 against very good schedules and be totally worth a slot in a playoff.

If conferences go to 20+ they should consider doing a top 4 conference title playoff.

 

[Gonzo Bloor]

You’re creating an argument I’m not making. I’m merely pointing out a silver lining for ISU staying trapped in the B12. They have a fighting chance to be a top 5 team in that league.

Do you really believe that a “Higher rate of early losses” is “the only way Iowa can elevate to the top tier”? That doesn’t sound logical to me.

You asked if conference expansion is going to lead to more wins, chances for championships for Iowa, and seemed to imply that, as an Iowa fan, what you should really want is more wins regardless of who those wins come against.

Yes, in order to succeed at the highest level I think you need to play against the best competition. Could that lead to more losses? Sure. But I'd rather that than go 10-2 every year against a bunch of MAC-level opponents. Assuming we end up with a P2 with the B1G and SEC, it really doesn't matter who's in the top-5 of any other conference because no one is going to take them seriously. Just the truth.

 

[pistachio1999]

OK, we aren't talking exactly about the same thing. I see what you mean, and you're probably right that the competition was stronger last year than the year before. In other words, that could be part of the reason ISU lost instead of won close games.

My point was that it wasn't a case of the team suddenly going into the dumper. It lost 6 games (counting the bowl), and five of them came down to ISU's final possession. A lot of factors contributed.

Especially maddening when it was probably the most talented team ever.

 

[HerkyFan]

You asked if conference expansion is going to lead to more wins, chances for championships for Iowa, and seemed to imply that, as an Iowa fan, what you should really want is more wins regardless of who those wins come against.

Yes, in order to succeed at the highest level I think you need to play against the best competition. Could that lead to more losses? Sure. But I'd rather that than go 10-2 every year against a bunch of MAC-level opponents. Assuming we end up with a P2 with the B1G and SEC, it really doesn't matter who's in the top-5 of any other conference because no one is going to take them seriously. Just the truth.

You will also see that each year the P2 takes more and more of the available top end talent. Now they may not be able to take it all but when the majority of the top end talent is in the P2 the remaining schools will struggle to compete. The P2 will also have additional resources to attract and retain the coaches of their choosing.

If CMC is as competitive as clown fans insist his is he will bolt from isu at the first chance to take a P2 job regardless of who it is. Then isu will be searching for a HC that isn’t wanted by a P2 school. Good luck with that.

 

[pistachio1999]

You will also see that each year the P2 takes more and more of the available top end talent. Now they may not be able to take it all but when the majority of the top end talent is in the P2 the remaining schools will struggle to compete. The P2 will also have additional resources to attract and retain the coaches of their choosing.

If CMC is as competitive as clown fans insist his is he will bolt from isu at the first chance to take a P2 job regardless of who it is. Then isu will be searching for a HC that isn’t wanted by a P2 school. Good luck with that.

I think he would prefer a Big Ten school in the Midwest. More his style and background. I don’t know the age of his kids but they have to play a huge part in his decision. Maybe he wants them to finish school where they are.

 

[HerkyFan]

I think he would prefer a Big Ten school in the Midwest. More his style and background. I don’t know the age of his kids but they have to play a huge part in his decision. Maybe he wants them to finish school where they are.

Sure if his wife and family love Ames and don’t want to leave that should play a role in his decision making. Until Friday there was the thinking that isu being in a P5 league they were for the most part on equal footing when it comes to the CFP and NY 6 Bowl games. That appears to be rapidly going away. Not every HC is going to want to chase the ultimate prize so Matt Campbell will have to decide for himself if he is one of those guys or not.

 

[ISUBryceC]

What makes you think even with the additions of ASU, Arizona, Colorado and Utah to the Big 12 that it puts you anywhere near equal footing with the Big Ten and SEC? Why would the Big Ten and SEC let the leftover 12 in their club of 2 for anything other than possibly some non-conference games.

They won't be close to equal footing with the Big 10 and SEC. I've said it probably 10 times in this thread already. I don't know what you're arguing about here.

However, last year at this time I was thinking the Big 12 could me distributing like 15-20 million a year to it's members when UT and OU left. After adding and even some other potential fallout the Big 12 should be at least able to maintain what they are currently paying out. ISU has debt obligations it's required to pay. I think it's a good thing to be able to do that.

I think the new look Big 12 will have a seat at the table for any playoff. I think the SEC and Big 10 will have the majority of the places in a playoff. I'm also a little skeptical that the ACC will be blowing up due to their Grant of Rights issues. So while it's all possible that's where it goes I don't think that happens just yet.

 

[HerkyFan]

They won't be close to equal footing with the Big 10 and SEC. I've said it probably 10 times in this thread already. I don't know what you're arguing about here.

However, last year at this time I was thinking the Big 12 could me distributing like 15-20 million a year to it's members when UT and OU left. After adding and even some other potential fallout the Big 12 should be at least able to maintain what they are currently paying out. ISU has debt obligations it's required to pay. I think it's a good thing to be able to do that.

I think the new look Big 12 will have a seat at the table for any playoff. I think the SEC and Big 10 will have the majority of the places in a playoff. I'm also a little skeptical that the ACC will be blowing up due to their Grant of Rights issues. So while it's all possible that's where it goes I don't think that happens just yet.

Why would the Big Ten and SEC need to have anyone other than the 40 teams from their leagues be involved in the College Football Playoff’s?

 

[ISUBryceC]

Why would the Big Ten and SEC need to have anyone other than the 40 teams from their leagues be involved in the College Football Playoff’s?

Who are the Big 10 and SEC adding to get to 20 each? I mean we're talking a LOT of hypotheticals here. Again, I'm saying that we could get there, I just don't see it happening on a short timeframe just like I don't see the SEC and Big 10 getting to 20 for a little while. If that changes, then yes they could probably look at locking out the other programs.

 

[paednoch23]

I grew up in northern Iowa about the same distance from both Iowa & ISU. I’d say it was 65% Hawk fans, 10% Clown fans, & the rest were for other teams.

There were so few Clown fans, I didn’t give them a second thought. Then I moved to DM area & those Clowns were everywhere! You can’t miss them because it must be a fan requirement to have those fugly colors hanging all over your car/house & wear your best ISU polo to church on Sunday. I can also pick out their fans by dressing like hick tools & constantly bitching about refs at youth

I don’t think anyone would argue the additions are great for the B10 conference. The question for you, as a fan of the Hawkeyes, are these additions going to give Iowa more wins? More chances at championships? Why didn’t you answer those questions?

The end goal of the athletic department is to make more money. As a fan is that your goal for Iowa or would you prefer to see them win more games.

Realistically the answer to the above question is no. If you asked those same questions for ISU in the B12 it might have a different answer. I would be extremely surprised with a 20 team B12 being left out of whatever passes for the playoffs.

Just stop. The last time Iowa played USC it was an outright rout. The money will make a huge difference. But being in the power 2 is where the recruiting skyrockets. Go ahead stick your head on the sand, clown.

 

[HerkyFan]

Who are the Big 10 and SEC adding to get to 20 each? I mean we're talking a LOT of hypotheticals here. Again, I'm saying that we could get there, I just don't see it happening on a short timeframe just like I don't see the SEC and Big 10 getting to 20 for a little while. If that changes, then yes they could probably look at locking out the other programs.

View embedded media

Big Ten takes Notre Dame, Stanford, Oregon and Washington.

SEC takes Clemson, North Carolina, Florida State and Miami.

The only non layup in this scenario is Notre Dame. I don’t see money being the attraction as much as the access for playing in the CFP at the highest level.

 

[ISUBryceC]

Big Ten takes Notre Dame, Stanford, Oregon and Washington.

SEC takes Clemson, North Carolina, Florida State and Miami.

The only non layup in this scenario is Notre Dame. I don’t see money being the attraction as much as the access for playing in the CFP at the highest level.

Breaking the ACC GoR is not a layup. At all.

 

[HerkyFan]

Breaking the ACC GoR is not a layup. At all.

Except the ACC GOR for the most part is with ESPN who would also be in a better position by moving more brands to the SEC than trying to keep the ACC going.

 

[pistachio1999]

Breaking the ACC GoR is not a layup. At all.

High priced attorneys will give anything a shot or media partners pay up to get it done. If Notre Dame wants out they have as much money as God. They give every Sunday.

 

[DodgerHawki]

Breaking the ACC GoR is not a layup. At all.

Definitely not a layup. But if you had half the conference members seeking to leave, in effect the conference is dead.

 

[HerkyFan]

Definitely not a layup. But if you had half the conference members seeking to leave, in effect the conference is dead.

Especially if the current holder of the GOR is ESPN. They can dictate what they do or don’t want to enforce.

 

[DodgerHawki]

Especially if the current holder of the GOR is ESPN. They can dictate what they do or don’t want to enforce.

Who made the decision for the ACC to turn over their grant of rights until 2036? And at such a reduced price tag? My goodness, total leadership fail.

 

[ISUBryceC]

Especially if the current holder of the GOR is ESPN. They can dictate what they do or don’t want to enforce.

That's not how GoR work. The GoR is between the member schools of the conference, not the TV partners.

 

[ISUBryceC]

Definitely not a layup. But if you had half the conference members seeking to leave, in effect the conference is dead.

That would be better for the Big 12/ISU too to be honest. They could probably pick up another 2-4 teams and really solidify themselves. I just don't think that's happening.

High priced attorneys will give anything a shot or media partners pay up to get it done.

Don't you think OU and UT have good lawyers? They've not even announced when they are leaving the Big 12 yet and it's been a year. Again it's just not that easy to break.

 

[HerkyFan]

That's not how GoR work. The GoR is between the member schools of the conference, not the TV partners.

But it is the media partner who pays for the rights. Does no good for the ACC to hold rights if the media partner refuses to buy them.

 

[pistachio1999]

That would be better for the Big 12/ISU too to be honest. They could probably pick up another 2-4 teams and really solidify themselves. I just don't think that's happening.



Don't you think OU and UT have good lawyers? They've not even announced when they are leaving the Big 12 yet and it's been a year. Again it's just not that easy to break.

They got the money to spend. I think they realize their best playoff shots were in the Big 12 so they decided to milk it.

 

[ISUBryceC]

But it is the media partner who pays for the rights. Does no good for the ACC to hold rights if the media partner refuses to buy them.

What does the ACC's Grant of Rights agreement say? Here's a copy

Conference realignment is shaking college athletics once again. The key to ACC stability appears to be its grant of rights agreement. Read it here.

www.wralsportsfan.com

"Each of the Member Institutions acknowledges that the grant of Rights during the entire Term is irrevocable and effective until the end of the Term regardless of whether the Member Institution withdraws from the Conference during the Term or otherwise ceases to participate as a member of the Conference," the agreement reads.

In other words, the schools not only would lose the money they receive for media rights from the ACC, but they'd forfeit any media rights money from their new conference. The agreement applied to the league's current members and accepted members at the time. It also applies to future members, who would have to accept the agreement as part of a condition for joining the league.


I added the bold because that's what's on the line here, and also why the ACC wouldn't fold. They'd pull a Big 12 and add some teams to keep the conference alive so that the GoR would remain in place for the schools that are left behind.

I'm sure it's not impossible to get out of it. But if they get caught up in lawsuits, and they don't have access to their TV money, they could be in a world of pain.

 

[HerkyFan]

What does the ACC's Grant of Rights agreement say? Here's a copy

Conference realignment is shaking college athletics once again. The key to ACC stability appears to be its grant of rights agreement. Read it here.

www.wralsportsfan.com

"Each of the Member Institutions acknowledges that the grant of Rights during the entire Term is irrevocable and effective until the end of the Term regardless of whether the Member Institution withdraws from the Conference during the Term or otherwise ceases to participate as a member of the Conference," the agreement reads.

In other words, the schools not only would lose the money they receive for media rights from the ACC, but they'd forfeit any media rights money from their new conference. The agreement applied to the league's current members and accepted members at the time. It also applies to future members, who would have to accept the agreement as part of a condition for joining the league.


I added the bold because that's what's on the line here, and also why the ACC wouldn't fold. They'd pull a Big 12 and add some teams to keep the conference alive so that the GoR would remain in place for the schools that are left behind.

I'm sure it's not impossible to get out of it. But if they get caught up in lawsuits, and they don't have access to their TV money, they could be in a world of pain.

What you have is the agreement between each school and the conference. The problem is the money still comes from the purchaser of the media rights or the media partner. That is a different contract. I am sure there is an exit/termination provision in that contract as there are in almost all contracts that ESPN can leverage to get what they want. ESPN can bail altogether on the ACC from purchasing the rights and that renders the agreement between the schools and the conference meaningless. Which puts us right back where I said it would end up, with ESPN getting the schools they want in the leagues they are choosing.

 

[ISUBryceC]

What you have is the agreement between each school and the conference. The problem is the money still comes from the purchaser of the media rights or the media partner. That is a different contract. I am sure there is an exit/termination provision in that contract as there are in almost all contracts that ESPN can leverage to get what they want. ESPN can bail altogether on the ACC from purchasing the rights and that renders the agreement between the schools and the conference meaningless. Which puts us right back where I said it would end up, with ESPN getting the schools they want in the leagues they are choosing.

ESPN signed a contract with the conference through 2036.

Even if they did get out of it, I assume after paying some massive fees, somebody would buy those rights, and then the ACC would also have the revenue from the schools that leave. It would be extremely unlikely they'd get a better deal than the buyout/new rights fees/GoR income from the schools that are leaving. I'm sure there would also be years of legal fallout. I think that's extremely unlikely.

Edit - Let's look at it hypothetically - Let's say 3 schools leave and go to the SEC. The SEC negotiates new rights for about 100MM per school. That 300 MM would revert back to the ACC. Let's say ESPN gets out of the contract - what would the remaining 13 schools be worth? 30MM per year? That's 390 MM for just the remaining 13 schools. So right there, assuming that they get zero money from ESPN to buy out the contract, it's 690 million in conference payout to ACC members. That's over 100 million more than they did in the last pre-pandemic year, for fewer members, so their payouts would be much better.

 

[HerkyFan]

ESPN signed a contract with the conference through 2036.

Even if they did get out of it, I assume after paying some massive fees, somebody would buy those rights, and then the ACC would also have the revenue from the schools that leave. It would be extremely unlikely they'd get a better deal than the buyout/new rights fees/GoR income from the schools that are leaving. I'm sure there would also be years of legal fallout. I think that's extremely unlikely.

Again all contracts have a exit/termination clause. Why would you assume there would be massive buyout fee’s?

Lawsuits in this case don’t help the ACC if ESPN refuses broadcast games and then not pay. What would the ACC do about it? No money would be rolling in and the ACC wouldn’t have any games broadcasted. I know you don’t like this but as with OU and Texas ESPN is holding all the best cards.

The best the ACC can hope for is that they survive in some form with whatever remains after the SEC takes what they want.

 

[ISUBryceC]

So you think that ESPN would just not broadcast the games, not pay the ACC, the ACC wouldn't sign any other deal, and they wouldn't be on the hook for any buyouts for ESPN terminating the contract early? Seems like the lawyers for the ACC were absolutely atrocious in that case.

And you're still just ignoring the GoR.

 

[nbanflfactory]

If the Big 10 and SEC both go to 20+ teams, they will advocate for an expanded playoff and will probably want at-large only playoff bids, no automatic bids to conferences that have lesser teams. Whether they will get it, who knows. But there is no playoff without the Big 10 and SEC if they are at 20+ teams, and they can dictate how it's structured.

In a 16 or 24 team playoff, good teams could go 8-4 or 9-3 against very good schedules and be totally worth a slot in a playoff.

no 4 loss team should be in the playoffs, nor should more than 8 teams period. regular season sports are becoming more and more meaningless every year.

 

[SDHawkDoc]

I'm interested in what's good for U of I. I don't care what happens to isu sports.
In a very small market state like Iowa it is better for Iowa to be the only team that is in the top tier of CFB. And that's what's happening here. There will be the top tier of teams that get the most attention, the most dollars and play for the biggest stakes. Iowa's looking to be in a good spot, at the moment, to be one of them. It will be an added bonus to get rid of the waste of time game with isu. Outside of that, as already noted, I don't care what happens to isu sports.

 

[HerkyFan]

So you think that ESPN would just not broadcast the games, not pay the ACC, the ACC wouldn't sign any other deal, and they wouldn't be on the hook for any buyouts for ESPN terminating the contract early? Seems like the lawyers for the ACC were absolutely atrocious in that case.

And you're still just ignoring the GoR.

Look the GOR is only as binding as the ACC wants to make it. Right now the ESPN contract doesn’t pay any of the ACC schools what is now market between now and the term they signed for. ESPN could be willing to re-negotiate to pay out the ACC more but could also demand that the existing GOR be amended.

The question becomes does the ACC insist on keeping the GOR as it is just to take below market payments to its members or do they want increase the payments to their members and try and keep as many of them happy as possible. At this point it doesn’t appear they can do both.

If the GOR and ESPN contract stay in force through then duration of the agreement the ACC membership may remain as it is today but the financial disparity with Big Ten and SEC schools will be exponentially worse.

 

[ISUBryceC]

Look the GOR is only as binding as the ACC wants to make it. Right now the ESPN contract doesn’t pay any of the ACC schools what is now market between now and the term they signed for. ESPN could be willing to re-negotiate to pay out the ACC more but could also demand that the existing GOR be amended.

The question becomes does the ACC insist on keeping the GOR as it is just to take below market payments to its members or do they want increase the payments to their members and try and keep as many of them happy as possible. At this point it doesn’t appear they can do both.

If the GOR and ESPN contract stay in force through then duration of the agreement the ACC membership may remain as it is today but the financial disparity with Big Ten and SEC schools will be exponentially worse.

The GoR and the TV contract are entirely different things. ESPN can't demand anything from the ACC's GoR. That's already signed and ESPN has no control over it.