If the end result of all this is the ACC schools being ten million dollars/year or more behind those from the B1G and SEC, then the ACC is quite vulnerable. Do you doubt that?

And yes, one of the reasons is due to the ACC actually negotiating roadblocks to a potential network. I called it in 2010. Many others on TSL did as well. The ACC needed to be in on the network game back then. The B1G was innovative with the first network. The Pac12 was innovative with their new type of network. Texas U was innovative as well. Why should I expect less of the ACC? I would and could argue the ACC has better network programming than any of those entities.

And one of the reasons I point to has a ton to do with the back room negotiating that this league is involved in. Dulaney mentioned the ACC's hush hush nature as problematic as well, and the ACC paid a price by their recent attempt at legislation being denied. Other leagues and schools do not operate this way and one could easily argue they've benefited by not doing so. The B1G doesn't. The SEC didn't, not sure now. Texas was fairly open. And then we have folks at places like OU and FSU leveraging the public's interest to better their respective causes. I am quite thankful FSU did in this case, or the ACC would have bungled its most recent expansion. And how could we forget the role public support played in VT's gaining entry to the ACC?