some might work and others ignore a host of economic, political and geographical realities that make them either unworkable or a long term project dependent on other things needing to happen first. Either way a good post and plenty of food for thought and discussion. Would probably make a lot of sense to copy and give the post its own thread as opposed to being buried in this one, just my opinion.

#1 would be nice but, ignores the difference in reality of what FSU's bargaining position was in the ACC and what VT's is and wholly ignores the possibility that where the conference is now might require a little more diplomacy than big stick. #2 is a very good suggestion but, rather than VT demanding it must be a coalition of schools for a reasonable chance of success to overcome the Tobacco Road voting block and behind the scenes power brokers. #3 is a good suggestion and there may be workable alternatives in addition. I doubt publicly complaining will be as productive as building consensus behind the scenes, at least initially. 4 and 5 are minefields that may hurt other more useful suggestions and will probably work themselves out on their own in the long run. VT does not want to shoot itself in the foot or sacrifice political capital on those, in my opinion. Disagree with #6 in principle as Raycom is a long time conference partner and deserves to be treated fairly. Agree on the nepotism angle but, with senior gone junior's influence would probably be minimal and more important is preventing future occurrence. #7 will occur in the normal course of evolution and as opposed to pushing and creating unintended consequences or enemies the ACC will be better served, in my opinion, influencing behind the scenes and being prepared to adapt concurrently with the shifting landscape.