Too bad nobody in DFW could care less about college football, or at least that’s the impression I got when I lived there for a short while years ago. Certainly nothing like here in the south (see what I did there).
I find that hard to believe but It doesn’t matter, they are all getting billed for it anyway
Grew up there, DFW definitely isn’t Atlanta in terms of overall level of CFB interest. And SMU will have an uphill climb against UT, A&M, OU, etc. Lots of alums of those and lots of transplants in general in DFW (similar to Atlanta in that way).
Whether people watch or not, having SMU in the conference automatically pulls in about $2.7 million per month into the ACC Network.
He is a Carolina grad that lives in Raleigh and covers UNC and Duke. I would pretty much expect this opinion.
I don’t have access past their paywall, but is it opinion, or media pushback initiated from more central ACC sources to counter Clemson/FSU-sourced rumors about the ACC giving in on things soon? That could also be expected.
If you feel it is a good deal, please let me know what the advantage to the rest of the ACC is. FSU and Clemson get more money, while the rest of the ACC doesn't? FSU and Clemson have a guaranteed departure in 2030? The lawsuits could easily take that long for a departure, even if they win. What is the positive side for the rest of the conference?
WF, Duke , NcSt are within 60 miles of each other. If you divide their market share byv3 it must be tiny.
Why? You don’t need to. They’re tethered to the ACC and all the belly-aching isn’t going to change that.
I will answer the question @Richard7125 asks for you. The ACC could tell FSU and Clemson they wish they would drop the lawsuit now, but there will be no reduction in the exit fee nor any offer to allow either school to buy back its media rights. What the ACC will offer is a promise to not sue for recovery of its attorney fees and court costs. But, only if both schools accept defeat in court with prejudice. And, very soon.