does not explain what you meant by "the valuations of those other networks are cut down the middle" and when you do finally explain that you need to share how that is even relevant in terms of comparing the networks and upside, as the relative difference in valuation, regardless of how they might be cut, show a wide disparity in the perceived future upsides.

Your second paragraph attributes the primary culprit to "what league those teams are in". The actual data shows the widest difference being ticket sales and contributions which could just as easily correlate to stadium size and student/alumni fan base size as to your contention that it is all about conference. If the latter is considered as the primary factor then for VT to really catch up, regardless of what conference they are in they are going to need an 80K or larger stadium and a much larger student/alumni fan base. The evidence is right there to evaluate in the USA Today data if you care to look. The data offer a far different story than your standard argument. Given that VT has been historically strong in attendance/ticket sales, despite your schedule complaints, the opportunity to really make headway only comes from adjusting ticket prices and/or increasing stadium size. Both options come with challenges including, either pricing people out of attendance which could offset gains or incurring additional cost to construct without real proof of increased demand. Seems to me that the current AD has made strides in trying to adjust the culture and giving approach of donors with some success so far but, to truly match the competitors you cite will require a significant increase in number of contributors and/or average contribution rate neither of which rise magically upward with a new conference address or improved schedule.

To your original argument, there absolutely are things the ACC can do to help the members raise revenue, however, those things are not nearly as significant to the overall revenue disparity you cite as factors more directly under the control of individual conference members including stadium size, fan base size and attendance. NO MATTER what they do most of the schools, if not all, can never(or at least not in the near term) expect to match Tuscaloosa, Baton Rouge, College Station, Columbus, etc. in terms of size of fan/donor base. While you may believe this is settling for 2nd best, I contend it is merely recognizing the realities in which VT and other ACC schools operate as opposed to their competitors and this disparity, while creating challenges, does not preclude the league from competing on the field as football and basketball national championships just this year would confirm. It does shrink the margin of error because they do not have piles of money to throw at bad decision after bad decision the way a Texas does. Again, just so you are clear, this is not saying the ACC cannot or should not do better but, it is saying it is nowhere near the albatross or useless location you contend and far better than many of the most optimistic VT fans could have imagined even a little over a decade ago.