However, Big12's failures do little to make the ACC appear to be a well run league, especially when it continues to make significantly more money for its schools. THAT's ridiculous.

The ACC had and has every advantage over the Big12 imaginable in these conference expansion wars. The ACC was not so long ago a top tier league with another decent conference crumbling within its footprint. It was easy pickings for the ACC as everyone was itching to jump off that sinking Big East ship. However, that didn't stop the ACC from adding the wrong BE teams, in the wrong order, and actually making it close between them and Big12 for numero 4 in the P4.

And to this day, with all their geographic limitations, the Big12 still delivers better for its schools than the ACC. Heck, all things considered, I think the Big12's done pretty well taking care of its schools as this thing plays out. Again, they bring in pretty good money and the schools have responded by being quite competitive. They were WAY down in football in 16, but the Big12's been good in recent years, especially considering there's only 10 teams. They provide decent football schedules too. Look at WVU's schedule. Nothing great due to it being half a continent away, but WVU is guaranteed at least one blockbuster home conference game per year. VT gets one of those every 6 years or so.


So, Yes, they are going to fold, but they're still producing for their teams as they do so. Wherever the Big12 schools end up, they aren't going to be digging out of too bad a financial hole, especially not Oklahoma or Texas.

And of course schools selling their own content is not ideal, but it's still better than Raycom showing that content and the schools receiving NOTHING in return.

I've stated this over and over, but pointing to the Big12's shortcoming does nothing to absolve the leadership of the ACC for the way they've failed to deliver for ACC schools. Even as it crumbles, the Big12 is actually delivering better.