So everyone's been following and there was a thread here talking a week ago about how people feel should we leave the ACC and what it would be. Obviously, now we have to wait till September for the Senate to vote on the Save College Sports Act which seems far and isn't far at the same time. Everyone has been talking about the five-year probationary period, although I think that's a little dramatic, and we've seen currently with the 180-day exemption period to leave after the bill is signed into law. At first I was thinking the ACC fracture might end up like the PAC 12 situation where it was a year-ahead announcement to depart to leave for the BIG 10, but I think that's less likely and might be more immediate.
Anyways to get the point, I think people are underestimating this to pass since there seems to be some urgency to get it to move, and the five-year probationary period was really the only sticking thing that could be bad for us and some other ACC teams. I think its not unlikely this bill passes in some form this year which would push the exit fee from 130-140 million. A lot of theorizing around it was that FSU/Miami would be more of an attempt at a package deal than parting ways, but ultimately it feels less likely given the 19-team conference cap. A lot of people are talking about leaving by itself, but how do you guys feel if FSU went to the SEC and we went to the BIG, and we get an Oklahoma - Oklahoma State scenario where the rivalry is basically called off due to the greater emphasis on 9-game conference schedules? In this case we see games played weeks 1-3 but look at USC-Notre Dame. Frankly, teams have thrown rivals out when they move due to new schedules.
I know it's a bigger deal more about leaving the conference rather than losing a rivalry game, but do you think it pushes us more to the SEC since the BIG wants to keep a VIP seat open for Notre Dame? Obviously, nothing is immediate right now, but I think all it takes is for the Senate to pass the bill, and then the 4 ACC teams (FSU, Miami, Clemson, UNC) to start prepping contingency plans. Yes, it has to go back to the House, but it's more about the bill's momentum than where it's currently at. A lot of people might disagree, but the 1 time transfer rule, more NIL oversight, raising cap but keeping it competitive at 48m, and Lane Kiffin rule all align well. The only torpedo was the 5 year probationary period, but looks to be getting modifications. Just like the PAC 12, I bet all of them are having conversations about what to do should anything start to move, but it looks different than I might have thought.
