If this criteria comes down mainly to football, I don’t see Kansas rated so highly.
Perspective from the Big Ten and some much needed clarifications
- Thread starter FriendlySpartan
- Start date
The KU, Bill Self, Adidas bs is going to be a negative for them and isn’t being mentioned in any of this. The NIL stuff changes how that’s framed some but that program DGAF about the law or even the FBI. A conference taking them on will have to be forced to at minimum look at that.
Yes.. agree with most of this. I think the thing we all need to understand is that the other power conferences are now trying to figure out the next move. While the "available" schools are not 0 value adds, they are also not slam dunk brand names. If ND was looking to get into a conf, this could be sorted out pretty quickly. But, we may need to wait a little while to see how other factors impact this.
The only thing I would add is that the ACC and PAC appear to be pretty unstable long term right now. So, if we remain on current trajectory those conferences could be the next to be poached in the 3-10+ year time frame.
ACC
Yes ACC GoR runs until 2036... but their contract will be so far behind the other leagues by that point they will be forced to add schools to keep up in the next 3-5 yrs. Who will join? No major brands are going to jump conferences and ND is not joining a sinking ship... So, they will need to add schools like WV, UConn, etc. in order to open the contract and renegotiate with ESPN. This will help them in the short term (say going from about 35M to say 45M-50M?). But they will not catch the b10/sec (I would be surprised if they were not at 80M-90M in payouts in the next 5-7 yrs). So, the question will be how much time does the ACC GoR buy them? And, when can the top brands be consolidated similar to what happened to the B12?
PAC
The PAC12 is in a similar position. Their games are not as marketable and they do not have GoR through 2036. But they have two key advantages. First, they are in a unique time zone / geographic footprint that make them less attractive to add - at least when compared to brands in central, eastern time zone (that could change quickly and b10 may decide to go coast-to-coast soon, but has been a barrier historically). The second advantage is that they will be renegotiating their rights very soon and own their network as well. They could partner with streaming providers located in their geographical footprint (amazon, apple, google, etc.). Maybe they get the first big deal from the streaming providers and make similar dollars per school comparing to the b10/sec if they do it... or maybe they force Fox/ESPN to out bid Apple/Amazon to keep them out of CFB... either way, this could be a path that could keep them competitive and make them less likely to be raided. However, if they stay a distant 3rd/4th in media rights, it is likely just a matter of time before they get raided by the b10 which would value the AAU schools in their conference (9 of 12 - all but ASU, WSU, OSU).
The Criteria changes from conference to conference. There were reports out last week that OU and UT first approached the Big 10 about joining, and the league told OU that since they are not an AAU school it was not going to happen, but the league would take UT.
The SEC did not care about AAU so the gobbled up both OU and UT without a second thought.
The Pac 12 has in the past been unwilling to take religious schools, but as someone mentioned TCU has slowly been moving away from its religious origins and becoming more none secular, so maybe they could find a home there.
I have thought all along the two schools that bring the least to any conference is WV and Baylor. WV's academics are horrible the worst in the league, small population base to draw from, there only possibility seems to be the ACC which has repeatedly turned them down choosing other schools in area.
Baylor is a small very religious school, with a small fan base. Does the men's and woman's bb programs, and there decent football programs make up for the religious aspect and their scandal's in the past?
I would rank the schools
1. KU, bb program is just too good to ignore and they are an AAU school.
2/3 ISU/OSU, we have the better academics, but OSU brings in a larger state and a better atheletic program.
4/5 KSU/TT both have had success in atheletics put nothing over the top, both suffer from being poor academically, but they do bring in new states.
6. TCU, solid academics, fine tradition in football and baseball, brings in the Metroplex of Dallas to the table. But small fan base.
7. WV. horrible academics, small but passionate fan base with decent attendence. They want the ACC so much they can taste it, but some reason the ACC does not want them.
8. Baylor, very religious small school with scandals in the near past, no matter how good their athletics programs are, it would be hard for school administrators explaining why they chose them to their fan base in our current political world.
* I did not include the scandal faced by KU for one simple reason, nothing will come of it. KU is following the UNC game plan, Lawyer up, remind the NCAA that you are a blue blood in the sport, and they cannot prove anything against you. So when you get tired of chasing ghosts, then give us the slap on the wrist punishment and we will be done with it. Case in point, lifetime contract for their coach.
The SEC did not care about AAU so the gobbled up both OU and UT without a second thought.
The Pac 12 has in the past been unwilling to take religious schools, but as someone mentioned TCU has slowly been moving away from its religious origins and becoming more none secular, so maybe they could find a home there.
I have thought all along the two schools that bring the least to any conference is WV and Baylor. WV's academics are horrible the worst in the league, small population base to draw from, there only possibility seems to be the ACC which has repeatedly turned them down choosing other schools in area.
Baylor is a small very religious school, with a small fan base. Does the men's and woman's bb programs, and there decent football programs make up for the religious aspect and their scandal's in the past?
I would rank the schools
1. KU, bb program is just too good to ignore and they are an AAU school.
2/3 ISU/OSU, we have the better academics, but OSU brings in a larger state and a better atheletic program.
4/5 KSU/TT both have had success in atheletics put nothing over the top, both suffer from being poor academically, but they do bring in new states.
6. TCU, solid academics, fine tradition in football and baseball, brings in the Metroplex of Dallas to the table. But small fan base.
7. WV. horrible academics, small but passionate fan base with decent attendence. They want the ACC so much they can taste it, but some reason the ACC does not want them.
8. Baylor, very religious small school with scandals in the near past, no matter how good their athletics programs are, it would be hard for school administrators explaining why they chose them to their fan base in our current political world.
* I did not include the scandal faced by KU for one simple reason, nothing will come of it. KU is following the UNC game plan, Lawyer up, remind the NCAA that you are a blue blood in the sport, and they cannot prove anything against you. So when you get tired of chasing ghosts, then give us the slap on the wrist punishment and we will be done with it. Case in point, lifetime contract for their coach.
Last edited:
As strange as this sounds, it's possible that there could be a bidding war for the Big 12 schools. Given what the SEC/ESPN is trying to do, it seems that B1G and Pac 12 standing pat would be a good way to fall further behind the SEC.
I'm not so sure the B1G is wild about taking West coast games when all the action is in the eastern and central zones. The Pac 12 sure as $hit does not want to be poached. That would leave the remaining schools in a serious bad way.
With ISU becoming a new "football" school and KU being a basketball power, there is value to the B1G to take them in. Oh, most years, ISU is not to shabby in basketball either... both men and women.
I'm not so sure the B1G is wild about taking West coast games when all the action is in the eastern and central zones. The Pac 12 sure as $hit does not want to be poached. That would leave the remaining schools in a serious bad way.
With ISU becoming a new "football" school and KU being a basketball power, there is value to the B1G to take them in. Oh, most years, ISU is not to shabby in basketball either... both men and women.
I think you are wrong regarding the strength of the ACC, their new network was only launched in the past couple of years, and just like BTN its going to take time to get their numbers up, maybe as many as 5 to 10. but they will grow.
Their roster of teams is as strong or even stronger than the Big 10's. Clemson, Florida St, Miami, are all three large football brands with more success in the past couple of decades than the Big 10's big 3 of OSU, Mich, and Penn St.
We also know that they have ESPN backing them, the network will not want the league to fall too far behind the payouts of the other two, unless their overall plan is to merge the best from the ACC into the SEC, which has only been speculated about, never confirmed.
Finally the states that make up the ACC are growing, while for the most part the states that make up the Big 10 are losing population, a fact that every TV exect has to take into account.
I get what your saying. I agree. The stakes are pretty damn high here, though.
PAC-12: Ok state and tech
Big 10: ISU for current fb regional and academic. ok state for brand and strength across many sports. Kansas for Kansas City, bb, and acedemic. Do they want to expand west? Want a spashy expansion
Acc: West Virginia for region, good fb and bb, and rivalries
Sec: doesn’t want anyone if they did would already of happened
AAC: anyone they can get
I don't think so. In terms of the ACC, it's Clemson and that's it. Florida State did make a splash for a few years, but are barely a .500 team anymore. Miami, even less so. The money is significantly less, the fan passion is not there relative to the B1G. Sure, population trends are toward the south and away from the Midwest. But population of the states is irrelevant to CFB fandom. Fan engagement is what brings the money in today's CFB. Being a resident of a state with a CFB team doesn't really lead to a person becoming a fan of that team.
The 2036 GOR was already ESPN's outreach to back the ACC. They signed an extremely long term contract so that they could get money closer to on par with the other power leagues in the near term, but locking in less money for the longer term. They simply don't have the widespread fan engagement and passion to command an ACC Network on basic cable the way that the B1G Network did/does. Look at the P12 network and its failure.
The ACC just isn't as strong a brand as a football conference. They're a distant third behind the B1G and SEC. They were fourth behind an intact B12. I think both the ACC and P12 are unstable long term as football leagues. The money isn't there to keep the top programs long term. What the ACC has in its favor is that only Clemson is really a major football brand with the ability to leave.
Clemson won championships in 2018, 2016, Florida St in 2013 and 1999, Miami in 2001 compare that to the Big 10 teams, Ohio State 2012 and 2002, Penn St. last was in 1986 and Michigan was in 1997. Plus both Florida St and Miami won 5 other titles in the 90's and 80's while you have one for Penn. State in the last 40 years.
The money will continue to grow with the ACC network it is still new and developing their fan base, none of the three ACC teams will ever catch up to the Big 10 teams in attendence, their stadiums are just too small, but they have solid support.
It's not just about winning championships though. It's about the history of the programs and how they are perceived. And their fan support. You can't say that Miami has anywhere near the fan support of those top B1G schools. In fact, it has less support than ISU. Attendance numbers, for comparison:
Miami
5 Year Average - 55821 (86% Capacity)
Iowa State
5 Year Average - 56562 (91% Capacity)
Florida State
5 Year Average - 68653 (86% Capacity)
Clemson
5 Year Average - 81409 (99% Capacity)
Penn State
5 Year Average - 103585 (97% Capacity)
Ohio State
5 Year Average - 105465 (103% Capacity)
Michigan
5 Year Average - 110884 (100% Capacity)
Out of the top 10 in attendance, 4 schools are B1G schools. None are ACC.
Attendance Rankings, Averages For Every School: 2020 CFN Five-Year Program Analysis
How many people show up? As a part of the CFN Five-Year Program Analysis, the attendance is a factor. Here are the rankings of all 130 schools. Contact @PeteFiutak 2020 Five-Year Program Analysis A…
collegefootballnews.com
In person attendance at games (ok, purchasing tickets) isn't the only factor in fan support, but I think you have to say it's a good indicator. The ACC Network will only grow if there is a fan demand for it. And there's no indication that there is. When the B1G Network came out, it didn't have a long ramp up period - the fans wanted it and the conference was good enough at negotiations to force it on cable companies. It was popular and a money maker immediately. It's not like people are going to gradually say "Oh, yeah I've seen that ACC network out there for a while, guess I'll go buy it now." Either you're a passionate fan who wants that content and you're going to pay for it, or you're not. And a relatively small percentage of people who live in ACC states are passionate fans.
I think you are significantly overstating the value of the ACC brands. I live in NC (heart of ACC territory and have followed the conference closely since I moved here attending football games at all three universities in the area - NC State, UNC, Duke). I also went to UNC for grad school. The ACC overall is much closer to the remaining 8 then they are to the b10 or sec.
Yes, i am very familiar with the ACC network. It is no where near the b10 and with the move away from the cable subscription model the long term prospects of conference networks are declining. This advantage and the size of the tv market you are in goes down significantly in a world where streaming demands fan bases pay for and watch the content. ACC struggles here but their partnership with ND helps them out... the ACC vs. ND games are some of the best ratings they have so getting 5 of them every year is benefitial.
The ACC does have brands.... However, GT<georgia, FSU/miami<uf, Clem>SC (but only recently)... miami is a nice brand... but actually a relatively small school (common theme across the league). More importantly, in football (which is king) you have clemson, miami, fsu as top brands that can compete nationaly... but not as competitive as you might think. More importantly, those brands have many schools that are MUCH smaller... syracuse, bc, duke, wake... even uva, nc state, gt while nice programs are not on the map when it comes to eyeballs for college football. VT and UNC are interesting, and UNC would almost be guaranteed a spot in a potential super league... but they are a national basketball brand... football is not as big a deal there and has hurt their position... they were #19 in athletic revenue in 2005, in 2019 they were #36.
In terms of football stadium size and attendance...
ISU would only be behind Clemson, FSU, VT, and Miami (miami shares their stadium with the dolphins... so that is the only reason). Also, only clemson averaged more fans per game than ISU. Clemson was the only school in the league with a top 20 attendance in 2019. Overall, the SEC is #1, B10 #2, and B12 at #3 was closer to the b10 in average attendance than to the #4 ACC. The ACC was almost at the same level as the PAC:
Avg Attendance:
SEC: 72.7k
b10: 65.1k
B12: 57.5k (ISU 59.8)
acc: 48.2k
pac: 46.1k
(http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/Attendance/2019.pdf)
Overall Athletic budgets between the "Big 8" schools are very close to the ACC outside the top few brands (only have public institutions for each conf). So, eliminate OU/Tx remaining 6 public universities in B12 have averaged $92M per year the last 5 yrs, ACC public 8 have averaged $103M/ year. Interesting liousville is 2nd in budget driven by #11 in college athletics for contribution revenue (papa john's).
https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances (you can get per school revenue from 2005-2019 by clicking on each school).
But these revenues are WAY behind SEC, B10... for example, Wisconsin makes more than FSU (FSU 5 yr average would be #5 in b10, tied with Tennessee for #7 in the sec). Ticket revenue which is driven by football in most cases, the ACC lags the top two as well. Also... South Carolina actually makes more than Clemson even with all of Clemson's success...
| Conference | Average of Total Revenues | Average of Ticket Sales |
| ACC | 103,619,680 | 20,724,140 |
| b10 | 126,446,497 | 28,020,515 |
| B12 (w/o OU, Tx) | 91,887,663 | 16,688,790 |
| PAC | 94,146,910 | 16,098,051 |
| SEC | 138,131,125 | 31,700,538 |
| Grand Total | 115,225,232 | 24,065,601 |
NCAA Finances: Revenue & Expenses by School - USA TODAY
Which are the most profitable college athletic programs in the country? See a ranked listed, including total revenue and expenses. Brought to you by USA TODAY.
sports.usatoday.com
NOTE: B12 without OU/Tx
Last edited:
Miami is just a strange case all around. Top notch private school that gets "this close" to cancelling football in the 70's. Schnellenberger shows up and turns them into a monster and Johnson takes it to the next level, then Erickson also has success. I don't see any logical reason that they should be sustaining success but they do pretty well...
They no doubt have some major league BMDs who must really like having good football continue at UM.
Makes them a prime candidate for the ACC. A natural fit with those other bball schools.
It's not just about winning championships though. It's about the history of the programs and how they are perceived. And their fan support. You can't say that Miami has anywhere near the fan support of those top B1G schools. In fact, it has less support than ISU. Attendance numbers, for comparison:
Miami
5 Year Average - 55821 (86% Capacity)
Iowa State
5 Year Average - 56562 (91% Capacity)
Florida State
5 Year Average - 68653 (86% Capacity)
Clemson
5 Year Average - 81409 (99% Capacity)
Penn State
5 Year Average - 103585 (97% Capacity)
Ohio State
5 Year Average - 105465 (103% Capacity)
Michigan
5 Year Average - 110884 (100% Capacity)
Out of the top 10 in attendance, 4 schools are B1G schools. None are ACC.
Attendance Rankings, Averages For Every School: 2020 CFN Five-Year Program Analysis
How many people show up? As a part of the CFN Five-Year Program Analysis, the attendance is a factor. Here are the rankings of all 130 schools. Contact @PeteFiutak 2020 Five-Year Program Analysis A…
In person attendance at games (ok, purchasing tickets) isn't the only factor in fan support, but I think you have to say it's a good indicator. The ACC Network will only grow if there is a fan demand for it. And there's no indication that there is. When the B1G Network came out, it didn't have a long ramp up period - the fans wanted it and the conference was good enough at negotiations to force it on cable companies. It was popular and a money maker immediately. It's not like people are going to gradually say "Oh, yeah I've seen that ACC network out there for a while, guess I'll go buy it now." Either you're a passionate fan who wants that content and you're going to pay for it, or you're not. And a relatively small percentage of people who live in ACC states are passionate fans.
agree... clemson / fsu are going to be as close as you get to osu, psu, mich, bama, LSU, uf, uga, etc. in the acc. outside of those two you are not going to get anything like the top brands in the other conferences. There are many small public and private schools in the ACC. This is quickly becoming a race to the highest concentration of brands. ACC is not going to have enough brands to add to offset the small schools that they have. There is just no way around duke, wake, bc, syracuse... SEC has vandy, b10 has nw... but most of the schools these conferences have are very large state schools. The ACC has some large state schools but they tend to be the smaller ones...
clemson < sc
fsu < uf
gt < uga
More importantly... the football brand for each of these states is usually the sec school. Even with all of clemson's success, sc/clemson were neck and neck in terms of average attendance... they are only separated by about 3k fans/game. In terms of athletic budgets, South Carolina makes more than Clemson...
Last edited:
After listening to the CW/Blum Sunday night podcast, I think they nailed the two most likely scenarios for ISU.
1 (Best): B1G Poaches the top money makers from the P12 sometime in the next few years. The leftovers of the B12 and P12 combine to form a league. The "P4" becomes B1G+Top of P12, ACC, SEC, B12/P12 Leftovers.
2 (Marginal): My previous scenario - nobody expands. B12 merges with best available of G5 and limps along being considered a "P5" conference, though the weakest one by a significant margin.
1 (Best): B1G Poaches the top money makers from the P12 sometime in the next few years. The leftovers of the B12 and P12 combine to form a league. The "P4" becomes B1G+Top of P12, ACC, SEC, B12/P12 Leftovers.
2 (Marginal): My previous scenario - nobody expands. B12 merges with best available of G5 and limps along being considered a "P5" conference, though the weakest one by a significant margin.
Having three stadiums in the Big 10 that seats 100,000 or more does tend to shift the balance to that leagues side more than anything. If ISU was in the Big 10 we would have finished right behind Iowa in attendence the last full year the schools played.I think you are significantly overstating the value of the ACC brands. I live in NC (heart of ACC territory and have followed the conference closely since I moved here attending football games at all three universities in the area - NC State, UNC, Duke). I also went to UNC for grad school. The ACC overall is much closer to the remaining 8 then they are to the b10 or sec.
Yes, i am very familiar with the ACC network. It is no where near the b10 and with the move away from the cable subscription model the long term prospects of conference networks are declining. This advantage and the size of the tv market you are in goes down significantly in a world where streaming demands fan bases pay for and watch the content. ACC struggles here but their partnership with ND helps them out... the ACC vs. ND games are some of the best ratings they have so getting 5 of them every year is benefitial.
The ACC does have brands.... However, GT<georgia, FSU/miami<uf, Clem>SC (but only recently)... miami is a nice brand... but actually a relatively small school (common theme across the league). More importantly, in football (which is king) you have clemson, miami, fsu as top brands that can compete nationaly... but not as competitive as you might think. More importantly, those brands have many schools that are MUCH smaller... syracuse, bc, duke, wake... even uva, nc state, gt while nice programs are not on the map when it comes to eyeballs for college football. VT and UNC are interesting, and UNC would almost be guaranteed a spot in a potential super league... but they are a national basketball brand... football is not as big a deal there and has hurt their position... they were #19 in athletic revenue in 2005, in 2019 they were #36.
In terms of football stadium size and attendance...
ISU would only be behind Clemson, FSU, VT, and Miami (miami shares their stadium with the dolphins... so that is the only reason). Also, only clemson averaged more fans per game than ISU. Clemson was the only school in the league with a top 20 attendance in 2019. Overall, the SEC is #1, B10 #2, and B12 at #3 was closer to the b10 in average attendance than to the #4 ACC. The ACC was almost at the same level as the PAC:
Avg Attendance:
SEC: 72.7k
b10: 65.1k
B12: 57.5k (ISU 59.8)
acc: 48.2k
pac: 46.1k
(http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/Attendance/2019.pdf)
Overall Athletic budgets between the "Big 8" schools are very close to the ACC outside the top few brands (only have public institutions for each conf). So, eliminate OU/Tx remaining 6 public universities in B12 have averaged $92M per year the last 5 yrs, ACC public 8 have averaged $103M/ year. Interesting liousville is 2nd in budget driven by #11 in college athletics for contribution revenue (papa john's).
View attachment 87716
https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances (you can get per school revenue from 2005-2019 by clicking on each school).
But these revenues are WAY behind SEC, B10... for example, Wisconsin makes more than FSU (FSU 5 yr average would be #5 in b10, tied with Tennessee for #7 in the sec). Ticket revenue which is driven by football in most cases, the ACC lags the top two as well. Also... South Carolina actually makes more than Clemson even with all of Clemson's success...
Conference Average of Total Revenues Average of Ticket Sales ACC 103,619,680 20,724,140 b10 126,446,497 28,020,515 B12 (w/o OU, Tx) 91,887,663 16,688,790 PAC 94,146,910 16,098,051 SEC 138,131,125 31,700,538 Grand Total 115,225,232 24,065,601
NCAA Finances: Revenue & Expenses by School - USA TODAY
Which are the most profitable college athletic programs in the country? See a ranked listed, including total revenue and expenses. Brought to you by USA TODAY.sports.usatoday.com
NOTE: B12 without OU/Tx
How much better does the Big 12 attendence look if had 3 schools with stadiums over 100k instead of just one?
When looking at money these schools spend you also have to remember that the Big 10 schools have been getting a rather large share from BTN for over a decade now. That cash cow has allowed them to move up in the rankings whether they performed or not, because of the money it brought it.
I tend to think you are undervaluing the ACC, now the Big 10 is much better, but the numbers gap will close as the ACC network gets going and they can build their fan base. With more money the schools can expand their stadiums and grow larger.
I think we have to *HOPE* that when the b10 adds the top AAU schools from the PAC that somehow, some way we get in too. I think you are right... more likely scenario *RIGHT NOW* is big 10 adds exclusively from the top 9 AAU schools in the pac (all pac except asu, wsu, osu are AAU). But I do think if we can perform well and continue to grow ticket sales (projected to be over $20M for the first time in our athletics budget for FY22), and donations we would have a strong case to compete depending on number added. The most frustrating part of this is that we have a lot of momentum right now. If this was delayed even 5 yrs we could be in a very different position... I was really hoping we would have until the end of the LHN deal so that we could continue on our current trajectory and be in an even better position.
ISU is #8 in the P5 in revenue growth from 2005-2019. Ticket sales is a key detractor where we were #20 in growth but that likely picks up significantly in the next few years if Campbell stays around (remember this is revenue not just qty... so, revenue could continue to grow even if we stay at 61.5k capacity for the next few years).
RANK IS BASED ON GROWTH, NOT TOTAL $ (ISU is #44 in $, #8 in Growth)
NOTE that Utah, while a P5 tam now, was in the MW in 2005 which helps explain their growth. Louisville and WV went from the big east to the ACC, B12 respectively. The Mississippi schools are fascinating cases... I honestly do not know what is driving such significant growth... Mississippi St. was one of the lowest budget schools in all of the in 2005 (they were #52 of 52 public schools included the 2005 rankings); in 2019 they had moved up to #30.
Last edited:
The revenues have all increased... B10 network has been a huge success... but this wasn't launched until 2006 and all media revenues have been increasing significantly since then. So, hard to split out the impact of the b10 network since these rights would have had value increases with or without the creation of the network. The gap between the ACC and B10 has been largely unchanged for 15 yrs (even when the network had little value in the first few years).
Most importantly, these revenues do not include many small private schools in the ACC. These schools likely would bring down the overall average since they have much smaller fan bases (wake, syracuse, bc, duke).
Basically, the big 10 has maintained a similar advantage since 2006 over the ACC... again, average size of the schools and the fan bases are going to have a much bigger impact on things going forward... I think schools like tcu, baylor will have a much harder time than the state schools to find landing spots.
NCAA Finances: Revenue & Expenses by School - USA TODAY
Which are the most profitable college athletic programs in the country? See a ranked listed, including total revenue and expenses. Brought to you by USA TODAY.
sports.usatoday.com
The point is the stability of your conference going forward is going to be driven by the concentration of brands. The b10 is ok for now. But the SEC is much more concentrated and has passed them in revenue. The PAC and ACC do not have nearly the brand power and overall value of their media content on a per team basis has been much lower for years - this is not new. The B12 was much more competitive than the PAC or ACC have been historically. So, with the B12 gone, the top two can start to pick away at the top brands from the PAC and ACC.
I guess we can agree to disagree on this one... but I think we will find out pretty quickly which way this is going to go... if b10, sec start sending 80M-90M checks to their members and acc is sending out 45M to 50M the top schools will start to leave.
Last edited:
