I don't think they were a top 3 conference before adding Cal, Stanford, and SMU.

Now they have added Cal/Stan/SMU who had a combined 14-23 record last year. Not sure that bumps the ACC up much.

SMU board chair David B. Miller: “We’re finally back where we belong.”

Emphasizes that the ACC is a “top-three” conference.

Says he got a call from George W. Bush to congratulate him and Bush called this one of the finest moments in SMU history. pic.twitter.com/hfhGsT1ZCc

— Chris Vannini (@ChrisVannini) September 1, 2023

2 minutes and already insufferable.

— Vitamin B12 (@Big12_Sickos) September 1, 2023

Failed to mention the poorest athletic dept in division 1 for the next 7 years.

This is SMU's "getting the camel's nose under the tent" moment.

Read the U.S.A. Today column for a different perspective about the ACC and its health and status. I believe someone posted it on this board.

boognish_bear said:

---

2 minutes and already insufferable.

— Vitamin B12 (@Big12_Sickos) September 1, 2023

---

Wow, can't wait to revisit these statements from SMU in 5 years...

The ACC expanded because there was a pool of television money ESPN was contractually required to give it because of conference expansion, and most of that money will be hoarded by the existing members while the newbies subsidize their athletic departments in other ways. In SMU's case, the desperation to get into a power conference was so strong, it reportedly agreed to forego a media-rights distribution for its first nine years as a member of the ACC.

In other words, SMU is going to literally pay to play in its new league despite being competitively irrelevant in its old one. There will be three presidential elections by the time SMU gets a dollar from television.

Pulled from an article posted in another thread..

Teams are now lining up to add SMU to the schedule for a "win over a P5 team."

SEC, B1G, BigXII, ACC

I mean he's really gotta sell it if they aren't gonna get paid for so long.

Playing for free..