Is the ACC playing second fiddle to the Big Ten and SEC when it comes to media rights? While those two conferences are all about the blue-blood programs grabbing all the headlines, the ACC is keeping a lower profile. But a controversial claim about this particular conference’s media revenue has stirred significant debate. And this all began when Tony Altimore posted a graphic suggesting that ACC schools would earn $51.3 million in media rights revenue from 2025–31. But wait—with two ACC programs breaking the quiet, is the whole claim just an “offseason Twitter lie?”

TJ Pittinger welcomed Big 12 insider Drake C Toll in a new episode on College Football Addiction on February 17. The lingering question is—“Is the ACC way ahead of the Big 12?” Drake didn’t mince words — “$20 million ahead if you ask Tony Altimore, who posted a graphic that utilizes some Florida State sourcing to say that ACC schools are making, according to his graphic, $51.3 million per year; that’s media rights from 2025 to 2031 and the Big 12 making about 20 million less at $31.7.” Here’s his take on the situation: “Turns out TJ, the only problem with that is it’s a complete lie.”

Despite getting the numbers wrong, Altimore’s refusal to delete or correct his post has led to criticism from many people including Drake. “Tony Altimore hasn’t deleted the original post,” he said. “Hasn’t really corrected much or accepted accountability for false data and propaganda. It turns out this is just not real. The actual numbers may be around that 5-7 million mark, around the 6-7 million mark that is from Jeff Fuller.” ESPN’s Jeff Fuller debunked this claim using official data from USA Today and Sportico. 

Per Fuller’s report, “The entire ACC conference distribution was only $44.8M/school per USA Today’s college finance guru Berkowitz… Also, per Sportico, the average ACC public school only reported $34.6M revenue from ‘media rights’ that year, but Altimore somehow got a figure over 40% higher.” This stark discrepancy suggests that Altimore’s claim was misleading at best, if not outright false. And it stems from financial sacrifices by new ACC members like Cal, Stanford, and SMU. The introduction of a weighted revenue-sharing model has further triggered concerns about financial equity within the conference, as seen in the case of Florida State and Clemson.

Florida State and Clemson exit dilemma

FSU and Clemson have been at odds with the ACC, challenging the hefty exit sum. The conference has an extended contract with ESPN to broadcast games through 2036, with each of its 17 members initially set to receive around $25 million from a $425 million payout. But this is fairly smaller than what the SEC and B1G schools are poised to get. By 2027, the annual revenue gap per school between the ACC and the SEC is projected to reach $30 million. 

Over time, this financial disparity could cost Florida State and Clemson upwards of $600 million combined. The fear of falling behind in resources and recruitment has intensified their desire to leave the ACC. But the conference is also making moves to lock them in as the ACC came up with two financial initiatives—the Success Initiative and the Brand Initiative.

Win more, get paid more—that’s the simple idea behind the ACC’s success initiative. But the brand initiative, favoring the big schools, is a recipe for trouble and could create a two-tiered system. Locked on ACC Alex Donno mentioned these initiatives are a way to appease the two teams. However, the long-term viability of this model is questionable. By 2031, when the next major realignment window opens, the ACC could see mass departures from its most valuable programs.