Ok man. Its fair to call me condescending for that, but when you come into a thread about Notre Dame and say it their arrangement isn't fair, it's reasonable to expect that it will be met with hostility from Notre Dame fans. That is especially true when you're flat out wrong. Do you have any metrics to suggest that the ACC is not being fairly compensated for the relationship with Notre Dame? Do you have any idea how much money Notre Dame makes the ACC?
To start, let's just talk about Men's basketball. Men's basketball tournament revenue is distributed based on the amount of games a conference has played in during the tournament over the past 6 seasons. Each tournament game played over the past 6 years is awarded 1 game share. Those wins are counted each year for 6 years. Each share is worth approximately $250k (2014 number). Since Syracuse played in 2 games in 2014, they made approximately $500k for the ACC. That $500k will also be paid this year and the next 4 years. That means that Syracuse so far has earned about $1 million for the ACC from the men's basketball tournament payouts so far (with another 2 million still to be paid in increments over next 4 years.) Notre Dame played in 4 games this year. That means they made $1 million for the ACC this season only. The ACC will also receive that $1 million each year for the next 5 years, so ND men's basketball so far has netted the ACC $6 million compared to $3 million for Syracuse in NCAA tournament revenue.
I can't find share values for women's tournament games, but I believe the same model is used, although what I've read suggests the share value is much lower. ND has played in the national championship game 2 years in a row.
I don't know how NCAA payouts work for other sports, but ND Lacrosse was in the final 4 last year and is ranked #1 in the country this year. ND men's soccer won the national championship in 2013 and was solid again this year. ND competes at the highest level in all sports. This is good for the ACC.
Your entire argument is based on ND not playing a full conference schedule for football. Of course, as you suggest, the ACC would make more money if ND played 9 games against ACC teams, but you ignore that they would make much less money if ND played 0 games against ACC teams. Almost every team sells out their stadium for ND games and usually charges a higher face value for the game. That's revenue that wouldn't exist for those schools without the ND deal. That doesn't even include the extra television audience that you get for ND games or that all of those games are played on national tv. Notre Dame at Florida State last year was one of the most watched regular season college football games in years. ESPN probably has already circled ND at Clemson as a prime time game. ND also plays at Virginia and at Pittsburgh. The inclusion of even 2-3 ND games a year has value in the ACC football tv deal. Again, I can agree that 4-5 would be better for the ACC, but you have to recognize that 0 would be worse.
In your opinion, the ACC would be better off if they told ND to go away if they don't want to give the ACC more than they currently do. They should throw away millions of dollars a year brought in by Notre Dame because you feel like the deal is unfair to the ACC.