I don't think we want to get any bigger than we have to. The more mouths to feed, the less likely we all get enough to eat. Oregon and Washington are the best football programs available. I'd start with just trying to add those two and if we need to go 4, take both California schools. Stanford is a good draw and has had a good program the past 20 years or so. Cal has a large alumni base and fits the ACC's *ahem* personality. I'd stop there. 4 good programs in the Pacific time zone + ACC Network + ESPN not having to pay for an entire Pac 12 league and deal with that overhead might get us the numbers that would put the ACC #3 and at least give us a shot to stay competitive. ESPN is rumored to be looking at $300M/yr for the 10 Pac 12 schools left. That also doesn't count the costs for ESPN to televise all of those games (not only football...) with no PAC 12 Network in place. ESPN already owning the ACC network could expand their subscriber base like you said by quite a bit, and being able to deal with only the 4 PAC schools the ACC wants would probably save quite a bit of money while adding to it's ACCN revenues.. The ACC is currently getting like $500M/yr. Lets add $400M to that and divide by 18. $50M/yr per team. Not bad. Is it the $80-$100M that's being mentioned for the SEC/B1G? No, but its quite a bit better than the $36M the ACC schools are looking at and the $30M the Pac 12 schools are looking at. I don't think we can do any better by adding the Arizona schools, Utah or Colorado to the mix (although I personally feel we need to go after Utah).