People seem to think that both the SEC and the Big Ten will expand to 20 or even 24 teams in the next round of realignment (around 2030). I know people like symmetry, but there’s no good reason why the two conferences should end up the same size. This reminds me of what people were saying long time ago. Back then, many believed the end game would be four conferences of 16 teams each (the classic 4×16 model). I haven’t heard anyone seriously talk about that lately. But we have to consider the business side. In the end, it’s all business, isn’t it? Fox and ESPN have been the two main drivers behind conference realignment so far. ESPN is much bigger than Fox in college sports and has far more programming slots to fill (ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ACC Network, SEC Network, ESPN News, ESPN+, etc.). Fox is heavily committed to the Big Ten, but ESPN can comfortably handle more than one major conference. Their strategy has been to prioritize the SEC as the flagship partner while treating the ACC as a secondary property. The SEC is widely regarded as the best football conference, with excellent basketball and baseball as well. The ACC is a OK football conference with good basketball, baseball, and Olympic sports. There’s another important dimension, though: the SEC is largely a regional conference focused on the Southeast and Southwest. Being regional isn’t a weakness — it’s a feature by design. The SEC still draws the most eyeballs, and I would argue that its regional identity actually helps its ratings. But ESPN is a national network. As a national broadcaster, it needs to reach other markets, even if the ratings in those markets aren’t as strong. How many SEC games do you see in the late night TV slots? Turning the SEC into a “national” conference would be like killing the golden goose. Why would ESPN do that? The simplest and smartest solution for ESPN is to own a secondary, lower-cost property that provides national reach and complements the SEC. That’s why the SEC doesn’t need to be as large as the Big Ten. Fox needs the Big Ten to cover everything, but the SEC doesn’t have to. By the way, I think Yormark desperately wanted the Big 12 to become that secondary national property for ESPN. He has openly talked about covering all four time zones and recruited UConn very aggressively for East Coast and New York market exposure. Unfortunately for Yormark and many Big 12 fans, it looks like ESPN has chosen the ACC for that role by renewing its contract. Sure, Drake T[r]oll and other pundits keep dreaming about the Big 12 poaching ACC schools after 2030, but they don’t seem to understand that the ACC has secured financial stability through 2036 with the new media deal. Schools may leave in 2030, but the media rights money will still be there. And even the relatively modest ACC deal is still significantly better than the Big 12’s deal. (That’s why you rarely hear them talk about the revenue gap between the two.) In the next round of realignment, ESPN may allow the SEC to take UNC plus one more school (maybe UVa?). That would expand the SEC’s geographic footprint and strengthen its basketball profile without compromising its strong regional identity or delivering a fatal blow to the ACC. The Big Ten would likely add two schools as well — at least one from Florida. If they no longer care about AAU status, then Florida State plus Miami could be an option. If they stick to AAU criteria, Arizona or Arizona State could be dark horses. The state of Arizona is as large as Virginia and is growing much faster, yet surprisingly few people have mentioned the Arizona schools as a potential target for the B10. For the ACC, as I’ve said many times, the ACC needs to add some schools from the Pacific and Mountain time zones. The ACC should target Utah and Arizona State (or Arizona) first. Adding one more Texas school wouldn’t hurt either. Getting UConn wouldn't be a bad move to backfill if UNC leaves. It would also prevent the Big 12 from gaining a foothold in the Northeast.