Trouble is that it is symptomatic of the desperation of the ACC's better academic institutions to placate the academically weak, but "better at football" schools.
The ACC was once known as a P-5 conference that wouldn't sell out to the football gods if it meant lessening it academic reputation. Duke, UNC, UVA, Miami, BC, GT are all very selective to different degrees. Part time member ND is of he same ilk. But, Louisville? Check the numbers - Louisville accepts approx. 72% of its applicants and only graduates approx. 50% after 6 years! Are you kidding me? Duke and Louisville in the same conference? There was zero justification for adding Louisville beyond its questionable pedigree in football. No doubt UConn has to take the first bus out of the dreadful AAC, but here's to hoping that it is the B1G that calls.
If that were the pattern the ACC were following continuously, I would agree wholeheartedly with you. But, it isn't.
Texas is a Public Ivy, and, it shares it league with WVU. The four California schools in the Pac-12 are all elite academic institutions, and, they share a league with the Oregon schools, who aren't elite. Not even close.
Nebraska certainly is no academic bellwether of the plains, but, the B1G has caught no grief for adding them.
Utah and Colorado are at best average institutions, but, the Pac was not ridiculed for adding them, either.
But, the ACC is catching hell for adding Louisville, rather than UConn?