Here a couple of counterpoints. In hindsight, would Stanford and Cal choose the ACC over the Big 12 given their reduced payout and travel? TV ratings for Big 12 football were higher than ACC football this year even with FSU and Clemson still in the ACC. Why is ACC football after key schools leave more valuable than the Big 12? If enough ACC schools want to leave, would they vote to dissolve the conference in 2030/2031? Why can't the Big 12 form an eastern pod, a midwest pod and a west pod to improve rivalries and reduce travel?
Q: In hindsight, would Stanford and Cal choose the ACC over the Big 12 given their reduced payout and travel?
A: Circumstances in 2030 will be different from the ones a few years ago. The Big 12 would likely prefer to expand east, not west. Meanwhile, the ACC will likely look to expand west, giving Cal and Stanford some more geographically-friendly conference mates. Wash St, Oregon St, Boise St, Gonzaga, San Diego St, and UNLV are all possibilities. Having said that, one major reason Stanford and Cal preferred the ACC was they wanted to be in a league with prestigious schools like UNC, Florida State, Miami, etc. Some or all of those schools likely won't be in the ACC by 2030 or so though.
Q: TV ratings for Big 12 football were higher than ACC football this year even with FSU and Clemson still in the ACC. Why is ACC football after key schools leave more valuable than the Big 12?
A: There are more factors to consider than just TV ratings. Which networks were broadcasting the games? Which other games were on at the time? Etc, etc. Remember, the question in 2030 for teams debating going from the ACC to the B12 won't be whether the B12 will be just superior. Assuming it is- which is no sure thing- is the difference between the two big enough to justify giving up $100M or more? That comes from the $75M exit fee plus a share of the departing teams' exit fees; it's likely that at least four teams depart for the B10/SEC, so that's at least $300M to be split among the 14 remaining schools. The upcoming ACC situation kind of reminds me of the situation the B12 faced a few years ago. When Texas and Oklahoma announced they were leaving, lots of people thought the conference was screwed. Instead, they're survived and are doing reasonably well. I wouldn't be surprised if the ACC was on a pretty similar level to the B12 after the departures.
Q: If enough ACC schools want to leave, would they vote to dissolve the conference in 2030/2031?
A: It depends on the ACC's bylaws but I think the chances are low. Dissolving the conference would surely require at least 51% agreement and likely higher than that. There is probably a maximum of 10 slots available in the other three conferences, and that's assuming all three go to 20 teams, which is not a given. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that more than 10/18 teams would be interested in dissolving the conference, and I suspect the threshold for dissolving it is closer to 2/3 or 3/4.
Q: Why can't the Big 12 form an eastern pod, a midwest pod and a west pod to improve rivalries and reduce travel?
A: The Big 12 could totally do that. It's entirely possible- but not nearly certain- that Cal and Stanford eventually leave the ACC for the B12, but I doubt it will happen in 2030. The cost would probably be too steep. It might happen closer to the ACC GOR expiration date in 2036, but that's ten years from now and who the heck knows what the situation will be at that time.