In the next round of conference reshuffling, the ACC is almost certain to lose teams. Even if it is the B12 that takes the biggest hit, and the stragglers from the B12 merge with the slightly stronger ACC, the merger is likely to mean that the ACC merges into the B12, not the other way around. The B12 has more lucrative contracts (especially in regards to the playoff contract bowls, and retention of TV T3 rights). A merger of the conferences would be more lucrative if the ACC merges into the B12.
With any merger that large, the contracts will more or less have to be redone either way and Im guessing that after the recent realignment sagas, any major contract the conference signs - be it with bowls, or TV, or marketing partners, has an out if there is a substantial composition change. Which title they go with will basically depend on where they want the conference HQ to be and which history they want to bring along. If Texas and OU go, and FSU and Clemson are still in the ACC, then it would almost surely be under the ACC title. Now the real interesting thing would be the scenario above, where FSU and Clemson are in the SEC, but the Big 12 still falls apart. You would have 5 pre-2011 Big 12 schools (Baylor, TCU, ISUS, KSU, Kansas), 4 pre-2003 ACC schools (Duke, Wake, NC State, GT), and 7 former Big East schools (VT, Miami, WVU, Pitt, Syracuse, BC, Louisville).In the next round of conference reshuffling, the ACC is almost certain to lose teams. Even if it is the B12 that takes the biggest hit, and the stragglers from the B12 merge with the slightly stronger ACC, the merger is likely to mean that the ACC merges into the B12, not the other way around. The B12 has more lucrative contracts (especially in regards to the playoff contract bowls, and retention of TV T3 rights). A merger of the conferences would be more lucrative if the ACC merges into the B12.
K_L - it might be on the table, but I doubt it happens. Who are they taking?