If you want to BALANCE CFB and keep it a national sport and there was some cooperation and the goal was not to continue to create 2 top heavy leagues in the SEC & B1G. I think there are two options, most have not thought of the 2nd. Each involve the B1G & SEC giving back a regional rival to UT & OU while picking up a traditional rival while the B1G picks up Virginia and the SEC NC St. I think it will be bad for the sport if the B1G & SEC continue to get even more top heavy than the rest of the leagues.

1.) B12/PAC merger where the B1G & SEC give back a traditional regional rival to UT & OU, while picking up a ACC property to replace(the ACC should be happy anything happens if they get ND).

Big 12/PAC (18):
UT, OU, Neb., Ark., TT or TCU, OSU, ISU, KSU, Col., USC, UCLA, Az., ASU, Wash., OR., Cal, Stanford, Utah

SEC: lose Ark., Missouri(mutual parting due to geography).
add 4 of: NC St., WVU or USF, TCU or TT,

B1G: lose Neb
add: Va., Missouri, KS

ACC: ND, WVU if SEC doesn't take, 2 of Cincy, UH, UCF, maybe eve someone else to replace WF depending on Alston.

2.) PAC gets old Big 8 and ACC gets Texas part of B12 and Arkansas for UT

PAC(18): OU, Neb., KU, OSU, ISU, KSU
***OU gets Neb. rivalry back
***OU & Neb gets access to California recruiting
***PAC gets CST programming.

ACC (16): UT, ND, TT, Baylor, Arkansas, Cincy
***UT plays a lot of Texas schools and gets back the Arkansas rivalry.
***ACC benefits are obvious

SEC (16): loses Arkansas
adds: NC St., TCU, USF
***The SEC keeps the B1G out of the south, adds a market in NC, strengthens Dallas/Fort Worth, already got their homerun addition in A&M.

B1G (16): loses Nebraska
adds: Va., Missouri, UCONN
*** B1G does adds Virginia market to be able to potentially dominate Va/MD/DC area helping PSU especially. Missouri makes sense geographically. UCONN could help NE presence.

In option 2 nobody loses their status as P4 now and it gives a chance at a more balanced competition as ACC & PAC improved chance for top tier teams in football.