Agree. I don't really see what the ACC gets out of it. It won't increase their payout dramatically just because Oregon and Washington are there. The only real benefit I can see is that the ACCN, which is only in like 20m homes, could be the combined home of the Pac/ACC, get it in more homes and spread out more games over more time zones. At that point though, its not really a conference merger, its a combined media partnership. However, now they have to spread that benefit over more mouths - square one.
An actual mega merger like that though could provide different benefits, since there are no more actual ways to expand for the B10/SEC without limiting money. We have fun talks about relegation/promotion, but, while I doubt it would happen for all FBS, it could work within conferences. Say the Big 12 expands to 16 with Colorado, AZ, ASU, and who the fuck cares at that point. The SEC could join forces with the B12 on a 32 team super conference - pool all that inventory, and package it en mass with several providers. It could then split that conference into two divisions. You could pay 60% to the top half (playing on Fox/ABC/CBS) and 40% to the bottom half (playing on ESPN, FS1, SECN). Everyone is slightly happy because guaranteed money, but with promotion/relegation between the two (usually three swap every year) you satisfy @Al_4_ISUprimary gripe that people who just happened to be in the right place are more deserving than those who aren't.
The biggest brands will likely remain locked in the top split, but may see a Vandy/Kentucky/South Carolina fall down and an Oklahoma State or UCF or whoever, move up.