Case 1 - UMD: The public reason was the Athletic Department was bankrupt, which was/is true, but the other reason was UMD endowment. As of 2015 their endowment was 283 Million, this is community college money. So it was a no brainer for the administration and the athletic department to vote the move to the BIG in search of riches. I think Delaney and the BIG thought that with UMD leaving, they could convince UVA, UNC, and Duke to jump on the gravy train (UVA & UNC meet all the BIG expansion criteria and Duke would grease the wheels for UNC to make the move). BIG miscalculation on Delaney's part and they ended up with UMD & Rutgers.

Case 2 - Texas A&M: Athletic Department is flush with money and endowment is 10 Billion. So moving to the SEC was not based on money, but I believe they were fed up with Texas and the LHN and the opportunity to leave presented itself and the SEC jumped at the chance to get into Texas and offered Missouri to come along.

The reason endowments are so important is they mean more money to attract & keep top faculty, devout more money to research, and compete for the top students. Expansion is voted on by the Presidents and academics are more important than athletics (or so I hope). Louisville endowment is around 1 Billion and their athletics were superior to any other school available when UMD left. Their affiliation with the ACC should increase their fund rising and thus their academic standing.

Oklahoma fits Case 2 and Kansas would be the second school to move with Oklahoma when the time comes. (BIG or SEC)

Texas would hobble together a BIGXII by adding schools or go independent and get an 'other sports' agreement with the PAC 12.

ACC will stand pat unless Texas wants to join, but no other school moves the needle enough to justify expansion at this time. No ACCN or Oklahoma jumping would probably be the catalyst for expansion. Just my rumbling thoughts.