There is indeed a movement toward super-conferences, but the exisiting foundations shall remain. Colleges/Universities are not the NFL whereby a franchise determines league placements and the inclusions of startups and divisional placements are under centralized, professional management with distinct criteria. Even the NFL does not toss out teams from leagues that comply, and do not shift movements based predominantly on perceptional value and bias.
College sports are more fluid and certainly more numerous and subject to change with time. Programs improve, others diminish, and college programs are certainly impacted by funding, population shifts, governance, enrollments, coaching, etc., and such can happen in short order. And, the NFL is dealing with one sport, not the multitude which colleges provide which prefers a greater interactive dimension. Posted scripts that have suggestions such as cutting out Ole Miss, Miss. State, Vandy, Iowa, ISU, Northwestern, WVU, etc., and leaving the Dukes' and BCs', are in the domain of opinionated bias and the system does not operate that way, nor will it. The intent is not to be exclusionary from within, but to be a distinction from schools with "generally" obvious lesser means, scope, and marketing value for advertising, TV exposure, and bowl deals. Politics, traditions, alumni and booster power, legal issues, and an appreciable sense of fairness and access, cannot be dismissed. The means shall not be "cut and add" when geography, just causes, availabilities, and existing limitations remain at work.
There will not be a 64-team college league of 4 neat conferences of 16 each that becomes exclusionary and not interactive with the rest. However, there will be elite conferences that control most of the revenue. They do that now, and plan to enhance it.
I agree completely.