One of the biggest problems with realignment is finding enough like-minded institutions willing to spend money on athletics. The Sun Belt was very meticulous in who they added the first go round and also their deal with ESPN: (1) bus travel league for the most part (2) schools that are willing to invest more into football and actually cared to do so and (3) wanting to keep playing more games on Saturdays to drive fan attendance.
I'm not sure if Ohio fits into that. And I'm not sure our academic leaders would approve the move solely for athletics.
For years I’ve seen people talk about academics being tied to athletic conferences, but I have no idea how this works in practice. Genuinely curious if this even matters in any meaningful way? Like, is there anything anyone can point to academically between schools that could not still happen if we weren’t in the same conference?
You can look at the PAC 12's demise for an example. Stanford, Cal and Washington refused to be in the same conference with the likes of Boise State, Fresno State and San Diego State simply because they didn't fit the academic profile. They quite literally would have rather seen their own conference die. There were obviously other factors that played into that, but the PAC 12 had chances to expand and they just didn't.
The Big Ten has stated for years that they would only target schools that fit their type of institutional profile. Probably why they went as far west for UCLA and Washington, but hasn't thought twice about a school like West Virginia in its own backyard. You could argue the biggest target on everyone's radar right now is North Carolina. They fit the academic profile for the Big Ten, but it's right on the border of the SEC who also wants them.