$80-90 million is too high. Projections are showing 5 years from now it's likely going to be around $70 million per team. Yes, that's still a good chunk of money, and yes, it is definitely better than the crappy ACC deal, but it isn't going to all of a sudden turn Vanderbilt, South Carolina, and co. into some juggernauts.
Did Swofford screw the ACC over before he left? No doubt. Do they need to get out of the contract even if it means admitting Notre Dame(unlikely) or WVU(much more likely)? Absolutely. Even if the ACC adds WVU which contractually allows them to renegotiate TV rights, they obviously won't be getting a deal that puts them in the same league as the B1G or SEC, but they can get a more competitive deal.
There's more to the sport and building programs than pure revenue as well. Texas has been bringing in more revenue than anyone else for a long time now and it hasn't led to them being an unstoppable force. They had a winning percentage a little above .500 for the entire last decade.
Heck, going back to the Vanderbilt, South Carolina, etc. examples, they've been bringing in 150% of the revenue the ACC teams have and let's not act like it has led to them being anything special. Vanderbilt gets more revenue than Clemson since they are in the SEC, but we obviously see the difference in the programs over the last 10+ years.
To keep it somewhat short and simple, the revenue only takes you so far. You can only build so many facilities and things that win over a recruit here or there. The biggest advantage the money gets you is if Miami and FSU and their inept admins somehow stumble onto some elite coaches, the SEC schools will potentially be able to use that TV money to pay some absurd salaries that the current admins at Miami and FSU won't want to pay since they aren't all in on winning. That's where the biggest advantage is.
That said, there's only so many good coaches out there, and we've seen the SEC loves to hire the same failed coaches repeatedly, so Miami and FSU probably don't have much to worry about unless the SEC changes their hiring processes. Also, if Miami and FSU ever do go back to having admins that care about winning, both schools are more than capable "finding" the money to pay for successful coaches. FSU could have funded the football program more under Fisher, but there was more to that story and I know you likely know that, too.
To give a better example, Miami's admin doesn't care much about winning in sports. They are all about their
PR and pushing certain agendas and winning takes a backseat. They are very reluctant to spend any money despite Miami having WAY more than most people realize, and they really hate paying coaches. While Richt was here he was still getting closer to $5 million per year. That would be around the top 15 salaries going into 2021's season. That's with Miami being cheap.
Hell, Miami is still pretty cheap and they paid Dan Enos over a million two years ago to be an abomination and they're paying Lashlee around a million as well. They were also paying Blake Baker around three-quarters of a million dollars which isn't a ton, but when you realize that's what they're paying an inexperienced DC when they are being cheap, then you begin to understand they have the means to pay well if they ever want to. If the admin at Miami ever changed and they actually had an attitude that was all about winning and they wanted to spend the money to get results on the field, Miami would very well have the resources to fund a top 10 coaching staff.
I get where you're coming from with regards to the advantages these schools will have, but the Vandy's, South Carolina's, Tennessee's, Rutger's, and so on have all had some advantages financially over the years and it's amounted to nothing because money doesn't buy you wins. You still have to have the admin setup right with the right attitude, you still have to make the right hire after the right hire to become successful, and so on.
Take Tennessee, give them the revenue Texas has, Tennessee would just become the Texas of the SEC with that money. They've made boneheaded moves left and right and the latest hires they've made are questionable as well.
A lot of these schools are going to just cash these checks and not worry about winning as much. They may say the right things here and there, put on a show acting like they are all in like Alabama, but they won't be. They'll become what Miami became after their ACC move. Once Miami was guaranteed that ACC check, they began having a huge cultural shift in their admin that hasn't changed a whole lot. Why risk spending a lot of money to try and get some wins when you can be cheap, mediocre, and be guaranteed millions of dollars?
If every single SEC and B1G administration is replaced with cutthroat win at all costs people, then it may be time to worry, but in the meantime, Vanderbilt getting $65 million in distribution money still has less potential as a program than a current Miami or FSU who are cheap and not focused as much on winning.