NASHVILLE, Tenn. — The two most powerful people in college athletics shared a room here Thursday after an unprecedented joint meeting of their school’s athletic directors.
Seated at a nondescript table in front of a dozen media members, commissioners Greg Sankey of the SEC and Tony Petitti of the Big Ten answered questions for nearly an hour about the raucous meeting of their top leaders.
They couldn’t have looked more different: Sankey, in his blue-checked sport coat, white-collared shirt and dress shoes; Petitti, in white Nike shoes, a sweater pullover and black ankle socks.
Beyond their competing fashion styles, their similarities brought them to this place: the Grand Hyatt in the bustling capital of country music, where executives from the nation’s most powerful and wealthiest leagues gathered for a somewhat historic meeting.
Although no decisions were made, all of the topics expected to be discussed during Thursday’s seven-hour summit were discussed: the future format of the College Football Playoff; a regular season schedule for football and basketball between the two leagues; and an entity to administer and enforce post-House settlements.
During the nearly hour-long meeting with reporters in a second-floor conference room, the two men shared details of the conversations as their athletic directors filed out of the main entrance to the lobby below.
Sankey and Petitti assured the country that their conferences have no intention of separating themselves from the rest of college athletics. They sharply criticized several outside proposals that would reform college athletics. And they will wait until after the completion of this year’s inaugural expanded CFP before making any real decisions about the playoff format, scheduling partnerships and postseason bowls.
But what is left unsaid here may be more shocking than anything that has been said.
Simply put, the SEC and Big Ten plan to reshape college athletics. They are now the drivers of the car, the operators of the machines, the captains of the ship.
For the most part, they believe they have control over the future playoff format (not the other eight FBS leagues). They will oversee the implementation of a new enforcement model under the impending revenue sharing concept (not the NCAA). And they could — most believe they will — overhaul the way their schools participate in the postseason (bowls?).
Although Thursday’s meeting will not result in any real decisions, it is a clear first step towards ultimately reaching those decisions. It is a leap forward for change, a leap for transformation in the most volatile era in the history of the industry.
Buckle up. The road is bumpy.
“Those who have the gold make the rules,” said a Big 12 athletic director.
These potential shocking changes are just a talking point for now. Decisions take weeks, months, maybe even years.
But it’s clear what the end of the road is: a guarantee of more spots in the playoffs (multiple automatic qualifiers per league, perhaps), allowing them to play tougher regular-season schedules (presumably against each other) and paving the way for, perhaps a conference play-in tournament for the CFP at the end of the regular season. All of this means more revenue for schools at a time when administrators are looking for money in the era of athlete revenue sharing.
Many of these revenue-generating concepts are embedded in proposals for a revamped college sports landscape that have recently been announced (College Sports Tomorrow) and unveiled (Project Rudy).
An angry Sankey sharply criticized that timing: “I don’t think it’s a coincidence that they stepped up their PR program around our meeting.”
Most, if not all, of the proposed concepts could be implemented by the two leagues or by the power conferences as a whole, Petitti says: “I haven’t seen anything in any plan so far that we couldn’t do ourselves. It comes down to planning more good games and reorganizing the way you play those games.”
There is more to this path of change. Division I governance will be subdivided and the power conferences will gain more exclusive authority than ever over their own rules and policymaking. They will choose a third-party enforcement department and a clearinghouse intended to achieve the settlement’s main goal: eliminating the cumbersome system of booster payments.
And what about bowl games? It remains uncertain. But, as one leader recently told Yahoo Sports, “the days of schools losing money playing bowl games are over.”
Fasten your seat belt, we’re going down this bumpy road.
The “catalyst” for much of this change, Petitti acknowledges, is related to the House settlement, which will usher in direct sharing of school revenues among their athletes. The settlement is likely the final dividing line between the haves and the have-nots, the last straw in college athletics. The camel’s back breaks.
“There are so many things that need to change,” Petitti said.
What he didn’t say is clear: College athletics must evolve and operate as more of a professional and business entity. That’s because it is. If you pay players directly, you are a business.
“When you are a company,” says one high-level executive, “you make business decisions.”
College sports have changed, are changing and will change. Although decisions were postponed until later, Thursday’s meeting served as a reminder: The SEC and Big Ten are in control of the change that awaits.
They drive the car down this bumpy road we call college sports. Will they eventually run away together? Or will they drag everyone along? Will they end up in a place of compromise? Or one of division?
“This is the start of a conversation,” Sankey said.
