B1G & SEC summit

[HuskerChemist]

Anyone hearing anything about the Big Ten SEC summit that’s supposed to be happening in Tennessee I’ve heard about it. Talked on the radio, but really haven’t heard anything of substance.

 

[Herbie]

Doubt much of anything is shared

 

[2010sarenevercomingback]

I heard they're going to combine, and call it the "BIG SECS" conference.

 

[dom91932]

Anyone hearing anything about the Big Ten SEC summit that’s supposed to be happening in Tennessee I’ve heard about it. Talked on the radio, but really haven’t heard anything of substance.

SEC, B10: No private funds; football not 'broken'

SEC and Big Ten leaders showed a united front, as any big changes that would include private equity are unlikely to garner national support without their backing.

www.espn.com

 

[dom91932]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5835115/2024/10/10/sec-big-ten-college-football-investments/

SEC, Big Ten rail against private equity proposals: ‘We have the ability to do all of this ourselves’​

By Scott Dochterman

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Recent proposals by private equity firms investing billions of dollars into college football have yet to sway SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and Big Ten counterpart Tony Petitti to their side. And they probably won’t, either.

As part of a historic summit between college sports’ powerful conferences, league officials and every school’s athletics director met Thursday to seek areas of cooperation. The primary topics for discussion included the House settlement fallout, NCAA governance issues, the upcoming College Football Playoff and future scheduling.

However, the commissioners fired with both barrels toward efforts related to reorganizing college football.

“I have yet to see a single thing in any plan that I’ve learned details about that contains things that we couldn’t do ourselves and do with other colleagues,” said Petitti, who included leagues beyond the Big Ten and SEC. “I don’t see anything that’s proprietary that anybody holds, that we would need, that someone else controls to do what they’re talking about.

“It’s basically schedule more good games, and reorganize the way you play those games, like in terms of just tiering or going across and redoing divisions. Some say conferences can survive. Some say you don’t need conferences. At the end of the day, I think there’s a strong commitment that we have the ability to do all of this ourselves.”

Two organizations — the College Student Football League and the Rudy Project — have unveiled separate plans to infuse billions of dollars of capital into college football and restructure it with tiered payments and relegation.

But the Big Ten and SEC have little interest in joining a plan that curtails their power and influence. According to the league’s latest tax returns, the Big Ten disbursed around $60.5 million to each of its 14 members and the SEC shipped out north of $51 million to its 14 members.

Those payouts will grow significantly this year with the Big Ten moving to 18 universities and the SEC growing to 16 institutions.

“It’s no coincidence that both these efforts have ramped up their public relations schemes around our meeting,” Sankey said. “I don’t think there are coincidences in life. And I also don’t think it’s coincidental that they’ve chosen to comment on both Tony and I. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that one of your colleagues produces a little tweet today about we’re going to go around them.

“We work for presidents and chancellors. Our presidents and chancellors understand what’s happening around them. Are there different perspectives? Sure. On the big picture, there’s nobody dissatisfied with the Southeastern Conference. In fact, what we do, like our Big Ten colleagues, is incredibly exciting and draws people in. I think it’s a compliment.”

The leagues formed a joint advisory committee in February to help them navigate some of the challenges facing schools, particularly involving the House settlement. The details discussed Thursday morning included the implementation of roster caps, signing dates and how the settlement broadly impacts each school.

They were not allowed to discuss financial numbers to avoid any issues related to antitrust or collusion.

“Our legal counsel is very skilled at this point in defining the boundaries, what we can talk about and we cannot talk about, and we were fully attentive to that,” Sankey said.

In addition, the leagues weighed additional future football games against one another. This year, the Big Ten and SEC met in four nonconference games with television ratings and public attention piquing their interest in working together for more games in the future.

Nothing was decided except that they are in favor of scheduling future matchups, both in the regular season and in future bowl lineups.

The leagues declined to promote a specific alignment for the College Football Playoff after the 2026 season until after the upcoming tournament. They prefer to get through the current season and understand the challenges — especially related to on-campus first-round games — before touting a plan.

There also was a consensus that the NCAA “has to change,” per Sankey, to keep up with the massive overhaul impacting college athletics.

“The meetings were productive,” UCLAbia athletic director Martin Jarmond said. “It’s good to connect and have important conversations with athletic directors who face common challenges. We have a lot of work in front of us in college athletics. I left the meeting energized and enthused.”

 

[Kaladin]

“I think there’s a strong commitment that we have the ability to do all of this ourselves.”

Then do it already you dumb bitch

It’s a cluster fuck right now

I want regional divisions with old rivals

 

[LoudHogRider]

Then do it already you dumb bitch

It’s a cluster fuck right now

I want regional divisions with old rivals

 

[Kaladin]

 

[dom91932]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5835658/2024/10/11/college-football-playoff-future-big-ten-sec/

SEC, Big Ten looking to future, ready to flex their muscle in College Football Playoff​

By Scott Dochterman

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Neither Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti nor SEC counterpart Greg Sankey shared an opinion on Thursday about how to structure the College Football Playoff beginning in 2026. But that doesn’t mean they don’t have one.

As part of a summit between two longtime rival leagues, officials from both conferences and each of their universities met at the Grand Hyatt to discuss the ever-changing state of college athletics. The issues are significant, more so than at any juncture in history. Schools will share revenue with athletes next year, something unthinkable even a half-decade ago. Every facet of governance, which once operated at a glacial pace, now moves like an avalanche.

These are trying times for the industry leaders filling up a hotel ballroom. But once the problems are solved and followed up with continuous improvement, make no mistake: The SEC and Big Ten are poised to flex their muscle. That specifically includes the College Football Playoff format beginning in 2026.

Neither the SEC nor the Big Ten unilaterally can change the postseason, but according to Sankey, “We do have a defined role where we have to be clear participants at the end of that conversation.” A memo of understanding signed in March gives both leagues significant power over the CFP’s future makeup. For now, both commissioners are staying silent on their future preferences to focus on the upcoming tournament. Afterward, they’ll have plenty to say.

This year marks the first edition of a 12-team Playoff. It includes the five highest-ranked champions and the seven highest-ranked at-large qualifiers. The top four champions receive first-round byes and open the tournament in either the Rose, Sugar, Peach or Fiesta bowls. The fifth champion is ranked alongside the seven at-large teams and battles in first-round action on campuses in mid-December.

That all can change beginning in 2026 when the CFP revenue structure favors both the SEC and Big Ten. Both leagues will receive about 29 percent annually (around $21 million per school). The other leagues earn smaller shares: 17 percent for the ACC (around $13 million each), 15 percent for the Big 12 ($12 million each) and 9 percent for the Group of 5 conferences collectively (about $1.8 million per school). But how the Playoff field is structured, including the number of teams and the type of qualification, remains undetermined.

The challenges of on-campus Playoff games coinciding in college towns with semester finals, college graduations and perhaps weather issues are something no one has experienced on this scale, which is why Petitti and Sankey are mum on their preferences — for now.

“Our focus on future format comes after we go through this first cycle of the expanded College Football Playoff,” Sankey said. “So, not a lot of conversation about what ifs for Tony and I both; we’ve communicated with Rich Clark and his staff and our colleagues have as well. This just has to go incredibly well. This has to be a successful launch. This isn’t the time to talk about governance in ’26 or format in ’26, but the immediate implementation that is in front of us.”

“I’ve been pretty consistent about this,” Petitti said. “I want to see, not only what’s any impact on the regular season, I want to see what November football looks like. I want to see the selection process, actually how it works. How the seeding works. How will they evaluate and compare teams? I think that’s all fair to do. You can have a lot of situations where teams are going to be bunched.”

The initial four-team Playoff debuted in 2014 and was set up in a 12-year block in part to avoid “bracket creep” a term former Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany coined. Over time, conference commissioners and other officials wanted to examine Playoff expansion, and an agreement was reached in 2021. That iteration was set to debut in 2024 and included the top six champions and top six at-large teams earning spots. Multiple rounds of negotiations, alliances and disagreements followed until the current setup was agreed upon in 2023. It lasts through the 2025 season.

In previous discussions, Petitti and Sankey have pushed for at least three automatic qualifiers for their leagues, no matter if the Playoff stays at 12 or expands to 14 teams. Their argument lies with on-field prowess and the depth of both leagues. Currently, 60 percent of the AP Top 25 involves teams from the SEC (nine) or Big Ten (six), including eight of the top nine spots. Following the 2023 season, all four Playoff contestants now are members of either the Big Ten or SEC.

The depth of both conferences when compared with other leagues bolsters their collective argument that the SEC and Big Ten deserve more automatic participants.

“We just saw five of the top 11 (teams) lose conference road games — three in the SEC, two in the Big Ten,” Petitti said. “That tells you the quality and depth that’s being played. And I think that’s just a very challenging thing to evaluate. And it’s not because I don’t believe the committee does an incredible job of working at it and getting information they need. I just want to see how it all comes together.”

The leagues are set to collaborate on more than just Playoff participation. This year, they squared off four times on the field, and three of the games drew more than 5 million viewers. All 13 games that have reached 5 million viewers this season have included at least one SEC or Big Ten team. Adding more regular-season matchups between the conferences in football and other sports makes sense to garner interest and generate viewers.

In addition, more games with that type of appeal could keep attendance strong in both leagues. Last year, 20 of the top 23 teams in home football attendance came from either the SEC (11) or Big Ten (nine).

“I had my first chance to visit Ann Arbor this year for Texas and Michigan. Just an incredible experience,” Sankey said. “And you stand on the sideline prior to kickoff thinking about, ‘Well, what if we could do this more with our nonconference games?’

“We respect where we have instate rivalries that take place in nonconference scheduling. But we had a real general conversation about the what ifs in football and in basketball. We talked briefly about, are there other sport opportunities where the student-athletes on our teams could have the opportunity to challenge themselves against Big Ten competition?”

That could lead to more cross-sectional football games, perhaps mini-basketball classics replacing exempt multi-team events in basketball and crossover challenges in other sports. It has led some to criticize the two leagues as separating from the rest of collegiate sports. To that, Sankey bristles.

“I don’t think that perception is consistent with our conversation,” he said. “We recognize we’re a part of a bigger ecosystem, but we also are interested in what we might be able to achieve together.

“We’re going to focus on how we continue to lead and how we continue to improve. I think that’s the right focus.”