SEC, B1G publicly back PCSA

[Maroon Eagle]

Big Ten, SEC finally green-light college sports bill, teeing up historic trip to Senate floor

With the Big Ten and SEC now on board, the bill has a chance of getting to the Senate floor next week for a vote.

www.nytimes.com

(gift article)

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Is there a cliffs notes? We can spend 50M through the school, plus outside legit NIL? One time transfer? (Only good part) No more law suits? 5M set aside for women’s sports?

I don’t think it’s all that great. Esp for us. We have to come up with that money every year and we don’t have any big corporate connections.

 

[Dawgzilla2]

Is there a cliffs notes? We can spend 50M through the school, plus outside legit NIL? One time transfer? (Only good part) No more law suits? 5M set aside for women’s sports?

I don’t think it’s all that great. Esp for us. We have to come up with that money every year and we don’t have any big corporate connections.

Its not great for us. Its better than the current direction.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

Did they get rid of the cap of 19 schools per conference and basically banning moving conferences (schools must be an independent for 5 years between), or is that still in there? I can't imagine the SEC or Big Ten signing off on either of those.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Did they get rid of the cap of 19 schools per conference and basically banning moving conferences (schools must be an independent for 5 years between), or is that still in there? I can't imagine the SEC or Big Ten signing off on either of those.

Something like that is in there regarding mega conferences. But again, I'm looking for clear cliff's notes.

 

[johnson86-1]

Did they get rid of the cap of 19 schools per conference and basically banning moving conferences (schools must be an independent for 5 years between), or is that still in there? I can't imagine the SEC or Big Ten signing off on either of those.

I don’t know. That cements the big10 and sec as the two premier conferences. Not ideal for the big 10 as they’re primarily in lower growth areas. But still pretty good deal for both.

 

[patdog]

Did they get rid of the cap of 19 schools per conference and basically banning moving conferences (schools must be an independent for 5 years between), or is that still in there? I can't imagine the SEC or Big Ten signing off on either of those.

Contrary to what a lot of people think, I think the big 10 & sec are about as big as they want to get right now. The big 10 didn’t want to take #17 & #18, but when the pac-12 fell apart they panicked a little & took them at a steep discount.

 

[Seinfeld]

Something like that is in there regarding mega conferences. But again, I'm looking for clear cliff's notes.

The good

- Antitrust exemptions that can allow the NCAA and conferences to make rules without the courts overturning them

- Solidify 5 year eligibility limits

- Put an end to unlimited transfers

- Seeks to end the NIL loopholes by putting it and rev sharing into the same bucket with a hard cap

- Eliminates an apparent attempt to pool and redistribute conference media wealth to smaller conferences

- attempt to preserve smaller sports

The bad (I guess)

- Seeks to immediately increase annual rev sharing cap to over 40M. Maybe not the end of the world since big schools are already paying this regardless, but I just don’t believe we have the funds

- Demands “flexibility” for funds required for women’s and Olympic sports which basically tells me that the SEC and B1G still want to be able to cut sports when needed

 

[OG Goat Holder]

I don’t know. That cements the big10 and sec as the two premier conferences. Not ideal for the big 10 as they’re primarily in lower growth areas. But still pretty good deal for both.

Kind of a catch 22. SEC had all the marbles for a while because the South had become more desirable. But the B1G has more money. But then like you said, over time, does the power return to the SEC due to sheer population increases thus the schools becoming wealthier by proxy?

 

[OG Goat Holder]

- Seeks to immediately increase annual rev sharing cap to over 40M. Maybe not the end of the world since big schools are already paying this regardless, but I just don’t believe we have the funds

Yeah this part sucks so bad. And this is only the rev share and the back room deals. If a player wants to go do a commercial for a private entity, they still can. They should have made this cap MUCH smaller, like 25M.

What about the mega conferences? People keep saying there's something in there about that.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

Whenever the ACC grant of rights expires (or whenever a judge throws it out), there will be a mad scramble to pick up North Carolina and Virginia.

Even if that never happens, I don't really see any reason why the SEC and Big 10 would ever agree to a cap anyway.

 

[Seinfeld]

Yeah this part sucks so bad. And this is only the rev share and the back room deals. If a player wants to go do a commercial for a private entity, they still can. They should have made this cap MUCH smaller, like 25M.

What about the mega conferences? People keep saying there's something in there about that.

It didn’t go into a ton of detail about it, but it sounds like any type of proposed restrictions on future expansion was a hard no from from the SEC and B1G, so from what I gather, they just took it out of the bill

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Whenever the ACC grant of rights expires (or whenever a judge throws it out), there will be a mad scramble to pick up North Carolina and Virginia.

Even if that never happens, I don't really see any reason why the SEC and Big 10 would ever agree to a cap anyway.

You’d think that the Big 2 would get together and realize that their consolidation of power is not a good thing for college sports overall. But that will never happen.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

You’d think that the Big 2 would get together and realize that their consolidation of power is not a good thing for college sports overall. But that will never happen.

I think 2 roughly equal superconferences playing balanced rotating schedules with regular games against all of their rivals is much better than the hodgepodge we have right now that people seem to want to "preserve"

Unless we can go back to the 2010 alignments, let's forge ahead to a 64- or 72-team super league format.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

I think 2 roughly equal superconferences playing balanced rotating schedules with regular games against all of their rivals is much better than the hodgepodge we have right now that people seem to want to "preserve"

Unless we can go back to the 2010 alignments, let's forge ahead to a 64- or 72-team super league format.

I’m ok with this, because I don’t consider 64 to be a super league that tries to rival the NFL. I just don’t want to do 20-30 or whatever.

64-72, to me, is just a split of P4 and G6. I’m ok with that. Also wouldn’t need to expand the playoff.

The funny thing is, it may not be P4 that breaks away. It might be the G6. They may decide, hey 17 the rev share stuff.

 

[patdog]

You’d think that the Big 2 would get together and realize that their consolidation of power is not a good thing for college sports overall. But that will never happen.

The only thing they care about is what’s good for the big 10 & sec.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

It didn’t go into a ton of detail about it, but it sounds like any type of proposed restrictions on future expansion was a hard no from from the SEC and B1G, so from what I gather, they just took it out of the bill

Bart and Charlie say, conference membership capped at 19.

 

[L4Dawg]

When I first saw this post I thought it said PCUSA. We would appreciate it I’m sure!