Jon Wilner
The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to wilnerhotline@
And if you missed it, last week’s mailbag plunged into the implications of the Pac-12 and Mountain West settling their lawsuits.
If the Big Ten and SEC form a super league, what would happen to men’s basketball and the other sports? — @Wazzucoug1996
The super league concept is always relevant but went next level this week with the release of the latest college sports legislation on Capitol Hill. (More on that below.)
And there’s a common misconception about the threat. Even Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who co-authored the bipartisan legislation with Maria Cantwell (D-Washington), doesn’t see the situation clearly, in our view.
Everyone is concerned about the SEC and Big Ten joining forces, but the pure version of a super league requires an extrication, not a combination.
For political, legal and financial reasons, the theorized entity only works if the top brands in the SEC and Big Ten leave their lower-profile peers behind and form something new that features the most valuable 30-something teams in a structure roughly equivalent to a mini-NFL.
Much of the membership would come from the two conferences, but not all. Florida State, Miami, Clemson and North Carolina would be involved, along with Notre Dame, of course, and perhaps a few schools from the Big 12. How many? That would depend on the size of the super league.
The 100 or so excluded FBS schools would create a second division, with a promotion/relegation component possibly involved. (The ability to access the entity through competitive success might help ward off claims of collusion.)
The scenario Cruz has referenced, in which the SEC and Big Ten simply join forces, has two problems. It would be vulnerable to antitrust litigation; and it would be far less fiscally efficient.
Put another way: Too many schools currently in the SEC and Big Ten have very little, if any media value. The biggest brands would effectively pay for the lesser brands, just as they do now in the sport’s inverted pyramid of subsidization.
(The top 15 football schools subsidize the rest of the Power Four, the Power Four subsidize the rest of the FBS, the FBS subsidizes Division I, and Division I subsidizes the other NCAA Divisions.)
Media companies partnering with the super league would not pay top dollar to broadcast South Carolina against Purdue or Mississippi State against Rutgers or Missouri against Maryland.
But in the extrication scenario, only the schools with above-average media value would be involved. Everyone contributes to the revenue pot, which means … more revenue!
At least, that’s how we see the situation unfolding.
And in that world, the super league exists only for football. Basketball and the Olympic sports would reform along regional lines, which has always been the most sensible approach.
It’s beyond absurd that the West Coast schools have their softball and soccer programs (to name two) competing in leagues across the country.
But in Cruz’s version of the super league, where the SEC and Big Ten simply combine forces, basketball and a slew of Olympic sports would be involved. It’s not like the ACC and Big 12 would offer them homes. Competing in the combined entity would be the only viable option.
That was made abundantly clear in comments two weeks ago by Iowa State athletic director Jamie Pollard, who told Cyclone Fanatic: “Let them go, but they have to go in all their sports and see how fun it is to play baseball and softball and track when it’s just the 20 of you.”
It would not be fun, which is one of many reasons joining forces is more problematic for the top schools in the SEC and Big Ten than just leaving everyone behind.
What are your thoughts on the proposed Cruz-Caldwell college sports bill currently in the Senate? Is it good or flawed legislation? — @MrEd315
The Protect College Sports Act is a more thoughtful version of the SCORE Act that died in the House recently. It has merit on multiple levels, including the provisions that allow athletes five years to play five seasons and prohibit professionals from returning to college. Eventually, it could become the law of the land.
That said, the final version undoubtedly will look much different than the original. In fact, Senator Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut) wasted no time voicing opposition to the component that limits athlete compensation while “protecting the huge salaries of all the adults … who are getting rich off the performance of the players.”
Resistance by Democrats in both chambers of Congress will be fierce even though Cantwell played an integral role.
The provisions that generated the most attention were related to pooling media rights and preventing the SEC and Big Ten from expanding, an anti-competitive view within a bill that includes some antitrust protections for college sports.
The Hotline has always believed the impact of pooling media rights is grossly overstated by self-interested entities hoping to close the massive revenue gap between the SEC/Big Ten and everyone else. And there’s little reason for the two most powerful conferences to agree to pooling, especially the SEC.
Based on the audience data from last season, the SEC’s media rights deal with ESPN is clearly undervalued relative to the media deals involving the Big Ten, ACC and Big 12. As a result, any increase in revenue for everyone stemming from a pooling of rights would largely come at the SEC’s expense — it would pay for the extra dollars received by the ACC, Big 12 and Group of Six.
For that and many other reasons, we do not envision the SEC or Big Ten supporting the Protect College Sports Act in its current form, thereby adding the hurdles the bill faces on the journey to becoming law.
The Cruz-Cantwell bill requires 75 percent of Football Bowl Subdivision teams to agree to pool media rights. If the Big Ten and SEC expand to prevent triggering that provision, could the rest of the FBS retaliate by expanding with FCS teams? — @Pac12Central
The math is interesting, isn’t it? That 75-percent threshold clearly was picked for a reason.
There are 138 schools in the FBS and 34 in the SEC (16) and Big Ten (18).
If the other 108 agree to pool rights, that’s 75.3 percent — enough to trigger the provision.
But would Notre Dame, an Independent with its own (lucrative) media rights deal, side with the masses or with the Big Ten and SEC?
If the Irish refuse to join, then only 74.6 percent of the FBS would agree — not enough to trigger the provision.
(It’s yet another example of Notre Dame having outsized influence on the sport.)
The bill is written in a fashion that, in theory, prevents the SEC and Big Ten from expanding to gain numerical superiority in the pooling process. But will that hold up through the revisions in the Senate and House and potentially in court?
This being college sports, it’s not difficult to envision a ludicrous scenario in which multiple rounds of expansion unfold with each side attempting to gain advantage in the numbers game, until there are 150-something teams in the FBS.
But we don’t see it getting to that point. Either the provision will go the way of the Dodo or the Big Ten and SEC will determine they are better off pooling.
If new Congressional legislation prevents the Big Ten from adding new members, would Stanford and Cal be locked into long term ACC membership? — @sfw4422
Specifically, the bill prevents conferences with more than $1 billion in revenue from expanding in order to preserve the math at the heart of the pooling provision.
There are only two leagues that meet the standard: the Big Ten and SEC. If permitted to expand, they could prevent the rest of the FBS from ever reaching the number (of schools) needed to trigger pooling.
How the federal government can dictate the membership structure of a non-government agency is beyond us — and one of several aspects of the bill that appear legally tenuous.
Our advice to everyone: Do not overreact, especially to the aspects related to media rights and conference expansion.
The likelihood of the Protect College Sports Act becoming law is less than 50 percent.
The likelihood of the bill in its current form becoming law is close to zero.
Let’s monitor the changes as it moves through committee, onto the Senate floor and then, possibly, through the House.
When and where will the Pac-12’s football media event be held? What are the odds they do it cocktail hour style again and lean into the #AfterDark brand? — @KoolEconimics
At this point, there is no Pac-12 football media event scheduled this summer.
The conference undoubtedly has its reasons — its rebirth constitutes an unprecedented situation in the modern era, for sure. But we could make a case for the eight coaches convening for a one-day media event with top players, conference executives and perhaps the athletic directors.
Our strong suspicion is the absence of football media gatherings in Las Vegas involving the power conferences, which attract national reporters, played a role in the decision.
There was nothing for the Pac-12 to piggyback off. (The closest major media event will be the Big 12’s edition in suburban Dallas in early July.)
Don’t be surprised if the eight schools, along with the conference office, mark the occasion of the Pac-12’s rebirth (July 1). But it won’t be accomplished through a traditional summer gathering.
If the Big Ten and SEC never agree on a playoff format, what happens after the current College Football Playoff contract expires? Would the 12-team version remain in place? — @troyboy8ball
Good question, and for those unaware, here’s the relevant date: The CFP’s media rights deal with ESPN, which begins this fall, expires in the spring of 2032.
That means the 2031 season is the last covered by the agreement. Beyond that, there is nothing.
No 12-team format.
No options for expanding to 16 or 24.
No requirements that the SEC and Big Ten agree on a number.
Nothing.
Starting in the fall of 2032, the sport’s postseason is a blindingly blank slate.
By that point, there could be another round of realignment. The super league could have formed. College football could be structured in a way nobody has yet considered.
We have no idea what the regular season or postseason will look like in 2032.
That’s all by design, of course.
In 2030, the Big Ten’s media rights deal expires and the penalty to leave the ACC plunges.
In 2031, the Big 12’s media contract expires.
In 2032, the CFP and NCAA Tournament deals conclude.
And in 2034, the SEC’s agreement with ESPN ends, although there’s always the option to revise the deal early.
The expiration dates are lined up, planes on a runway, in a fashion that suggests a massive restructuring in the early 2030s — before a new playoff format is created.
Any thoughts about the Pac-12 adding UTSA and/or North Texas? They could partner with Texas State and allow more growth in Texas. — Rance S
Both schools make sense geographically and competitively. North Texas is fresh off a 12-win season, and UTSA has been bowl-eligible every year this decade.
They offer a travel partner for Texas State, deeper entrenchment in Texas for recruiting purposes and another option for Central Time Zone kickoffs.
Our view: The Pac-12 would have preferred either school over Texas State — both are further advanced as football programs — but luring North Texas and UTSA away from the American wasn’t realistic.
Remember, Texas State is joining the Pac-12 at a discount: The Bobcats aren’t full-share members initially but deemed the moving from the Sun Belt worthwhile nonetheless.
The American’s media contract is lucrative enough that North Texas and UTSA would not have agreed to the same financial parameters as the Bobcats.
This issue isn’t about whether the Mean Green or Roadrunners “could partner with Texas State.”
It’s a matter of whether they would want to.
Did Idaho prove that some struggling FBS schools are better off in regional FCS leagues? And if a 24-team playoff kills future paycheck games, does the bottom of FBS even make sense? — @CurtisBlack
The Vandals are better off in the Big Sky. Of that, there is zero doubt. And others could benefit from dropping down a level. But that’s a difficult move to justify publicly to constituents and carries ramifications across every facet of campus.
Even at the lowest level of the Group of Six, football remains a university’s best marketing option.
Then again, we suspect the soaring costs of competing at the FBS level, driven by the combination of revenue sharing and NIL, will prompt many other lower-tier FBS schools to make the downward move.
It could take a few years, but the math is increasingly difficult to justify. That’s true, as well, for the bottom tier schools in the power conferences.
If a structural rupture creates a super conference, the schools left behind will look (and spend) like the current Group of Six programs. Meanwhile, some in the Group of Six could move to the FCS.
Give it time. Massive change is coming.
Shouldn’t in-game references to players be followed by the top five NIL donors to that player? “Up the middle for five yards goes Darrin Jones, sponsored by Dr. John Ames, Perkins Real Estate, etc.” — @schmedvig
Well done. That’s a fantastically ridiculous concept that the Hotline would pay to hear, for one game.
Or maybe one quarter.
Or one series.
The sentiment is fully understandable, however. What’s the endgame for college sports? How absurd could the situation become with NIL and the transfer portal and revenue sharing? What preposterous situation will emerge in coming years?
In a literal sense, we are a universe away from Gus Johnson declaring: “Goodness, what a throw by Oregon quarterback Dante Moore sponsored by Chevrolet GMC of Eugene!”
But figuratively, it feels like we are mere days away.
*** Send suggestions, comments and tips (confidentiality guaranteed) to wilnerhotline@
*** Follow me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline
Related posts:
BYU guard Trevin Knell (21) drives against Arizona guard Anthony Dell'Orso (AP Photo/Rick Scuteri)
Best of the West MBB power rankings: Brigham Young, Utah State and the state of Utah all thrive in unexpectedly successful season
Best of the West WBB power rankings: USC sweeps UCLA, Cal climbs ahead of ACC tourney, GCU stays sizzling
(AP Photo/Michael Conroy, File)
Live reaction to the House v NCAA settlement with Jon Wilner
Mailbag: Tracing the breadcrumbs to realignment (and a super league) as the CSC struggles for traction and frustration soars