SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey at SEC media day on Monday “filibustered for much of his media availability by saying the right things,” but “more notably, he did not shy away when asked about frustrations brewing within the SEC,” according to Nicolas Villami of the TAMPA BAY TIMES. Sankey said that talks of the conference separating from the NCAA, possibly with its own rules or postseason, is “real” but added that the “assessment is ‘just an honest communication,’ not a leverage play on the SEC’s part.” Villami wrote a particularly “recent and relevant cause of said simmering is the Protect College Sports Act.” Sankey said that congressional action “is needed, but not before implementing a variety of suggestions from the SEC.” When asked what issue will most define the conference over the next five years, Sankey “identified the SEC’s ‘ability to be both influential and effective through change’ as most important.” For now, Sankey “seems to believe filibustering with pleasantries and relatively patient requests is best for that bottom line.” The question is for “how much longer that will be the case, and what the implications of a more ambitious and aggressive course of action could be” (TAMPA BAY TIMES, 7/20).
ENOUGH: USA TODAY’s Matt Hayes wrote, “When the commissioner of the SEC declares publicly that the possibility of his conference breaking away from everyone else is ‘real’ and isn’t ‘a leverage point,’ it’s probably time to listen. No matter how he couches it.” Sankey “has had enough.” Or “more apropos: the SEC presidents and chancellors have had enough.” Enough of Congress trying to “shove their ability to earn through media rights deals and potential expansion into an unescapable box -- through the guise of what’s good for all of college sports.” Enough of a 24-team College Football Playoff “pushed by the rest of college football.” Enough of schools “refusing to abide by rules, and using litigation to avoid enforcement.” Enough of schools “flouting the spirit of private NIL deals, and using the secondary market to destroy any semblance of financial competitive balance.” Enough of being told their conference championship game -- “the foundation of the league’s wild success over the last three decades -- has to go.” Enough of “being forced into a structural, logistical and financial model that they say, more than anything, doesn’t work for them.” But Hayes wrote “understand this: Congress doesn’t need the SEC and Big Ten’s approval to push the bill through. If the bill goes through as-is -- without the blessing of the two super conferences -- the SEC and Big Ten are left with a difficult decision.” Agree to the legislation, and “deal with any potential unwinding of its ability to earn or expand, or go it alone” (USA TODAY, 7/20).
IRONIC? SI’s Pat Forde wrote it “might still mean more in the SEC, but the payoff is less.” That “unavoidable reality makes some of the continued posturing by the league a bit harder to take.” Forde: “There is a dash of unintended irony here. The conference that at times has been the biggest outlaw locale in college sports now wants to see the rules enforced? Got it.” The SEC can not “reasonably break away -- especially while it is feverishly negotiating with Congress on a bill that could provide college sports with antitrust protection and potentially rein in the transfer and NIL markets.” So for now, “consider that empty posturing” (SI, 7/20).
LEGITIMATE FRUSTRATIONS: In New Orleans, Scott Rabalais wrote Sankey and the SEC do “rightfully have frustrations over the escalating costs surrounding college athletics and a laundry list of other issues.” That part “is understandable.” But it is “wrong for the league to talk about taking its ball and just playing ball with its 16 members.” Rabalais: “An SEC championship means a lot, but what would it mean to win the SEC and not compete in the CFP? Or the NCAA basketball tournaments? Or the College World Series? Perhaps the SEC is serious, but is it really going to break up the band?” (New Orleans TIMES-PICAYUNE, 7/20).
OPT OUT? In Nashville, Gentry Estes wrote the SEC may opt to “obliterate the framework of NCAA Division I sports if everyone else doesn’t get on the same page.” This is why Sankey, “despite any poetic serenades, should never be viewed as a guardian for the sanctity of college sports or a watchdog for its fans.” He’s “not paid to care about what you want.” He’s “paid to represent the SEC and its member schools and administrations.” His “job is to look out for them.” Estes: “While I don’t believe the SEC would ever do something so stupid, you have to take Sankey’s words seriously, right? Given how much greed, selfishness and basic incompetence of college leadership in general has been to blame for putting college sports’ existence into peril in the first place, how can you rule out anything in this era?” (Nashville TENNESSEAN, 7/20).
CRACKS ARE FORMING: AL.com’s Michael Casagrande writes, “Sankey can brag about the hardware, though the reality is hard to miss: The league’s football ownership is slipping away.” Failing to even play for the last three championships claimed by three different Big Ten teams is “just the beginning.” Casagrande: “Not to sound all Chicken Little, but the cracks are forming. Where, at one point, every move came up SEC, we’re seeing some backfires.” Perhaps those years of “playing schoolyard bully are coming back to bite the SEC” (AL.com, 7/21).
