What’s going on in the Big 12 and beyond? I expand and explain every Sunday in Postscripts at Heartland College Sports, your home for independent Big 12 coverage.
A Regulatory Week in Three Acts
So, let’s start with some legislation. Well, actually, let’s be more specific. Let’s start with the Congressional legislation. The Save College Sports Act continues to dominate headlines and the bill continues to get marked up and tweaked as it gets a little bit closer to a potential vote on the floor of the U.S. Senate.
The bill was amended to require that any conference taking in at least $700 million in gross revenue during a fiscal year was not allowed to expand or merge with another league. Before the amendment, the limit was $1 billion. Before the amendment, that only impacted the SEC and the Big Ten. After the amendment? Hello, Big 12 and ACC. The Big 12 isn’t quite there yet, but it’s expected to get there in the next fiscal year.
What this amendment does is effectively bake in conferences where they are now. The power four wouldn’t be able to expand or merge. The remaining schools in the Group of 6 wouldn’t be able to join a power conference, either. So no mergers, so acquisitions and no upward mobility. What we have now is what we will have.
Or is it?
Yahoo Sports’ Ross Dellenger, who is as good as it gets when it comes to covering this stuff and making it simple for us to understand, started talking to athletic directors after the amendment was accepted. Guess what? Some of them may have an appetite for one last run of realignment musical chairs if this legislation gets close to the finish line.
Why is this important to the Big 12? I’ve written plenty about the game’s economics in this space. I don’t need to go back over the money the SEC and the Big Ten are making. The Big 12 is doing everything to bridge the gap as much as possible. The league knows it can’t catch either conference. But the best way to boost its value is by adding membership. And Commissioner Brett Yormark has a tremendous asset as his disposal in the pro rata.
The pro rata allowed him to bring in the four corners schools at the same revenue share amount as the holdover eight Big 12 schools, which was $31.7 in television revenue each year. It helped him boost the value of the conference. This legislation, if passed, would render his best tool to lure schools to the league inert.
So what happens if this bill gets close to passage and that amendment is on the bill? Would some ACC schools try to make a move? Thanks to Clemson’s and Florida State’s revolt last year, the league has unequal revenue sharing (ask the older Big 12 members how that worked out) and formalized exit fees that, while expensive, give exiting members some cost certainty. The exit fee next year is $129 million. I guess if you’ve got the money … go for it.
Of course, this bill needs to become law first. But if it gets close this summer or fall, start watching the chairs.
Next, there is the “5-for-5” eligibility legislation. The NCAA passed it last week and it’s going to change the landscape of eligibility. I think it’s a solid piece of legislation. It eliminates redshirts (except in extreme circumstances), allows athletes to play five years without any restrictions. Coaches don’t have to sweat burning redshirts and manage their rosters the way they want. It should help player development long-term. The NCAA just needs to get through the inevitable lawsuits. They’ve already been filed. The seniors that played four years without a redshirt want that fifth year.
Technically, the NCAA is in the right here. The old rule gave play athletes the option to play four years or use their redshirts. These athletes did not. Under normal circumstances those athletes would be done. The NCAA has made clear from the start of this legislation that it would not change its mind.
So … did you see this?
The NCAA is drowning in court fees because it keeps losing cases. One must wonder if running the risk of losing another lawsuit is worth it?
The NCAA should have learned from the RaeQuan Battle debacle. They deemed him ineligible after he transferred twice, the second time after the one-time transfer rule was implemented. He won in court after he wasn’t grandfathered in.
Had I run the NCAA, I would have given seniors that played four years and didn’t use their redshirt the option to come back for one more year. Scholarships and NIL wouldn’t count against caps. It would be worth it to reset the system without any drama. But we’ll see.
Last Zero Week is no longer Zero Week. The NCAA took care of that this week, too. There is a Zero Week this year, but anyone who played that week needed a waiver from the NCAA to do so. That includes this year’s TCU-North Carolina game in Dublin, which is being played the weekend before Labor Day weekend. The Horned Frogs and Tar Heels needed a waiver to play that game.
Next year, no one needs a waiver. Get ready for many Big 12 teams to move their openers up a weekend, and it’s not just to start the season earlier. It’s a chance, at least until the College Football Playoff expands, to get an extra bye week. This year, Big 12 teams are only getting one due to the way the calendar is arranged. Moving the season up a week gives Big 12 teams a chance to get extra rest it wouldn’t ordinarily get.
Of course, if the playoff does expand again, then the schedule may have to change again. But for now, giving teams the freedom to schedule a week earlier if they want to is just common sense.
