(10-08-2026 10:35 PM)Gitanole Wrote: (10-08-2026 09:14 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote: Campbell doesn’t want this. This is much bigger than Texas Tech.
I’ve seen no evidence Campbell is.
Campbell is just trying to keep his name in the public eye. The pressure is coming from the schools, and it is out a fear of being left out of something the public likely knows nothing about as of yet. There's been a lot of cooperation between the SEC leadership and the Big Ten's leadership as they've worked through issues pertaining to the CFP expansion. They may or may not agree about that. But they are coming to grips with the likelihood of a scheduling alliance and have some ideas about where to go beyond that.
Yes, they were content with the cap at 19. It permitted both to still land what they have been most after without altering the landscape of the P4 in a dramatic way, and had the SEC decided to land the ones they wanted it would have freed the ACC to make some football first backfills perhaps improving their situation.
I believe the appeal to bump the number to 20 which raised possible defections to 6 from the ACC has created a mini-panic among its football first schools. If the SEC and Big Ten pull off a scheduling alliance it leaves less for all of them, especially if the SEC plays 10 conference games and only has one slot left for a 7th home buy game, or accepts only 6 home games while alternating the Big Ten obligation and the season ending rivalry with several of the ACC schools.
And then there is a speculated upon potentiality for a more aggressive move for the two at a later date.
Therefore while the total movement, even at 20 isn't fatal, being left out of the movement could be seen as such since the margin of revenue difference between the SEC/Big Ten and the ACC/Big 12 is going to grow, perhaps later even more significantly.
Nobody in the press is going to be clued in and if they get bits and pieces of the rumor, they have nothing to pin it to. So they sit on it. But the pipeline of such speculation is enough to engender anxiety in athletic departments whether there is truth to the speculation or not. It's like something out of Dr. Strangelove, "Mr. President we cannot permit there to be a mineshaft gap!" when referring to preparations for doomsday. I think such a mindset exists outside of the offices of the Big Ten and SEC. I believe that fear is what is driving demand for greater accessibility to the P2 by the M2. It is a demand driven by what might be, rather than by what is. The SEC and Big Ten were quite content at a likely 18 or 19 at the most. They'll be as contented at 20, but perhaps not arranged as efficiently as they might have been at 18.
The result will be confused instructions to House members and Senators, and it may prove to be that fear becomes the greatest obstacle to obtaining the exemption.
Maybe if the House and Senate go to joint restructuring of the bill we will stop at 20, hopefully remove any requirement for years of independence, and everyone will see the wisdom of bringing all of this to the swiftest possible conclusion.
At 18 members each we could have had a P4 of 72 members adding 4 more schools to the tier plus Notre Dame. At 20 we might wind up more exclusive with 3 conferences, 60 members plus Notre Dame. That kind of potential reduction in the upper tier is what is helping to drive the panic. All of the AD's and presidents can do the math, grasp the potentialities, and worry. That's why 18 posing as 19 was the safer number for everyone. That's why 20 is creating panic. If some idiot pushes for 22, it will be catastrophic for the P4 if the networks wanted to pay for it and encouraged it, and why not? The more they can make from a smaller upper tier the better off they are and the more control over it they'll want. In the end you could easily wind up with a Super 2 of 24 members each and only 48 schools paid premier carriage rates. Everyone else relegated to a limbo tier between the S2 and the G6 and forever labeled the M2.
It's the math of 20 that stirred the fears. IMO, 18 would not have created that. But some of those lobbying the Senate's writing of the Bill squeezed in some self interest and voila, here we are.
/
Protect College Sports Act
