A media rights proposal pitched as a financial fix for college sports drew a blunt response in a study commissioned by the SEC and the Big Ten: pooling conference television rights would generate less revenue than the current model and would introduce what the study called a “dangerously unworkable” structure.
The study was commissioned by the Southeastern Conference and the Big Ten and produced by FTI Consulting. A copy was provided to The Associated Press on Thursday. The paper evaluated proposals that would allow conferences to combine and sell media rights collectively, rather than continuing the long running system where leagues sell their own packages to partners such as ESPN, Fox, CBS, and NBC.
The report targeted a specific idea that has gained attention in policy and college sports circles: rewriting the 1961 Sports Broadcasting Act, which currently prevents conferences from combining TV rights. The study argued that even if that legal barrier were removed, the pooled rights approach would not deliver the revenue boost supporters project.
Here’s What They’re Not Telling You About Your Retirement
“The … proposal not only fails to produce more revenue than the current conference structure but also introduces a dangerously unworkable model and new risks to the college sports landscape,” the study said.
A major focus of the study was the $7 billion projection advanced by Cody Campbell, a Texas Tech board of regents chair and billionaire donor. Campbell created a nonprofit called Saving College Sports, which has argued that pooling rights could “supercharge revenue” and help stabilize athletics budgets as costs rise in the era of NIL payments.
Campbell responded on social media after the study became public, calling college sports “broken” and saying those benefiting from the current model do not want it changed. He also criticized SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti, who requested the study. “The posture of these two commissioners indicates that they do not care about the fate of the other conferences or smaller schools, nor do they care about the life-changing opportunity provided to women and to athletes in our Olympic sports,” Campbell said.
The study challenged the assumption that college sports could replicate the revenue gains seen in professional leagues simply by aggregating inventory. It cited the NBA’s recent media deal, noting that the league’s success came from selling smaller packages to a larger number of distributors, not from “aggregation” alone. “Instead, the NBA was successful in selling smaller packages of games to larger numbers of distributors thereby increasing market demand and adding additional media partners for smaller packages,” the report said.
This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year
The paper also leaned on historical precedent in college football’s own media history. After a Supreme Court decision found the NCAA’s control of televised games violated antitrust law, schools formed the College Football Association to package games. The study said that arrangement produced less revenue: $43.6 million under the CFA deal compared with $69.7 million under the earlier NCAA package. The study described that revenue gap as part of what pushed Notre Dame to leave the group, followed by conference departures that eventually produced today’s conference by conference rights system.
Supporters of pooling rights have acknowledged the practical hurdles beyond the law itself. Campbell has said unwinding existing media deals, which have different expiration dates across conferences and networks, would take years. His plan also envisions an independent entity to manage and maximize rights, with an option for schools to opt into a reworked Sports Broadcasting Act structure within a 12 year window.
For the SEC and Big Ten, the study’s bottom line is that the current market trajectory already outperforms the pooling projection. The report said that at the pace the SEC, Big Ten, ACC, and Big 12 have been increasing rights values, they would surpass the pooled model’s promised gains without having to rebuild the system.
The study does not end the debate, but it does put the two biggest conferences on record: they are not buying the pooled rights pitch, and they are prepared to argue it would reduce revenue while injecting new risk into a sport already juggling NIL costs and wider budget pressure.
Warning: Account balances and purchasing power no longer tell the same story. Know in 2 minutes if your retirement is working for you.
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.
Read the full article here
