In the pecking order of college athletics conferences, the SEC has had only one true peer in recent years; the Big Ten. While the SEC has enjoyed greater football success, when it comes to brand prestige and the money it generates, the Big Ten has been its equal, and at times greater. That may very well end the next time the SEC negotiates its broadcast rights once Texas and Oklahoma (and perhaps more) become members.

Last week’s events almost immediately turned attention to the Big Ten and what its response would be. As you might expect when caught somewhat flat-footed, the official response has been that nothing is in the works but everything is on the table. There have been unconfirmed reports that the Big Ten has at least listened to some of the remaining Big 12 members, namely Kansas, Iowa State and Oklahoma State, who no doubt would love to have a B1G parachute right now.

You can discuss conference realignment and expansion here.

Regardless of what the Big Ten’s position is on adding to its membership right now, they should always be willing to listen to someone who wants to talk to them. That’s just smart business. Smart business is also not making a move simply for the sake of making a move because that’s what your competitor just did. Adding a school to your conference membership is not a choice you make looking at the next 2 years; it’s a move you make looking at the next 20 years. Kansas, Iowa State and Oklahoma State are not Texas and Oklahoma. They might grow the overall revenue pie in the Big Ten, but it’s highly unlikely that they would grow it to the point that every member’s slice of the pie is as big as it is now.

The dynamics of how revenue grows is also changing. During the last round of expansion in the early 2010’s, schools that expanded a conference’s footprint into heavily populated regions were coveted, because with the proliferation of conference-owned and branded cable channels those schools brought in more money from cable subscriber fees. That’s why Maryland and Rutgers were brought in despite having very underwhelming football programs. While that factor still carries some weight today, other factors matter more. This is due to both changes in how games are consumed by the public and the Playoff. What matters now is adding the type of program that will draw viewers for the primary broadcasters (ESPN, FOX, etc) and will raise your conference’s football profile to increase your chances of getting Playoff berths.

With that in mind, there are really only a few options that make sense for the Big Ten, but none of those seem practical at this time. Several Pac 12 members could be solid additions, like USC, Oregon or Washington; but geography would be an issue, especially for the West Coast minority. Notre Dame is the most obvious choice, but they still don’t appear to be seriously considering giving up independence; and if they did they would be contractually obligated to join the ACC until 2036. UVA and UNC are a little less attractive than they may have been before, for reasons I stated above, but they would still make decent additions. However, like Notre Dame, they are contractually tied to the ACC until 2036.

So if expansion does not work for the Big Ten to increase revenue, what options are there? One idea is to explore partnerships with the ACC, Pac 12, or even the remainder  the Big 12 that would be of mutual benefit. The idea that has made the rounds are scheduling agreements….think of the football version of the ACC/Big Ten Challenge, where most of the teams from one play a counterpart in the other each season. The two conferences could perhaps find a way to sell the series to a broadcaster as a special package. It might only bring a little bit more money than the regular broadcast deal, but that’s a little bit more that they didn’t have before.

As a partner for the Big Ten, the Pac 12 might make more sense than the ACC for a couple reasons. First, the Pac 12’s current TV deal expires in 2024, just one year after the Big Ten’s, whereas the ACC is locked in with ESPN until 2036; so the Pac 12 will have much more negotiating room. Also, the Pac 12 opens up a whole unique region of viewership for the series, whereas the ACC and Big Ten have a little bit of overlap.

The challenge to this series would be that both the Big Ten and Pac 12 members already have non conference games booked a decade or more in advance. Some of those games are against each other, but many are not. One solution could be for both conferences to open up a game by moving back to an 8-game conference schedule. The Pac 12 has already indicated they are considering doing this. The Big Ten has not considered it, that we know of.

One thing that all the non-SEC Power Five conferences ought to be doing, if they are concerned about the behemoth the SEC is becoming, is to form a bloc in which they cooperate on their objectives. Back to scheduling, maybe the ACC, Big Ten, Pac 12, and Big 12 (if they’re still around) ought to consider whether it is really to their benefit to schedule non-conference games with the SEC any more? If the SEC wants to be on an island to itself, let it be. They can just play each other and fill out the rest with Sun Belt, C-USA and FCS games. 

Of course where the other Power Five schools must really stick together is on Playoff expansion. It didn’t take long at all before the brakes were slammed on the 12-team proposal, which some were saying could be implemented as early as 2023. But with ESPN owning the rights to the current format through 2025-26, to change it before then would give them exclusive negotiating rights. And by the way, ESPN also just inked a 10-year/$3bn deal to be the SEC’s exclusive broadcast partner that begins in 2024. So it’s hard to imagine the other conferences wanting to hand ESPN even more Playoff rights without at least taking them to the open market, since it could possibly devalue their own conference broadcast rights that will be up for bidding over the next several years.

In summary, expansion does not appear to be in the Big Ten’s interest at this time. But that doesn’t mean that opportunities for new revenues don’t exist. They just have to think outside the box a little more. Just as importantly, they need to keep their relationships with the ACC, Pac 12 and Big 12 (if it survives), strong and focused on the common goal of ensuring their best interests as a group; lest they just fall further and further behind the SEC while their few most valuable pieces get gobbled up by the shark down south.

Mike Lowe
Mike Lowe

College Football Analyst

Mike is a Baltimore native living in Portland, OR since 2007. He currently runs his own business specializing in video production and online marketing. Prior to that he was a legal technology consultant, worked for 9 years at Johns Hopkins University and served 6 years in the Air Force. He also enjoys travel, food, beer, and is a volunteer at the Oregon Humane Society.

X