Big Ten, SEC Tell Congress There’s No Need to Pool TV Deals

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
64,514
Reaction score
23,784
Points
113
Per Amanda;

Over the past year, billionaire Cody Campbell has lobbied for college football to pool its most valuable broadcast rights. Campbell claims the idea will “save college sports” by making more money, which can then be used to fund women’s and Olympic sports.

On Thursday, the SEC and Big Ten called the strategy “well-intentioned but misguided.” The conferences—who currently own the most lucrative college football TV rights—sent out a 10-page white paper to members of Congress explaining exactly why Campbell’s idea to amend the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 is a bad one.



Pooling college football media rights “would not save college sports but would actually introduce bureaucracy and legal chaos, and projections show it is likely to reduce revenue over the long term,” the white paper said.

The paper—sent by the SEC and Big Ten to offices of federal lawmakers who had requested more information on the concept—was prepared by FTI Consulting “on the basis of its review of certain of the information provided to it as well as publicly available information.” It’s the latest in a lobbying battle not just over a potential amendment of the Sports Broadcast Act, but also over broader legislation governing the future of college sports.

Campbell responded at length on X: “Our primary objective is to provide athletic programs, both big and small, the tools they need to achieve financial sustainability and preserve all of their programs, scholarships, and roster spots,” he wrote. “We want to grow the financial pie, and make it work for everybody—doing so in a way that doesn’t … punish or take revenue away from the ‘big boys.’”

Campbell made his billions through oil and gas companies in Texas; currently, he serves as co-CEO of Double Eagle Energy Holdings IV. He’s contributed heavily to the NIL (name, image, and likeness) efforts at Texas Tech and currently serves as the university board chairman.

The idea of centralizing college sports media rights isn’t new. The NCAA used to sell all sports media rights as one package, but the Supreme Court ruled in 1984 that doing so violated federal antitrust law. A group called the College Football Association formed to pool college football media rights for 64 schools, but the organization eventually folded and conferences began to sell their own rights. That setup continues today, minus pooled media rights deals for NCAA championships and College Football Playoff.

Campbell resurrected the idea of amending the SBA last here when he launched SCS and commissioned multiple commercials touting the idea during the 2025–26 football season. As Campbell has described it, a centralized body would take charge of selling pooled media rights, which would generate more total value than the current conference-specific deals. Those revenues would be distributed in a way that allows the biggest brands—like the SEC and Big Ten—to get a larger share of revenue than the rest, but still have enough left over to increase revenues for the other conferences and fund women’s and Olympic sports.


Go Gophers!!
 


Wonder what the billionaire gets out of it?
I think the main thing is that "his" school would no longer be in a second-tier conference (financially) and it sounds like he doesn't want sports that most people don't watch to go away.

Personally I like competition. For example, if (and this hasn't happened) but if, for example, the same 2 teams kept competing for the B1G and SEC, while the Big12 had new winners every year, well the Big12 conference and games would start seeming more appealing to me.

Or things like Tuesday night MACtion, or PAC12 after dark, the things conferences did to try and be different and get some eyeballs, would that get impacted if everyone already knew the amount of revenue they are getting?
 


Getting government oversight in this doesn't seem like it would help with revenue. Having conferences able to negotiate their own deals and having competition in the media seems to be the best generator of money.

Two years into the 12 teams tournament, there have been 20 teams represented and 4 of the 20 were in both tournaments.
 



Markets are best when they can evolve, change, adapt to competition. Like when shellac music records led to vinyl, when 8 track tapes led to cassette tapes, to CDs led to streaming music. The free market is best at that.

Government has an important role, and has made positive differences. Government should act as a referee so the game is not won by cheating. How much refereeing then is the debate, some say more zebras, some say less zebra. Sometimes Zebras do not reward the best but the best backscratchers.
 

Markets are best when they can evolve, change, adapt to competition. Like when shellac music records led to vinyl, when 8 track tapes led to cassette tapes, to CDs led to streaming music. The free market is best at that.

Government has an important role, and has made positive differences. Government should act as a referee so the game is not won by cheating. How much refereeing then is the debate, some say more zebras, some say less zebra. Sometimes Zebras do not reward the best but the best backscratchers.

CDs are still the far superior medium in terms of strictly the audio component.
 




Wonder what the billionaire gets out of it?

The conferences would require $ to buy out their current media (and teams from their conferences, potentially) contracts to jump into this new entity and wouldn’t you know it, Cody Campbell happens to know people that bankrolled his oil field flips! They will of course require some percentage of revenues for their trouble but no worries! Revenue will double or triple under their expert guidance and everyone wins. His assertion media rights contracts would immediate be renegotiated for 2x current value and eventually 3x is definitely not pulled from a posterior orifice. Not to mention if/as revenues rise outlays from our thrift-less ADs will also rise because market forces exist and players and coaches cost. Getting everyone back to square one.

A fool and his money….


SCS believes that reorganizing media rights under a national collective will produce approximately $6billion in incremental revenue—without providing any detail on how such gains would be achieved, other than citing “optimization” of the schedule to produce more “high-quality match-ups.”3 Even a cursory examination of the SCS proposal reveals the source of the “incremental revenues:” SCS simply assumes that all of the major conference-wide media packages will be renegotiated immediately and will more than double in value

Of course, this ignores the highly significant fact that these existing media agreements are long-term contracts between private parties, have values in the billions of dollars, and are not likely to be re-negotiated voluntarily overnight. The goals of SCS can only be accomplished by abrogating those existing media contracts entirely, or substantially and materially altering the terms of those agreements
 


Seemed timely....one of the SEC youtubers made a video comparing SEC and Big Ten teams to each other. Pretty funny stuff. Although just so you are warned he does mispronounce the first work in Ski-U-Mah.....well he doesn't actually mispronounce it per se....just doesn't pronounce it the way we do. :)

 

18:20. Arkansas is our match.
 



Seemed timely....one of the SEC youtubers made a video comparing SEC and Big Ten teams to each other. Pretty funny stuff. Although just so you are warned he does mispronounce the first work in Ski-U-Mah.....well he doesn't actually mispronounce it per se....just doesn't pronounce it the way we do. :)

Saw this video a few days ago, very funny stuff. I went in thinking that Ole Miss would be our match given historic level of success, sharing the 1960 national title, and an eccentric (former in Ole Miss's case) head coach. Arkansas definitely makes much more sense though and shares some of those points and then some.
 



"Save College Sports", a consortium of right-wing billionaires and politicians and zero college athletes, exists to find a way to limit the rights of young athletes from making their worth for their talents.

In a way these rich elites would never stand for the government interfering in their businesses.

SCS also exists to find a way for that supposed $6B in additional value unlocked to end up in their already overflowing pockets. It's the old private equity playbook these men know so well, applied to college sports.
 

Where would you get that interpretation from my post?

Well, ummmm... right here. Here's your post:

"Everything that government touches is more than likely worse off than before. So I say gov piss off."
 

"Save College Sports", a consortium of right-wing billionaires and politicians and zero college athletes, exists to find a way to limit the rights of young athletes from making their worth for their talents.

In a way these rich elites would never stand for the government interfering in their businesses.

SCS also exists to find a way for that supposed $6B in additional value unlocked to end up in their already overflowing pockets. It's the old private equity playbook these men know so well, applied to college sports.

Take your cut/paste political garbage over to the off topic board please.
 


The people or groups pushing the pooling angle either represent schools on the outside looking in, like the Texas Tech booster, or are PE groups who are looking to profit off college football.

The Big Ten and the SEC do not want to pool their rights everyone else. Why do they want to make it so the Big XII and ACC get on a level footing with them, in TV money?


That only makes sense if you completely drop the four conferences altogether and create a new singular entity, which then obviously would be a pool of the best/biggest schools.

There are still far too many people with too much pride in the tradition of their respective conference brands and the rivalry between the brands for that yet, it seems
 

Both the streaming music services from Apple and Amazon offer a lossless option that has the same or even higher bitrate than a CD.

Sure, they offer it. But does it apply to the entire catalog? Does lossless streaming come with standard packages or is it an upgrade? I honestly don't know, because I keep all my music stored locally.

An under acknowledged thing about this is that many bluetooth headphones/speakers (like Airpods for example, maybe new gen airpods do) don't even transmit lossless audio. They transcribe to a lower bitrate format so even if you happen to be streaming (internet connection required) lossless audio files.....you may not even be listening to those files in a CD quality bitrate.

As for Amazon.....can you even buy lossless albums from them? Last time I checked, the best they offer is 256kbps, which isn't necessarily bad.....but also isn't CD quality.
 

Sure, they offer it. But does it apply to the entire catalog? Does lossless streaming come with standard packages or is it an upgrade? I honestly don't know, because I keep all my music stored locally.

An under acknowledged thing about this is that many bluetooth headphones/speakers (like Airpods for example, maybe new gen airpods do) don't even transmit lossless audio. They transcribe to a lower bitrate format so even if you happen to be streaming (internet connection required) lossless audio files.....you may not even be listening to those files in a CD quality bitrate.

As for Amazon.....can you even buy lossless albums from them? Last time I checked, the best they offer is 256kbps, which isn't necessarily bad.....but also isn't CD quality.
Do you think you'd be able to successfully pass an A/B test on high-end equipment? I'm sure there are people who can, but I assume most regular folks could not.
 

Do you think you'd be able to successfully pass an A/B test on high-end equipment? I'm sure there are people who can, but I assume most regular folks could not.

It would depend on the comparative bitrates and the songs in question. Even CD quality can sound like trash if the mixing and mastering is done poorly.
 

Take your cut/paste political garbage over to the off topic board please.

Electoral politics became relevant to this when the president insisted on sticking his nose in to "save" college sports the same way he insists on sticking his nose in absolutely everything else, proclaiming to have a silver bullet solution to every problem on Earth.

There was a roster of all attendees on Friday listed by the White House. Of course, the political group was entirely Rs. There were absolutely no representatives of college athletes. Not even attorneys or famous ex players representing them. There were hedge fund and private equity folks there.

These dynamics would absolutely infuriate you if the government led by anyone but Trump was doing them.

Nothing I said was untrue so you resorted to ad hominem attacks. But I guess talking about lossless compression on this thread and board count as on-topic.
 

Electoral politics became relevant to this when the president insisted on sticking his nose in to "save" college sports the same way he insists on sticking his nose in absolutely everything else, proclaiming to have a silver bullet solution to every problem on Earth.

There was a roster of all attendees on Friday listed by the White House. Of course, the political group was entirely Rs. There were absolutely no representatives of college athletes. Not even attorneys or famous ex players representing them. There were hedge fund and private equity folks there.

These dynamics would absolutely infuriate you if the government led by anyone but Trump was doing them.

Nothing I said was untrue so you resorted to ad hominem attacks. But I guess talking about lossless compression on this thread and board count as on-topic.

Nah, you're a partisan with TDS spewing political garbage. Take it to OT
 
Last edited:

Sometimes they really are just crooks and scammers, Les. Some people are better at hiding it.
 

One thing about the new TV deals and B1G not being on ESPN, I don't watch the network at all or any SEC games. Maybe flip for some football. Gotta think ESPN viewership is down a bit.
 


Well, ummmm... right here. Here's your post:

"Everything that government touches is more than likely worse off than before. So I say gov piss off."

I think your conclusion out-kicks your coverage on a hyperbolic statement.

But, given Congress (the body, not any one person or party) has done such a bang-up job on even the most basic functions of government in the last decade+—like setting and approving a budget, for example—I firmly believe they have better things to worry about right now than college football Sports rights.

Same goes for billionaires looking for a cut of the profits.
 




Top Bottom