ACC/Big 10/Pac-12 Alliance not taking a back seat to SEC

By Jerry Ratcliffe

No sooner had the video conference announcing the new alliance between the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12 ended, the criticism from media pundits followed.

The three leagues have agreed to work together for future scheduling in football, men’s and women’s basketball and possibly Olympic sports. All three share a value in academics and strong athletic programs, in addition to a concern for the future of college sports and the national landscape.

In perhaps the largest metamorphosis in collegiate athletic history, the trio of conferences expressed a desire to get things under control.

We have the transfer portal, we have NIL, proposed College Football Playoff expansion from four to 12 teams, concerns about the future of the NCAA, conference expansion and more. This is not your father’s college sports experience.

While the commissioners of the three leagues _ Jim Phillips of the ACC, Kevin Warren of the Big Ten, George Kliakoff _ couldn’t supply all the answers to media grilling on Tuesday, they attempted to put a happy face on what was to come.

Their leagues, which are comprised of 41 schools (remember that number for later in this column), didn’t sign a contract for the proposed future endeavors. They couldn’t deliver a timeline.

Big deal. This is something new that has been talked about for a couple months and certainly a reaction to the SEC’s plans to add Texas and Oklahoma from the Big 12 as soon as possible.

What did the critics expect, for the ACC, Big 10 and Pac-12 commissioners to just sit there on their hands and allow the aggressive SEC to run roughshod over the rest of the Power Five? Certainly they don’t trust the SEC or ESPN or Disney after the recent money grab of acquiring the Longhorns and Sooners.

Who is to say Disney, which owns ESPN, didn’t have a larger appetite to poach schools from the ACC or Pac-12. Big Ten schools wouldn’t accept such advances because of the money each of those schools receive in TV revenue.

Disney’s future goals were uncovered recently in terms of luring Texas and Oklahoma, leaving the Big 12 for dead, just to line its pockets with more greenbacks.

To protect their own assets and to avoid another massive restructure under a potential national realignment of conferences, the ACC, Big 10 and Pac-12 decided to act fast. Personally, I think they should be praised, not criticized, for attempting to provide some stability in major college athletics.

Who cares if there’s a contract. Who cares when they can get a real handle on the specifics of future scheduling. The important thing is that they put their collective feet down in a collegiate world that was on the verge of running amuck.

College sports has reached a crossroad. Do we want college football to more resemble the NFL? I think not.

I liked what the commissioners said about a contract. Essentially, “we don’t need no stinkin’ contract.”

“It’s about trust, looking each other in the eye,” said the ACC’s Phillips. “If it takes [a contract] to get things done, then we’ve lost our way.”

Kliakoff, the newest of the three league bosses, said: “there’s no signed contract, it’s a commitment from 41 schools to do what we say we’re going to do. It’s an agreement between three gentlemen. There’s doesn’t need to be a contract.”

Bravo. Yes, it’s a legal world we live in, but what happened to honoring your word?

It’s also a politically correct world, and the only thing that left a sour taste in my mouth, was some PC dancing around a couple of key questions.

I wished that the three commissioners would have just come out and flatly said, yes, this alliance is definitely a reaction to the SEC-Texas-Oklahoma deal. And, yes, this is about money.

Whenever someone says it’s not about the money, it’s about the money. It’s always about the money.

In this case, it wasn’t totally about the money, but conference expansion is always about the revenues and the power. Who can blame the Alliance, which stretches from sea to shining sea, all the way from Seattle to Miami, for protecting its own interests?

It was impressive that the Alliance will honor all existing scheduled football and basketball games. Football in particular have games scheduled for years to come, so in many cases, those three leagues won’t be able to arrange at least one football game against each of the other two conferences for some time to come.

However, Warren pointed out that there are already 68 football games on the schedule between the three leagues starting in 2022 onward to 2036. That doesn’t count Notre Dame, which would make if 103 games.

“What this allows us to do is focus on existing games and how do we expand those schedules,” Warren explained.

He also said that opportunities will open for early season and mid-season basketball tournaments between the three leagues (the ACC and Big 10 already have their own early season tournament).

“We are at the beginning stages of all this, but we have some of the brightest minds in college athletics with our athletic directors,” Warren said.

One of those ADs is Virginia’s Carla Williams, who believes the venture is exciting.

“The alliance is really good for college athletics because there’s so much instability, so much unknown, unanswered questions,” Williams said. “It’s great for UVA because a lot of the goals are the same. Education is really important and we do our best to use sports to educate young people.

“Many would not have had an opportunity to go to college but for athletic scholarships. Watching the three commissioners today gave me a lot of hope.”

The Pac-12 and Big 10 play nine regular season conference games, the ACC eight, so there could be a change there. The SEC is talking about playing 10, which would eliminate the threat of the three alliance schools blocking its teams from playing against SEC teams for future quality scheduling purposes.

Oh, and there’s the proposed expansion of the CFP, from the present four teams to 12.

The Pac-12 seems to be in favor of expansion (maybe because it generally is a sideline spectator under the current system), and the Big 10 seems to be on the same page. The ACC hasn’t revealed its thoughts on that expansion, but all three conferences will be prepared to vote in late September.

It could be that the Alliance figures should the CFP expand to 12 participants, that the SEC could get five, even six teams into the postseason.

Remember, the Alliance has 41 votes, the SEC but 16 on anything that requires an individual member vote. Even if it’s a conference vote, that’s three against one, not counting the Big 12, which has been largely ignored by the entire process.

All three alliance commissioners are talking to hundreds of people at their respective schools in order to get a feeling on how they want to vote as a conference.

Money?

There will be more money for the three alliance conferences when new TV deals are struck, particularly if Notre Dame is part of the equation. Oh, and does this mean Notre Dame might be prompted to join the ACC?

No. The only thing that is going to force Notre Dame to join a conference (it is obligated to the ACC if it does) is if the Irish’ path to the CFP is blocked. An expanded 12-team playoff actually increases Notre Dame’s road to the postseason.

As Phillips pointed out, “We understand the financial piece. It is usually the driver of decisions. This is a time when we felt we had a chance to stabilize a volatile environment. Sometimes it can’t be driven by money, things you want to last for the next generation of student-athletes, the collegiate model.”

Warren pointed out that all three leagues have great (TV) media partners and with future big games scheduled that may have never been otherwise, and with new events created by the alliance, the money will be there.

Certainly none of the three conferences in the alliance wanted their leagues raided, so this was one way to halt any thoughts about more major collegiate realignment.

Phillips was wise with his comments about that topic.

“In the history of college athletics, one expansion of a conference has usually led to another, then another, then another,” the ACC boss said. “The three of us and the stabilization of the Power Five in particular, was a chance for a new direction that has never been done before and was significant at this point in time. We are better together than we are separate.”

For all the other stuff that critics are wringing their hands over _ contracts, timelines _ those can wait. Phillips said that 11 athletic directors that represent the three conferences have already met and will be working on these issues now that the alliance has been formed.

It was no surprise that some media criticized the announcement, the contract, timelines stuff, saying it had no meat. It was also no surprise that some of those media are employed by ESPN or the SEC. Certainly they’re not happy about it.

The SEC is no longer in the driver’s seat, and there’s nothing they can do about it.

Bravo, Alliance, bravo.