WGNO

Video: SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey talks current direction of the Southeastern Conference

ATLANTA — SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey kicked off SEC Media Days by talking about the current state and direction of athletics in the Southeastern Conference.

Topics of discussion include the additions of Texas and Oklahoma, potential expansion, and NIL.


Here is a transcript of today’s Q & A session with Commissioner Sankey:

Q. Do you anticipate maybe Texas and Oklahoma coming in the league early, ahead of time?

GREG SANKEY: That’s not up to me. That’s about the relationship between Oklahoma, Texas and the Big 12. We are focused on the addition being effective July 1st, 2025.

Q. With what’s happened in the country the last few months, in addition to it being an election year, do you think that makes it even more difficult for Congress to do something to make a clear, enforceable NIL policy?

GREG SANKEY: Go back to March. I made a list in a meeting of matters present, war in Ukraine, the economy, Build Back Better which was introduced and not moved, the differences that exist in Congress. We have a midterm election coming up.

Things that have happened over recent weeks and months have just added to that.

The reality was, when I had that conversation in March, I wasn’t looking necessarily to this Congress to be the solution just because of the timing. We’ve had conversations with leaders from both sides of the aisles, and we’ll continue to do so because regardless of what’s happened recently or what happens with the election, we need a bipartisan solution for this national concept to move forward.

If we don’t, then we’re going to be left not simply creating conference rules, we’re going to have to deal with state laws that vary in our region. That was actually part of our conversation in Destin as well. But the focus will remain on a national solution, and Congress is the venue for that option.

Q. You mentioned one of the bigger issues with that single-division model was the tiebreakers, figuring out that stuff. What are some of the other issues when y’all are thinking about finalizing that single-division format?

GREG SANKEY: You didn’t even have to introduce yourself because I was in Omaha and heard you ask a question in those press conferences leading up to the Ole Miss national championship, so welcome to Atlanta.

The list of issues, tiebreakers one, the number of games and what that means from a scheduling standpoint, the imbalance around nine games versus the comfort with eight games. What happens with non-conference schedules. We have a requirement that that ninth game right now be among an autonomy five-type opponent. How do we dispose of or maintain that particular policy.

The impact on bowl eligibility and College Football Playoff access I mentioned. When I go through six different teams having won national championships in the last 25 years or so, no one comes close to that number. So the level of competition here, while people want to be a part of it, we’re attentive and sensitive to that.

Just to be clear, no one from TV is saying do this, do that. This is a conversation and decision to be made among our conference membership.

Q. Do you sense a lot of support for a model with three permanent rivals or are you anywhere close to the consensus on that? Is there any interest in expanding beyond 16 teams right now?

GREG SANKEY: The first question, it’s under consideration. There are limits on the number of options available for three permanent opponents based on the number of games. Nine makes that more practical. If you remember, I had two points when we expanded that I wanted to be front and center. One is that we engage in blue sky thinking, let’s look at the big picture. The second is that we rotate teams through campus as frequently as possible so we don’t go 12 years between visits.

Those two have guided us. That last one relates to the number of games, permanent opponents and how many times you can move people that cleanly.

Embedded in my remarks is we’re attentive, we’re engaged in conversation. The great news for the Southeastern Conference is that people call and say, Hey, you’re doing something really special. They kind of hint around the edges.

We know who we are. We’re confident in our success. We’re really looking forward to the expansion and being at 16 teams. Don’t feel pressured to just operate at a number. But we’ll watch what happens around us and be thoughtful but be nimble.

Q. You said you don’t have the sense of urgency or panic in reaction to what others are doing. In looking at what others are doing, does it affect your receptiveness to those calls you say you’re receiving from others? Do you see this heading toward a conglomeration of superleagues? Do you have to be proactive to be at the front of that?

GREG SANKEY: Well, somebody will write, a smart aleck guy, we are a superleague. When I walk through the recitation, this is a superleague.

As I visited with our presidents and chancellors and ADs, understand the timing is this news broke June 30. I did not gather that group till the next Wednesday. I wanted to make sure I was learning what was actually happening. But also I didn’t want a story like on Friday, the day after, the SEC presidents are gathering, and you have this ripple effect of they’re going to do something. We wanted to be patient and communicate.

Again, we’re comfortable at 16. There’s no sense of urgency, no sense of panic. We’re not just shooting for a number of affiliations that make us better. Could they be out there? I would never say they’re not. I would never say that we will.

We’re going to be evaluating the landscape. I’m not going to speculate. I actually am watching a lot of this activity operating around us, more so than impacting us directly.

Q. Kind of a multi-part question. What lake was it where you were on vacation? Did you get to take any vacation? Did you have any inkling what the Big Ten was doing? Do you think Texas and OU trump USC and UCLA when it comes to adding teams to a conference?

GREG SANKEY: I’ll start at the end. Yes. I’m not sure we want to use the word ‘trumped’ all the time these days. Got to be careful about that (smiling).

Yeah, we’re in contiguous states, southeast quadrant. I do have a few letters about what ‘southeast’ means. We are in the southeast quadrant of the United States. Those two additions actually restore rivalries. The Texas-Arkansas game last year was pretty special, but that goes back a long way. Obviously Texas and Texas A&M rivalry will be like our in-state rivalries across the league. You have Missouri and Oklahoma that are a quarter of the Big Eight that are now part of the Southeastern Conference and the opportunity for Arkansas and Oklahoma to play regularly.

I think that’s right. That’s who we are. Those fan bases get it. One of the very first calls it had, Hey, we watch how you’ve made decisions in the Southeastern Conference and how you want to achieve as universities and athletically, and we want to be a part of that. Absolutely, it’s right.

Did I have an inkling? I’ll be honest with you, about 18 months ago I said, Here’s some projections of what could happen, and those two schools were part of it nationally, but I didn’t know this was about to happen on June 30. No, not at all.

As I look and try to project what takes place and guess, that type of movement was somewhere in my thinking but not at that moment.

And it’s where I grew up, in Skaneateles, New York. S-k-a-n-e-a-t-e-l-e-s. So I’ve lived in two places that are tough to spell: Skaneateles, New York, and Natchitoches, Louisiana. You’ll have to get Natchitoches on your own.

Q. I wanted to ask you about how your thoughts on access to a College Football Playoff might be evolving. I know before this latest wave of realignment with USC and UCLA moving, you had been adamant on an 18-model with five automatic bids.

GREG SANKEY: No, I’m going to come back to that. I’m against that.

Q. Against that?

GREG SANKEY: Not supportive of that.

Q. You had strong opinions about that.

GREG SANKEY: Herb will get on me for interrupting you.

Q. That’s okay. I am curious how your views of what a potential model, when the Playoffs would expand, might look like, given that we are in this current state of flux where maybe the conferences are changing and maybe automatic bids might not be given equal weight given where conferences are heading.

GREG SANKEY: Just to be clear, I apologize for my rudeness. Somebody is live tweeting, and I’ll be credited with that thought.

I walked into one of the first meetings when we were looking at the format and said, If we want to expand to eight teams for the Playoff with no automatic bids, I’ll have that conversation. But moving to an eight-team Playoff and granting what were going to be six automatic bids, reducing at-large access, is unwise.

If you look 2014, you would have replaced the 8th best team in the country with the 20th best team in the country. I don’t think we can survive that from a credibility standpoint.

But the pressure was there to have conference access with some guarantee. So the 12-team, six at-large, which increases the at-large access, and six conference qualifiers, not automatic qualifiers, but the guarantee that the six best conference champions was a really good balancing outcome.

But things have changed. I was clear back in January when we walked away from the conversation that we as a conference weren’t unanimous in our support. I had as commissioner moved people forward to the point we were supportive as a league. If we’re going to go back to square one, we’re going to take a step back from the model introduced and rethink the approach, number of teams, whether there should be any guarantee for conference champions at all. Just earn your way in. There’s something that’s healthy competitively about that and creates expectations and support around programs.

Where we go? We’ll see. We’ve had one initial conversation in late June. I walked into that meeting not very optimistic about the ability to talk through issues. I walked out much more positive about the path forward than when I walked in.

There’s a lot of work to do. We have time and we’ll use it. It’s the same type of issues that you’ve heard, AQ, no AQ, how many teams, what’s the relationship to the bowls, when do we play these games on a calendar. We really need to look at that more deeply than we did in the previous iteration. We’ll see how it goes, but those are the realities.

I’d be fine with no AQs, whether it’s four like we have now, a model that’s worked, eight, 12. But the inclusion of conference champion access was I thought an effective compromise to the 12-team Playoff.

Q. I’m curious about the NIL. Can you talk about how that has helped us acquire the title of superconference and how you see that progressing in the SEC?

GREG SANKEY: I think we, the Southeastern Conference, were a superconference before name, image and likeness. In fact, I provided that clever answer a few times over the last seven or eight years.

There are any number of good stories. I was up the road here an hour in Athens, Georgia, when Auburn gymnastics competed, and Suni Lee was cheered by everyone in Stegeman Coliseum. You don’t get that much between rivals when they’re cheering for an individual student-athlete.

Kearis Jackson talked about a Bojangles deal when he was in Destin with our leadership group, 45 steps to making a Bojangles biscuit that he engaged in on social media.

Olivia Dunne is a good story at LSU. Very prepared, very ready for that. Those are the activities we thought would be present and should be present, allow young people to build the brand.

I think there are many more stories just beyond what you read in recruiting that are positive. But one of the concerns up front was that we not do this state by state. We need uniformity. That feeds into our ability to have national competition during the regular season and support national championships.

The notion of some oversight, transparency, regulation of the market I think is exactly what helps everyone.

I’m convinced, regulated or unregulated, we can do well. I think the unregulated markets creates a set of problems for the people involved, whether it’s young people and their families trying to make decisions, the potential for long-term life entanglements in deals that are not understand and evaluated, the lack of support, the taxation that comes. We’ve also allowed it to enter into the recruiting space in a really weird way, and I think that needs to be made healthier than it is now.

Q. Given some of the public comments from coaches about the effect of NIL on recruiting and the classes, is there a feeling from the conference office that member institutions are abiding the spirit of NIL rules? How is the conference office supporting education departments on best practices?

GREG SANKEY: The issue is are they abiding by their state laws? Whether it’s spirit or not spirit, the issue that goes back when we’re in consultation is are you following the laws of your state, or in the past one circumstance an executive order in our footprint?

It is uncomfortable. It is a new dynamic. We’re going to have to manage through that discomfort. I don’t believe everything I read. You’re great writers, great at what you do, but I don’t believe everything I read has the depth of information or the depth of analysis.

What I’ve not read is the points of concern where young people have lost opportunities or promises and commitments haven’t been fulfilled. I look forward to reading those types of analyses.

But the focus on the conference office is providing guidance back to the states that have to provide the information. We provide educational information. It’s tough when that changes routinely through states, and our footprint, there are 11 different state laws. You have questions coming in about the laws or lack of laws in effect in every other state as well.

Q. In Destin you mentioned there was at least a hope to get the scheduling model resolved by the end of the year. Is that still kind of a realistic timeline? You also mentioned Texas and Oklahoma had been involved in those discussions when it comes to realignment. How much are they able to be involved in those discussions?

GREG SANKEY: We invited both the athletic directors and presidents and chancellors into our conference call a week and a half ago, because this is a long-term issue that has impacts beyond just the here and now, so they could hear my analysis and ask any questions of us and hear questions asked by our campus leaders.

When we moved into August last year, we had an athletic directors meeting that happens each August. We invited both to attend by video, so Zoom, since we’re really good at Zooming now, so they could hear the introduction of how we consider information around scheduling. When we’ve had important updates or conversation, they’ve been a part of that.

We did not invite either university to Destin this year. It becomes its own story and distraction. You may recall, we had enough story lines heading into Destin already.

Provided actually updates to them through the week. They’ve been great emerging partners in this process talking about their interests and priorities, just as our other 14 do.