Study Reveals Challenges in Pooling Media Rights for College Sports
A recent analysis commissioned by the Southeastern Conference (SEC) and the Big Ten has cast doubt on the viability of pooling media rights as a solution to financial challenges in college sports. The study suggests that continuing to sell media rights independently may be more lucrative than consolidating them.
Some lawmakers and sports leaders have championed the idea of pooling media rights as a strategy to boost income and sustain college sports amid rising costs associated with name, image, and likeness (NIL) payments to athletes. However, the study, which was shared with The Associated Press, indicates that major conferences like the SEC, Big Ten, Atlantic Coast Conference, and Big 12 are likely to surpass the projected $7 billion increase in valuation over the next decade by maintaining their current individual sales approach.
“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 states.
This $7 billion estimate comes from Cody Campbell, a billionaire and head of the Texas Tech board of regents, who founded the nonprofit Saving College Sports. Campbell’s proposal, along with a Democrat-backed bill known as the SAFE Act, suggests modifying the 1961 Sports Broadcasting Act, which currently prevents conferences from collectively negotiating TV rights.
Campbell voiced his concerns on social media, labeling college sports as “broken” and criticizing those who benefit from the existing system. He acknowledged that unraveling current TV contracts would be a lengthy process, proposing the creation of an independent entity to maximize revenue under a potentially revised Sports Broadcasting Act within 12 years.
In his critique, Campbell highlighted SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey and Big Ten Commissioner Tony Petitti, who commissioned 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 stated.
FTI Consulting, hired by Sankey and Petitti, based its analysis on both provided and publicly available data, questioning Campbell’s assumptions that college sports could emulate the financial success of NBA and NFL deals through aggregation. The study points out that the NBA’s $6.9 billion-a-year deal results from selling smaller game packages to numerous distributors, which increases market competition and involves more media partners.
With only 30 NBA and 32 NFL teams compared to the 136 potential participants in a college sports pool, the study argues that such aggregation is less feasible. The analysis also revisits historical shifts, noting how the Supreme Court’s ruling in the early 1980s against NCAA’s game pooling led to the formation of the College Football Association, which ultimately generated less revenue than individual league deals.
“Decentralization also helps preserve the unique character of college sports — an incredibly important brand attribute,” the study concludes.
