This situation began nearly 15 years ago when a last-minute shift in conference realignment collapsed due to emotional factors interfering with college football’s business decisions.

It’s well known that emotions can ruin business dealings.

In 2010, for instance, the Pac-10 failed to attract six schools from the struggling Big 12: Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and Colorado, missing the chance to become the nation’s first 16-team super conference.

This singular blunder contributed to the gradual dissolution of both the Big 12 as it existed back then and the eventual demise of the Pac-12, leading to the establishment of today’s SEC and Big Ten super conferences.

While the SEC and Big Ten did not initiate their current dominance in college football (and subsequently college sports), they are certainly prepared to take all legal steps necessary to finish it on their own terms.

Their strategy includes collaborations that seemed unimaginable just a few years back, such as a potential 14- or 16-team College Football Playoff in 2026 guaranteeing four automatic qualifying slots for both the SEC and Big Ten, alongside both conferences combining their media rights revenue to significantly increase their earnings (currently about $2 billion a year combined).

This goes beyond a simple nonconference scheduling agreement, as reported by YSL News Sports, which could potentially add around 20 games between the two conferences to boost media rights earnings. This is merely a fraction of the anticipated revenue loss expected to impact athletes in the coming years, which is fundamentally driving this partnership.

This mutually beneficial arrangement between the SEC and Big Ten could ultimately create a system that resembles the NFL, leaving other Bowl Subdivision conferences to struggle financially. A combination of shared media rights and coordinated scheduling could emulate the NFL setup with two distinct conferences overlapping and competing in a playoff, potentially including the other remaining FBS conferences.

This isn’t merely a cash grab by the two richest Power Four conferences; it’s a matter of survival. Central to this issue are the billions lost in a legal case, and the forecasted annual expense of $20-23 million tied to shared revenue agreements with players starting as soon as the 2025 season.

Consider this: when accounting for shared revenue and using the higher end of the projections, the combined cost for the 34 teams in the SEC and Big Ten on player salaries would be nearly $782 million a year.

This figure is staggering for a group of schools that currently offer players a “cost of attendance” stipend amounting to about $6,000 annually. Simple calculations—34 teams, 85 scholarship players each, with $6,000 per player—lead to projected payments of merely $17.34 million each year.

Essentially, the SEC and Big Ten are addressing a projected budget deficit of $764,660,000 for 2025.

This illuminates the new alliance among former competitors. The primary goal is survival, not supplementing other FBS conferences, while allocating 15-20 percent of revenue to private equity investors who, out of sheer goodwill, are currently proposing to financially back a new league. You know, for their (un)fair share.

I find it hard to digest.

Some conferences may have to turn to private equity for funding to remain competitive in college football or attempt to keep up with the SEC and Big Ten. There could even come a time when some conferences collapse under the burden of paying players, possibly leading to the formation of separate divisions.

The debate arises: by uniting and seeking ways to generate revenue to cover future expenses, have the SEC and Big Ten ultimately abandoned the rest of college football?

More than thirty years ago, well before the initial College Football Playoff or the contentious Bowl Championship Series, then-WAC commissioner Karl Benson found himself in discussions with then-Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany at a Division I commissioners meeting.

Delany was incredibly influential at the time, being one of the key figures in the evolution of college football postseasons, transitioning from the Bowl Coalition, to the Bowl Alliance, to the Bowl Championship Series. All these formats aimed to create a coalition of bowls allowing the top two teams to compete for a national title.

During a meeting addressing the development of the BCS and its controversial system, Benson was advocating for better opportunities for the smaller WAC (which later evolved into the Mountain West Conference).

“We just want a spot on the stage,” Benson asserted to Delany.

Delany replied, “We built the stage.”

It’s all business here. Emotions have no place.