At this point, the Big 12 and its 16 schools are exploring a naming rights deal, according to two people familiar with the conference’s process, but not fully committed to striking one. When Commissioner Brett Yormark raised the idea, members were interested for a couple of key reasons: Schools are hunting for new cash streams, especially because they may have to start sharing revenue with athletes in the not-so-distant future. And even more importantly, the Big 12 is open to doing whatever it can to keep up with the SEC and Big Ten.
With the Pac-12 down to two schools, the Power Five has already been whittled to the Power Four. The Big 12 wants to keep it from becoming the Power Two.
“This is entirely driven by the goal of closing the gap between the Big 12 and B10/SEC and staying competitive,” a Big 12 official wrote in a text message to The Washington Post on Thursday. “In today’s landscape, this might be what it takes.”
Thursday morning, CBS Sports reported that the Big 12 is also considering an investment from the private equity firm CVC Capital Partners. That could include a 15 to 20 percent stake in the league for as much as $1 billion, according to a person familiar with those discussions. And the Big 12 is not the only conference considering a naming rights deal, according to Yahoo. Conference USA is poking around, too. Tostitos USA has a pretty nice ring to it.
The next few years are a critical point in the Big 12′s arc. It lost Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC in realignment. It recovered to add Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah, which will all join this fall. In February, the SEC and Big Ten announced they were forming an advisory group to sort out the future of college sports. The implication was that there are those two conferences and everyone else. The Big 12, however, is not satisfied with everyone else.
So consider the conference in its throwing-a-bunch-of-ideas-at-the-wall phase. Maybe that means changing its name to the Allstate 12, which Action Network first reported as a possibility Thursday. Maybe it means taking a cash infusion from a private equity firm. Maybe it means both, in some form, plus other ways to stick with the highest spenders.
The legal settlement that would bring about revenue sharing is still in the approval process, which is expected to take months and could hit snags. But if it does lead to a revenue-sharing model, it could cost major-conference schools about $30 million per year. That figure includes spending to the proposed revenue-sharing cap of about 22 percent of a school’s revenue, additional scholarships and the schools’ portion of back damages to plaintiffs in the House, Hubbard and Carter antitrust cases. The NCAA also hopes to permit schools to pay athletes directly through name, image and likeness (NIL) deals.
Revenue sharing, if the settlement is approved, would probably start in the fall of 2025. No matter what, the price to compete will continue to climb. A big question is what might be for sale next.
But even as the commercialization of college sports continues, some — including the NCAA and its members — are grasping at the last straws of amateurism. On Thursday, the House Education and the Workforce Committee advanced a bill that would exempt college athletes from becoming employees. It was a full party-line vote, with 23 Republicans voting to advance the bill and 16 Democrats voting against. Now Republican leadership, headed by Speaker Mike Johnson, will decide whether the bill makes it to the House floor.
If it passes through the House, it would go to the Democratic-controlled Senate, where it would probably have a hard time advancing unless it were attached to broader legislation.
The NCAA considers Thursday’s vote a major win, because barring athlete employment is one of its biggest wishes in Congress. But while the bill has made it farther than any college sports legislation in recent years, many steps remain before it could reach the president.
An obvious hurdle is that it’s an election year, when lawmakers are preoccupied and legislation is often harder to pass. Plus, attorney Paul McDonald — who is pushing for athletes to be eligible for minimum wage in Johnson v. NCAA — is already promising to challenge any such law on equal protection grounds. He argues that if athletes couldn’t be hourly employees, they would be denied the rights of fellow students in work study-style jobs.
The too long, didn’t read version: Among Congress, private equity and the possibility of the Big 12 selling its name to the highest bidder, it was just another day in college sports.
