When it comes to college football, the only constant seems to be change.
So when news emerged in recent weeks that the Big Ten and SEC have been discussing a partnership that could include an expanded College Football Playoffs, more automatic bids for the Power Four conferences and a formalized scheduling series, it was hardly received as the seismic shift it actually would be.
After all, it’s only appeared to be a matter of not “if” but rather “when” college football’s two most powerful conferences would team together to exert their outsized influence over the rest of the sport. But while much of the focus regarding the potential changes has centered on the Big Ten and SEC’s quest for more automatic playoff bids — how dare they! — others have begun to contemplate what the partnership could mean for the rest of the sport.
That includes sports columnist Jon Wilner, who considered such possibilities in a recent column. And according to Wilner, perhaps the most plausible outcome of a Big Ten-SEC pact is one between the Big 12 and ACC.
As Wilner points out, the possibility of the SEC moving to a nine-game conference schedule plus a predetermined cross-conference Big Ten would likely threaten any future matchups teams from either conference currently have scheduled against the Big 12 and ACC. With just two openings on their 12-game regular-season schedules to fill, it’s hard to imagine Big Ten and SEC teams doing so with games against the Big 12 and ACC, which could ultimately threaten their College Football Playoff resumes.
As such, it’s possible — if not likely — that the Big Ten and SEC teams would buy their future Big 12 and ACC opponents out of any games they already have scheduled against them. And while Big 12 and ACC schools would presumably be fine with the paydays, it would also leave them with holes in their own future schedules.
Wilner’s solution? The Big 12 and ACC could form their own partnership, including annual cross-conference games. While they may not wield the same power and influence as the Big Ten and SEC, such games would have plenty of appeal nationally and also be beneficial to the schools’ bottom lines.
“Home-and-home series don’t cost anything. Add the cancellation penalties collected from the SEC and Big Ten schools and the situation, while deeply unfortunate, would at least become revenue-positive,” Wilner writes. “But buying one-off home games against Group of Five and FCS programs is expensive — more than $1 million per game in some cases. And if they know Big 12 and ACC schools are desperate, the price could rise.”
Obviously, there would be some kinks to work out, including whether such games would be beneficial to the conferences’ playoff resumes, as the Big Ten and SEC would each get four automatic bids, while the ACC and Big 12 would each get two in the Big Ten and SEC’s reported proposal for a 14-team playoff. It’s also worth wondering how any of this would affect longstanding SEC-ACC rivalries, including Florida vs. Florida State and Kentucky vs. Louisville.
While there’s been plenty of negativity attached to a number of aspects about college football’s constantly changing landscape, the idea of annual Big Ten vs. SEC and Big 12 vs. ACC games in the regular season is, if nothing else, intriguing. It’s also worth noting that nothing about the Big Ten and SEC’s partnership has been finalized — although it’s beginning to become clear where all of this is heading.
This post was originally published on this site be sure to check out more of their content.
