5 biggest takeaways from the SEC spring meetings

MIRAMAR BEACH, Fla. — The SEC spring meetings ended last week without any bylaw changes or agreement with the Big Ten for playoff changes.

The meetings were, however, viewed as a success by commissioner Greg Sankey as league leaders discussed the College Football Playoff and contingency plans should Congressional oversight not prove an option in the quest for uniformity and rules enforcement.

Here are five significant takeaways on the big-ticket items collegiate sports is dealing with in what has become a chaotically charged landscape.

1. The SEC is open to expanded College Football Playoffs

Sankey said the SEC supports the 16-team playoff field model that it has researched and studied, but it remains open to discussing a more-expanded field (possibly 24 or 28 teams).

The SEC leaders want to be pragmatic with the decision and explore the ramifications of what a bigger playoff field would mean, both financially and from the standpoint of the scheduling model that would be required.

The biggest issue for the SEC is that it is contracted with ESPN to play its league championship game through 2031, and a field expansion beyond 16 teams could require the game being eliminated.

The CFP Selection Committee process is another concern, as SEC leaders question how the league’s move from an 8- to a 9-game schedule will be weighed by the 13 members who serve on the committee.

There are other “data points” to be discussed, but the feeling at spring meetings was the SEC recognized the need for its approval for the CFP to expand beyond the current 12-team model, and there is some leverage to be had in potential negotiations.

2. College Sports Commission needs more resources to enforce NIL rules

The CSC was created last May in an effort to provide a governing body to oversee and vet the name, image and likeness deals that athletes can secure outside of the NCAA-specified “cap.”

The cap allows the schools to pay out $22 million across its athletic department as part of the revenue-sharing agreement that came out of the House vs. NCAA settlement last May.

Athletes are required to submit their NIL deals that are outside of the cap — which must come from entities not associated with the university (non-boosters) — for CSC approval.

There are critics that say some deals aren’t being approved in a timely fashion, and there are some questions as to how CSC determines the definition of an “associated entity.”

There is also the issue of some schools not signing the participation agreement to be governed by the CSC, which leaves its interpretation subject to lawsuits and creates issues with how it enforces its legislation.

Sankey urged patience with what’s still a very new, and innovative process, that did not exist a year ago.

The SEC recognized the CSC needs more resources to be effective, along with the ability to enforce its rules to make schools accountable and provide uniformity in this venture.

3. Player eligibility needs to be for a specific period

The SEC stresses it wants collegiate sports to be a “defined period of eligibility,” and the NCAA is currently considering a bylaw that would put that in play.

The “5 for 5” proposal would give athletes five years to play five seasons in their chosen sport.

The “5 for 5” has also been written into the most recent bill pitched in Congress, but the NCAA has the power to institute the rule and is expected to do so in June.

4. A new Senate bill doesn’t have full support

A new bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate that would bring reform and stability to the collegiate landscape — it’s called the “Protect College Sports Act” — but it is not without its hang-ups.

There are several stages the bill would need to go through, including a series of legal reviews — but there are stipulations the SEC is not on board with, which is in part why it issued a joint statement with the Big Ten ahead of the Wednesday congressional hearing.

Specifically, the SEC objects to the notion of pooling its media rights, which the bill provides a contingency for, and also wording that would prevent further conference growth.

The SEC and Big Ten are somewhat targeted in the “Super Conference” wording of the bill, and while neither have immediate plans for growth, that aspect of the bill has Sankey’s attention.