“There are three ways we can go — stay out of it, facilitate more of it or create a mandate.”
On SEC-Big Ten scheduling, Sankey laid out three options: stay out of it, facilitate more games, or mandate them. He called a mandate incredibly difficult.
Greg Sankey
- Role(s) as quoted
- SEC commissioner
- Person type
- Conference executives
- Entries
- 9 (May 28, 2025 to Jul 20, 2026)
- Topics
- Governance & legislation (7) Structure: super league & divisions (4) Scheduling & calendar (2) Playoff & bowls (2) Eligibility (2) Rivalries & tradition (1) Pay, NIL & revenue sharing (1) Transfer portal (1)
In the Ideas index
- 2. Power 4 breakaway, super league or separate top division (SEC and Big Ten position)
- 5. A hard salary or revenue cap (Complications or opponents)
- 6. A federal law, national NIL standard or antitrust protection (Undecided)
- 8. Eligibility: five-year clock, JUCO years, draft age (Uniform national eligibility rules)
- 9. Playoff expansion to 16, 24 or more teams (Opponents or cautious)
- 12. Scheduling: standardize schedules, reward tough non-conference games (Mentioned)
- 13. Preserve rivalries; geography-based conferences via pooled media rights (Skeptic of pooling)
- 18. Regulate agents (Mentioned)
All entries (oldest first)
No verbatim quote recorded for this entry; summary of the source only.
At 2025 SEC Media Days, Sankey defended the CFP memorandum of understanding that gives the SEC and Big Ten decision-making authority on the format. He said that without an agreement the 5+7 12-team model could simply stay.
“If there's a point in which we cannot do so, I think that conversation -- Is there something that you do alone? -- I think that starts to generate more and more interest.”
On The Paul Finebaum Show, Sankey said breaking away wasn't a good idea for now, but that great frustration over the lack of enforceable guardrails could build interest in the SEC going it alone if collective problem-solving fails.
“So that's, I think the answer is the antitrust piece is the inherent problem in trying to create caps and limits.”
Asked why the House ruling wasn't appealed, Sankey pointed to the 9-0 Supreme Court loss in Alston and said antitrust law is the core obstacle to creating caps and limits.
“I think the notion that we would simply rush to say we support is not the appropriate position.”
On The Paul Finebaum Show, denied any SEC–Big Ten merger or super league plan, calling claims by Protect College Sports Act backers 'not consistent with the truth'; declined to endorse the bill yet and questioned voluntary media-rights pooling.
No verbatim quote recorded for this entry; summary of the source only.
At SEC Media Days, acknowledged 'real' discussions of governance breakaway options that could distance the SEC from the NCAA, then walked back talk of actually breaking away.
“We're not interested in finding the easiest path, we are focused on finding the right path.”
Opening SEC Media Days, Sankey pushed back on a 24-team CFP. He said there is no clear evidence of media interest, the calendar is already strained, and the sport needs to find the right path rather than the easiest one.
“I do not believe that is a leverage point. I think that's just honest communication.”
Sankey said SEC talk of breaking away is real and not a bargaining tactic. He described it as a sign of deep frustration over how national rules on tampering, the House settlement and eligibility are being enforced.
No verbatim quote recorded for this entry; summary of the source only.
In his media days address, Sankey laid out the national standards he wants, including health and safety, scholarship protections, oversight of agents, athlete participation in governance, and uniform eligibility and transfer rules.