What's next for Greg Sankey, SEC after latest round of power grabs and realignment?

DALLAS — Last summer, Greg Sankey fielded several phone calls from private equity firms seeking to arrange a meeting with the SEC commissioner.

So, he went.

There was talk of a cash infusion of millions of dollars, new financial resources to enhance an already valuable brand and its members. He absorbed the information and learned plenty but took no action.

Months later, as college leaders began to finalize an extension of the College Football Playoff contract, a new request came in from a separate group — a text message to power conference commissioners from the leaders of a private equity-backed “super league.”

Meet us for dinner in New York City.

He didn’t go.

As it turns out, the super league leaders had toiled behind the scenes meeting for months with college athletic directors and school presidents, some of them even within the SEC. The talk centered around a consolidation of big brands; more attractive gameday matchups more often; a new-look playoff; and a tiered distribution system for the league’s most elite programs.

“I think ideas are best when they are shared through the front door, not the backdoor,” Sankey told Yahoo Sports on Tuesday in a wide-ranging interview at Day 2 of the four-day SEC media days in downtown Dallas.

Private equity, even more so perhaps than conferencerealignment, are some of the most popular buzzwords within college sports at the moment. Private equity. Cash infusion. Equity stake. Venture capital. The jargon is growing more synonymous within the industry than touchdowns, field goals, first downs and foul lines.

A year away from the most historic change in college sports history — a House settlement-related revenue-sharing model that permits schools to pay athletes directly — universities, athletic departments and whole leagues are searching for more revenue streams, such as commercial logos on football fields and naming-rights deals with corporate sponsors.

Another route is private capital, as explained, on a school level, in this story from May.

On a national scale, multiple separate groups have spent the last several months sharing models with school administrators that would turn the 133-team FBS college football division into a smaller group of heavyweights battling in a tiered system, some with or without relegation (think the English Premier League). The proposals feature eye-popping money figures, some of them promising blue-blood schools like Ohio State, Texas and Alabama three or four times what they currently receive in annual distribution — money derived from more valuable television contracts than those that currently exist.

Despite the finalization of the College Football Playoff contract — an agreement that binds the 10 FBS conferences together for at least another eight years — these private equity-backed super league concepts are still lingering. In fact, meetings are scheduled to continue next month.

Sankey, arguably the most powerful person in the sport, is clear where he stands on the matter. For those inside and outside his conference who are enticed by promises of big paychecks, high-profile matchups and streamlined governance, he sends a message: We can do this ourselves.

“There’s frustration with presidents, coaches and athletic directors over the last couple years,” he told Yahoo Sports. “I say, ‘I get you’re frustrated.’ When there is change and there is frustration, it’s now, ‘Let’s pursue new ideas!’

“Any of the ideas identified can actually be decided within a conference or a collection of conferences. It’s not clear to me why people feel the need to cede authority to an outside entity when they can make decisions.”

Decisions on what exactly?

Management of the sport, for one. But that may be solved soon enough. The power conferences are expected to gain more control in a new DI governance model as part of the impending changes tied to the NCAA’s settlement of the House case.

But, let’s be real, this is about money more than anything. If Tennessee, Michigan or Florida can make $200 million annually from any new venture instead of $70 million annually from its own conference, how do you compete with that?

“The notion that money is a solution to our current situation actually should be seen as more of a threat,” Sankey said. “In a system going through upheaval, just inserting a bunch of money does not resolve the issues at the core of the upheaval.”

But no one, not even Sankey, is under the belief that these external pressures are all negative. They will and have incited necessary change. He’s in the midst of “exploring opportunities” with his membership.

“It’s clear that [schools] have been approached,” Sankey said. “I’ve gotten phone calls where they are approached. We have strength and relationships here where we have candid dialogue within our conference. I don’t think the outside ideas will stop. As I understand the reality of what’s presented, we can make every one of those decisions on our own.”

Already, changes are being made, whether because of these pressures or not. The Big Ten, for instance, ended its long-time tradition of sharing a portion of ticket revenues across the league.

Even the SEC is searching for revenues far and wide. The conference recently signed a deal with Southwest Airlines as its official airline.

In another potential revenue-generating move, the proposal to add a ninth SEC football game has been “re-introduced” as a topic on the administrative agenda, Sankey told Yahoo Sports. Those programs at first against adding a ninth conference game are more interested now in doing so, according to multiple administrators at conference schools — a way to enhance schedules with bigger matchups and generate more cash through ticket sales as well as the television contract with ESPN.

Any decision is expected next year after officials watch the first expanded CFP play out.

“We will use that as a learning experience and see how the [CFP] committee evaluates competition, rather than doing analytics to predict,” Sankey said. “That sets timing for the first quarter next year.”

For many within the industry, there is but one final step, an inevitability in college sports: unequal conference revenue distribution — a system that rewards those programs generating more of the revenue. Should Vanderbilt, for instance, receive the same conference television check as Texas?

As college athletics continues to burst free from its amateurism shell and rocket toward professionalism, external forces will press upon it.

Where does it all end? According to one leader, the industry, for so long resistant to change, must look inward and do just that: change.

“You had a system perceived as working pretty well — not perfect. There is no perfect. We are in the classic [idea] of ‘Great is the enemy of good,’” Sankey said. “It’s hard to change when you think something works well and it’s a historic model and when you’re in a higher education system.

“As we walk through this, don’t cede authority to making decisions. We should take ownership.”