Hi. I'm Joe Harris president of the University of Oklahoma. I want to welcome you to our conversations with the President. This platform gives me the chance to talk to some of the great people who make OU so special. Make sure you're subscribed to conversations with the President. You'll be the first to know when new episodes are released. Let's get started. Welcome to this episode of Conversations with the President. As you can immediately tell from our surroundings. This is no ordinary podcast. For those watching on YouTube, you'll note that we are in the home of the King, Barry Switzer. We have the Switzer Center here behind us, two very special guests here in the Gaylord Family, Oklahoma Memorial Stadium. The date is July 1, 2024. It's a historic day, one of the biggest in 130 plus years of college athletics at the University of Oklahoma. This is the day that we move to the SEC conference. Long anticipated overdue, two remarkable guests. Both of them deserve a great introduction. I'll make it a bit shorter so we can hear more from each of them. We have with us Commissioner Greg Sankey, the commissioner of the Southeast Conference, thrilled that you hear with us. 22 years with the Southeast Conference, if I recall correctly, and nine years as the commissioner. The bio includes a lot of things, including being co chair of the transformation committee, looking at the future of college athletics. But all of us in college athletics know him, as described by sports illustrated as the most powerful person in all of college athletics. Commissioner Sankey, thank you for joining us.
Should be here. Thank you.
To his left, we have often self described greatest AD in the country. Kidding you. That's everyone's description of him. He truly is the absolute best. Joe Castiglione has been here for 26 years. He was telling me this is the 26th anniversary date of the day we started paying you for this job. He worked a few months uncompensated, but the statute of limitation has rolled on that. If you look at OU, we have 44 national championships. We have seven Hismans and 300 conference championships. But if you look at Joe Castiglione ten at the University of Oklahoma, 25 of those 44 national championships happened on his watch so far. Thrilled to have both of you two very dear friends, and one I've known forever, one the last several years. Now that we've officially joined today, I assume it's official now, commissioner.
You can move beyond the assumption phase, It's reality.
Thank God. It's been a while.
I was thinking the longest three years of that 130 year history you referenced have been the last three years, I think is. I announced and then waited. To have today, the official entry date for both University of Oklahoma and your colleagues from Texas, it's rewarding, and it's exciting, and it's a new era.
Let's we're absolutely thrilled. It has been a long time coming. We like to officially talk about this when the story broke three years ago that we were coming to the SEC. But it started a bit before that. I thought we'd ask the two masterminds behind all of this, just for some behind the scenes insight, how did this all come to pass?
I'll start with, Joe and I have known each other. You interact in athletics at events or at scenes. I can actually remember a call where I didn't assume anything was going to happen, or I said, hey, if it's ever on your mind that there's something else let's just make sure we have a conversation before anything takes place. That's reality. There's all speculation that happens. But I really think the conversation that you and I were part of together when the presidents get involved, that's when things changeIt's fine to talk around the edges, but the reality of talking with presidents about a future move, that's historic. I would describe the news back in 2021, is the most subdued big time press release announcement of change that you could imagine. That's a credit to the way you wanted to approach it about being orderly and respectful. That brings us here today. Joe can fill in all the other blanks, but I really look towards, the first conversation with presidents as, this is real.
Well, I certainly recall it. I was extremely anxious. But just to be clear, so Jay Hartzell, the president at Texas and I were on that call, pulling the strings behind us in a terrifying sense, were Chris Del Conte of Texas, which, if you know him, you understand, just how funny that is. But he and his brother, the odd couple, Joe Castiglione were looking for two presidents that would take the bait. Joe, why don't you give us the real perspective of how you and Chris cooked this up and how you convinced President Hartzell, myself to reach out to the commissioner?
I think it's apropos that we're having conversations with the president in front of microphones and cameras, because there's only been a few times where we've spoken about this publicly, other than when we get there, we'll be excited. To the commissioner's point, the day we're celebrating this has been intentional, because there's no shade thrown on our previous membership or any of the members of our time in the Big 12, Big 8 before that. We just wanted to do it a different way. Probably, unlike what happens in conference realignment, we'll celebrate it when we get there. However, lots behind the scenes, a lot of preparation, grateful to the commissioner from a certain point in time to invite both Chris and I to the meetings, and obviously you and Jay to the President's Chancellors meeting. We can be involved in the forward thinking, not just about when we join, but what's going on around us in college athletics and a national landscape. Of course, part of that is how we can work together to make the Southeastern Conference even stronger. You got to go back to probably, it's going to be close to 10 years ago now.
Some eye popping decisions being made around college athletics, and the realization that this is not sustainable. What we're doing or not doing, as the case might be, is not good for the long term of college athletics. Now we're in a spot where the dog caught the car. What are we going to do with it? But we saw that both in our own league, as well as nationally. As you know, we quietly worked on a deep dive about ourself. This is more about what's Oklahoma's place, its role, its strength, and where do we want to position ourself in the future and what that's going to look like. Before, you became president, we were thinking about, where's the best place for us to be stable? The Big 12, no secret, had gone through dramatic change twice, we really count three times, because two of the three were teams leaving, and the third was two teams coming. Even go back to that ten year period, what triggered, our thinking was the Big 12 looking at expanded membership. No that it wasn't a healthy thing to be considering what should be best for the Big 12, but it provided an open window to what's really down the road. Again, we've talked many times, you know, what's best for Oklahoma, no disrespect to anybody, but that's our first challenge and first job. That's when it started, and the conversations with the President took place. Here we are today and could not be more excited.
Now go back. I probably haven't even shared this with the two of you. I became commissioner of the Southeastern Conference in June of 2015. As you noted, made it through nine a month now into Year 10, and we'll see how long we keep it rolling. But my first, no training wheels on with the commissioner meeting was October of 2015 with our Presidents and chancellors, 14 members. It was it was three years after our most recent expansion with Texas A&M in Missouri. One of the presentations I made was a broad look nationally at conference alignments at the autonomy five level, the big five conferences.
TV demographics, which are obviously shifting. But when you looked at the maps of TV households, it was a pretty interesting conversation to ensue about, wow, there's a couple where maybe one has high numbers, but low avid fans, another one has low numbers and not many states in their footprint. Then we looked at the range of media contracts coming up over the next decade, and we're almost at the end of that decade. That led to some hypothesizing, if you will, very academic terms, since I'm on with the University president about what would happen. You could think through, well there could be mid 20s change that would probably start in '22. Now, we announced this in '21, so I was off by a year. But in that meeting said to our presidents, my view is we'll be a couple of conferences. I think the Big 12 and the Pac 12 will have some membership issues come when it's TV contract renewal time and you'll have to think about how you want to proceed. Obviously, we've answered that question, but it was important for us, two or three years after an expansion, not to simply be complacent in our thinking, but then to think forward again. You've heard from me since you've participated over the last year, being attentive to what's happening around us still, not that we predict anything beyond 16, but how do we understand what's happening. We've engaged in that for the decade in which I've been involved in the leadership role.
It's been fascinating. It's been amazing. You've been right at on the vanguard television contracts that change everything. The deal you made with Walt Disney, with ABC, and ESPN was groundbreaking at the time and serves as a model for those going forward. I would love to spend an hour with us just talking about how all of this came to pass, because the story really is terrific. When people think about conference realignment, they don't realize how complicated it is to choose a partner, to be chosen by a partner, and to go through all of the business and political issues that attach to it. When Joe told me he had this idea, it sounded like a really good idea. Then when you start going through it, it really is intricate and complicated, and you learn just how much thought goes into it from the AD's perspective, the president's role and certainly as the commissioner. We're sitting here. This is a huge day for us moving into the SEC officially. I think one of the big questions that everybody has, and certainly it's one that we think about a lot, which is this question of, I'd say two fold. One where are we in college athletics right now? What do we think the future really holds? We knew three years ago when the US Supreme Court voted 90 in the Austin case that everything was going to change. We knew at that moment, and it's taken a little bit longer than some thought for some of that to play out. But as you sit here, everyone really looks to you to as the lead AD and the lead commissioner in the country. As you look at it, how would you describe first the present landscape of intercollegiate athletics and what you think this moves towards?
I was asked to describe where we are in my hope for change. I'll go back a couple of years ago. We had a little bit of attention around a football coaches conversation, name image and likens. When our coaches met, my observation was, look, it's never going to be the way that it was. We've seen today some historical footage from the archives at University of Oklahoma. Those were great times and great legends, great stories, great people. It won't be that way. Now, a lot of the core of what we do can remain the same, the education, the opportunities, the competitive experience and the fan environment. That can remain the same. But we're going through this process where states have started to force change. I think even bigger than the Supreme Court, the state started legislating, how we'll administer college athletics. That's the change. The Supreme Court provided very clear context for some of that change. But it's been incredibly hard, and you've been a part of those conversations because we had this model that was perceived as working so well for so long. To achieve some kind of balance around men and women's sports, to provide opportunity, scholarships, education, legacy. I've met young people who I'll see on campus, and they're playing in the NBA or the NFL. I'll ask, like, why are you here? They say, well, this is home. Those are heartwarming stories. But we're now in a situation where litigation, legislation and the economics are going to have to change the way we warm our heart a little bit, if you will. I think the hope that we have is there's discontent. I think that discontent exists across the spectrum. I think politically, you have states legislating, you have attorney generals making observations and actually filing lawsuits at force change. You have young people, student athletes who say, what, this isn't really fair. For me to line up across the line of scrimmage or to tip off a basketball game or be on the opposite side of a volleyball or stand in the batters box to not know that the people on the other side and the other uniforms are held to the same standards that we face among our team. I think that speaks to the need for national consistency. Now, we've got to accelerate our decision making. We have a decade's worth of decisions around this litigation settlement that's been announced to make in a matter of months and no longer than a year. But we also need to return to national standards. With the court commentary and the state activity, that's not going to happen unless we're really connected, and we can accomplish things at a state level, or we have some clarity around congressional interests, but not just interests, the commitment to resolve our problems. I would observe that in the midst of an Olympic year, which as we record this, we're just a few weeks away from the Olympic games, where we the college campuses and college athletics are the support system for the US Olympic. Movement in the US Olympic competition, we need those national standards and that national participation. But we've got a responsibility first to start to solve our own problems.
Yeah. Those are some deep and serious thoughts, Joe, do you want to amplify those or a commentary?
You know, for us, much like an institution. Athletics is built on creating an experience that athletes want to choose to be part of. We're not in a draft system. They all pro leagues, they put themselves into the draft to be selected by the teams. We're not acquiring our talent that way. We have to recruit so there are loads of things that go into a prospect of athletes decision to come in the first place. Now, stay and stay for more than a year. We still have to understand decor why they're here. In our case, we're developing the younger end. Now we always know in sports, there's somebody that defies all logic and is wise beyond the years or developed beyond their years. But for us, it's still about development. As we navigate this very complex environment, There was an easy solution and we all would have picked them by now. The best thing we can do is understand what puts our programs in a position going forward. Most importantly, how do we keep it tethered to education? Because that's a differentiating factor. Pro leagues, they all want to win at the top level, but they are built on parity, not a lot of parity in college athletics sometimes, although we have to think, in some ways, building a model that's good the greater good because it allows people to be involved in sports. But for us to come back to the core of why we exist, what attracts students? What attracts athletes in our case? What keeps them here, how we pour into them, New model. Don't try to connected to the old way, think of something entirely new and set itself up for success in the future.
It's fascinating. Here I am asking questions like some disinterested third party, when the truth of the matter is that you were very kind in the way you characterized it, but there is this reality that we are changed, that we have to find these consistent national standards. The truth of the matter is, people like Jocas de Leon and myself can engage and are a part at times of the race to the bottom, that if one state does something, then we have to do something. The reality around that is that that game theory results in everybody losing. There are great pressures to do that. But you've expressed it. We have the Olympics coming up. As you said, 75% of Olympians come from colleges, but none of those sports make money. It's not like the NFL where they have one sport to handle. We also have, we just celebrated, 52 years of Title IX. Women's sports have been really enabled because of intercollegiate athletics, from a financial proposition that does not make money. How we accomplish these objectives is critical, but there are natural tensions that could create a failure where each of us, individual universities, individual states crafts our own law to try and be just like the other person that we fear is going to get ahead of us. But that can actually create to the system. How do we accomplish in the strongest conference in the country? How do we accomplish what I heard someone in one of our meetings describe as the two essential things, which is number 1 to not lose the essence of college athletics? How do we accomplish that given these conflicting interests.
I think part of that is to go through, and that's a fair evaluation of what brought us here. And my reference to our conversation with Coaches, it's never going to be the way that it was, but it doesn't have to be the way that it is. What's not productive in that circumstance is simple solutions that are proposed constantly. There's no easy button for this. The ability I define a simple solution is when somebody says, if they would just and then fill in the blank. If they would just change the NCAA president, we'd be out of it. If they would just break off and leave everybody else behind. Those are defined as simple solutions. Then let's look through the complexities, which I think gives you a bit of a prescription. Diagnosis, then a prescription. Decisions made in the past put us here. Decisions to litigate, to not litigate, decisions to allow states to begin that legislative process without looking at litigation options that would have created a venue for a negotiation and a settlement and a structure. Huge error five years ago at the national level.
The difficulty of moving economically because we're in this big room of disparate interests. There's no circumstance with which I'm familiar, where the University of Florida and Fordham University go in a room with a bunch of other universities. I'm not picking on anybody in particular, we'll go to F in the Alphabet and say, make decisions that serve everybody's interests, because one's downtown in Manhattan, and one's a large public land grant university. But we do that in college sports. We have to reconcile these issues, and my view has been there are five fields of play. We have to deal with the court issues, we have to try in congress for a national solution. The states and the conferences, so if we as a conference can come together around solutions, can we populate those across our now 12 states? I think that's viable to a certain extent, but can we agree? Then what can the NCA actually do? I think you have to reverse engineer the NCAs existence to ask, what is it supposed to do, then what does it need to do to support those efforts, which I think are largely championship related. Then you play back up the system and say, well, we're in a circumstance where we have to resolve litigation. I think what happened with the NFL the week before we're recording this podcast and their antitrust decision informs a settlement. What's the most you can get out of that, then what's the rest of the work project on those five fields to play? There are other solutions that have been identified, if we just make them employees. Now, remember the definition of a simple solution because people don't explore those complexities. People talk about collectively bargain. Well, it works in the pro leagues, but you have to actually go back and conduct the evaluation, so we're going to have to work through the hard issues. I do think the threat, if you will, or the reality is, we have to make a decades worth of decisions that were pushed off because we were comfortable in our space, and we have to make those decisions. In a matter of months, maximum 12 of those months, so a year from now, that model has to largely be reshaped. Not everything, but as much as we can reshape. That's the responsibility.
Well, Joe, do you look at this with optimism or pessimism?
Optimism because I love college athletics and I think it's something totally different that is part of our society. Yes, it's going to look in some ways, completely different than it's ever looked. We have to train ourselves because that's been part of the system that's been developed in well over 100 years since President Roosevelt created a governing body. But I do believe in what takes place in the transformation of young people. Yes, there's that two, 3% that go on and play beyond their years of eligibility, but this is something that's special, and it means a lot to not just their life down the road, but collectively, when their lives are shaped well, they're starting to shape other parts of society. I don't want to get into the philosophical part, but that is a really big takeaway from college athletics, because it trains people in areas that even the universities, as much as the degrees are great, it trains them in leadership and other things that can serve them well. For us, I have great hope that we'll find the path forward as bumpy as it might be between here and there, I have great hope that it'll find its way and the North Star will guide us.
I'll give you part of the reality that needs not be lost. Is when you think about major change in college athletics over the last 50 years, it is externally driven largely. We can make some decisions about recruiting calendars and things like that, how many games we play, but you go back to Title nine. There was a participation, but that was driven at the congressional level, something locally here. In fact, we're going to have the Board of Regents bowl when Oklahoma and Georgia play in the regular season someday because of that lawsuit which changed the nature of TV agreements and conference alignments that still play out. You think about the antitrust issues dating back to real 1996. Again, hey, this worked, we can control these things. That was the notion, and we've been told over and over, you're going to have to give up that control and deal with the base level economic issues. I think from the hope standpoint, that allows us to have those competitive experiences, those athletic opportunities, the educational outcomes, and the fan engagement that we want. That type of similarity can exist, but those structures around those four elements, those are the adaptations. Those are just hard because it's again, been perceived as working so well for so many.
The irony is not lost on me. The big litigation, certainly one of those big milestones was a 1984 case US Supreme Court case that you referenced where Oklahoma sued the NCAA and won, which then opened up TV rights. I wish we had an hour and a half for this conversation. I appreciate you all being so engaged because here on a big day of celebration, we realize there is this reality, this is taking place right now, where big decisions have to get made in the next several months that haven't been addressed for over a decade. I love the fact that you two are at the Helms in your roles because it does matter. That's one of the things I think is fascinating. When you watch or listen to this podcast, I think there's two things to take away. One of those is is that college athletics is special. It's special for the student athlete, and it's one of the few things that binds us together as a country, Democrat or Republican. Red versus blue, you love college athletics. It's made a difference. It is the difference maker in our position in the Olympics, and it has been that, which has done more, I would argue, than almost anything to help make sure women get an equal opportunity in this country. Interclasian athletics is often thought of as just a competition. It's not just a game, the slogan of it just means more is very real. Athletics means more than just athletics. It means a lot to us. There are a lot of changes, and to me, it's very heartening that we have two of the absolute best in the business that are here leading this because it is complicated. You're dead right, Commissioner. Anyone that says if they just do that or they can break it down into two issues. It's not. It's hypercomplex, and it will solve itself the wrong way if we aren't the ones to solve it, so I appreciate both of you all so much for being here. I know that there's a whole host of activities scheduled for the day, and I appreciate you all stepping in for this podcast. I want to thank all the listeners for being a part of this, this is a very special edition of conversations with the president hosted here in the Barry Switzer Center, in the Gaylord Family, Oklahoma Memorial Stadium. Thank you all for being here and look forward to hosting you all next time.
