OU X SEC with SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey and OU Athletics Director Joe Castiglione

On this episode of Conversations with the President, President Joseph Harroz, Jr. is joined by SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey and OU Athletics Director Joe Castiglione discuss OU’s inaugural day in the Southeastern Conference, the journey to joining the conference, and the evolving landscape of collegiate athletics. 

Transcript

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.