Brett Yormark: Big 12 Puts Private Equity and Naming Rights on Pause

ORLANDO — The Big 12 will wrap up its spring meetings on Friday after a busy week of coaches, athletic directors, and university presidents discussing changes around the College Football Playoff, March Madness expansion, and the House vs. NCAA settlement.

Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark caught up with Front Office Sports on Thursday evening to analyze the new landscape of college sports, including some shifts in strategy for his conference.

Some of the Q&A below have been lightly edited for clarity and brevity.

Where does the Big 12 stand on selling a stake of the conference to private equity?

We’ve explored all that. We did it probably for the better part of the year. We’re not ready to go in that direction, but we know what the options are out there. We’ve been educated at the highest levels. 

Why aren’t you ready to take that step? 

The board’s not ready right now. And there’s probably lots of reasons for that. There are so many different things going on right now. But I think we’re well informed. We know what’s going on in that world. We hired a bank to consult and give us direction—show us what the optionality is out there. And we’re just not ready to jump in just yet.

Was there good value available if you were ready to take that step? 

There’s different ways to look at it. We were exploring a potential partnership that brings strategic expertise to grow the business of the Big 12, while also having someone that could be a capital resource. So, the model we were looking for and exploring was someone bespoke, custom-tailored to the needs of the conference, and we’re just not ready yet. It’s been a great exercise, and we’ll see what happens in the future.

Is selling naming rights to the Big 12 no longer being explored?

I don’t know if it’s on the table or off the table, because we’ve created a lot of equity behind “Big 12.” We have put a lot behind it. I think our narrative and profile is very different today than it’s ever been, especially on the heels of realignment. We’re 16 strong now, coast to coast. I think there are ways that we can monetize our business without necessarily giving up our name. So, not that it’s off the table, but I would say it’s probably on pause right now, because we are finding other ways to grow the commercial side of the business without necessarily having to give up the equity that we’re building.

Do you still support potential March Madness expansion?

We’re in favor of it, but the economics need to be right. The NCAA is working very closely with CBS and Warner Bros. Discovery on what those economics look like as it relates to potential expansion. So, we’ll see what plays out over the next 45 days or so. But I know NCAA president Charlie Baker is having some really good conversations with the media partners, and hopefully, he can get something done that’s good for all of us.

Where do you see conference championship games fitting in if the College Football Playoff expands to 16 teams?

We’re in it for the long haul with our conference championship game. It’s kind of the new “win and you’re in.” It’s going to continue to have drama if we go with the 5+11 format. That is our preference. We think it’s fair. We want to earn it on the field. 

With the Big Ten and SEC considering a scheduling agreement, does the Big 12 need something similar?

No. We’re fine. We love our out-of-conference schedule. We don’t necessarily have an alliance with any particular conference. We play them all.

Are you still comfortable with the decision to give the Big Ten and SEC so much power from 2026 and beyond?

Well, I wouldn’t say they have complete decision-making. They need to have meaningful consultation with us. Yes, they have the pen. But with that pen comes responsibility to do the right thing. It’s not written anywhere in the Memorandum of Understanding that they can take the CFP and create a format or make a decision that only benefits their two conferences. So, yes, they have the pen. And with that, again, comes the responsibility to lead and lead responsibly. And I’m hopeful that that’s what will happen.

Where do things stand on schools signing a contract to bind them to the terms of the proposed House v. NCAA settlement?

We discussed the participation agreement. It’s still a work in progress, but we discussed it with our board and ADs. They provided us with comments. It’s a collaborative effort among the P4 conferences. So, it’s a work in progress, but there were no objections to the participation agreement.