For decades, the geography of American college athletics was a reliable constant. Rivalries were born of proximity and conference borders were largely respected. Today, that map has been torn up. Driven by a volatile mix of media rights economics and shifting competitive priorities, the current era of college sports conference realignment has transformed the collegiate landscape into a high-stakes corporate puzzle.
This upheaval is most visible in the collapse and subsequent reconstruction of the Pac-12, a league that once defined the West Coast’s athletic identity. But while some institutions are currently fighting for survival, others have already navigated these waters. The contrast is best illustrated by the experiences of two women at the helm of these organizations: Pac-12 Commissioner Teresa Gould and Big East Commissioner Val Ackerman.
The two leaders recently shared perspectives on the divergent paths of their conferences. Gould is currently managing a rebuilding project of historic proportions after the departure of the league’s legacy members to the Big Ten and Big 12. Ackerman, meanwhile, leads a Big East that serves as a blueprint for successful reinvention, having pivoted from a fragmented past to become a premier, basketball-centric powerhouse.
Their dialogue reveals that while realignment is often viewed as a reactive scramble for revenue, the most sustainable path forward requires proactive leadership and a willingness to treat a conference not as a static entity, but as a brand that must be constantly redefined.
The Startup Mentality of the Pac-12
When a conference loses the majority of its membership, the instinct is often to replace what was lost as quickly as possible. However, Teresa Gould has approached the Pac-12’s crisis as a strategic reset. Rather than simply plugging holes in a roster, the process has become an exercise in operational reinvention.
Rebuilding a league from the ground up is, in many ways, a startup venture. It requires a total overhaul of governance, staffing, and commercial strategy. For the Pac-12, this means rethinking everything from how championships are structured to how the league interacts with its remaining members and potential fresh partners. The goal is not to recreate the conference of 2019, but to design a structure that is fit for a fragmented media environment and a new era of athlete compensation.
This “reset” allows leadership to align the conference’s identity with its current values rather than its historical baggage. In moments of extreme instability, Gould suggests that the clarity of vision becomes the only real anchor for stakeholders who are navigating competing priorities and institutional uncertainty.
Lessons from the Big East Blueprint
While the Pac-12 is in the midst of its storm, the Big East has already found its harbor. The conference provides a critical case study in how a league can survive fragmentation by leaning into a specific, high-value identity. By centering its brand around elite basketball, the Big East moved away from the traditional “all-sports” football-driven model that has fueled much of the current realignment chaos.
Val Ackerman’s leadership has emphasized that survival depends on defining what a conference stands for. When the Big East re-established itself, it didn’t try to be everything to everyone; it focused on a distinct cultural and competitive niche. This strategic clarity created a level of stability that has allowed the league to thrive even as other “Power” conferences shifted their borders.
The Big East experience suggests that the most successful conferences are those that prioritize long-term goals over immediate, short-term revenue spikes. By building a cohesive identity, the league created a product that is attractive to both athletes and broadcasters, regardless of the broader volatility in the NCAA landscape.
Moving Beyond the Transactional Media Deal
For years, the primary metric of success for a college conference was the size of its media rights check. However, as the media landscape fragments and traditional cable bundles decline, both Gould and Ackerman argue that the “transactional” model is failing.
The new priority is growth over immediate payout. Conferences are now seeking partners who can provide more than just a fee; they need partners who can drive visibility, provide marketing support, and actively grow the audience. This shift is essential because a massive rights fee is meaningless if the sport’s visibility vanishes from the public consciousness.
This evolution in media strategy requires a shift in how leagues operate internally. Instead of merely managing a contract, commissioners must now act as brand managers, ensuring their content is accessible across multiple platforms and engaging a younger, more digitally native demographic.
The Centrality of Women’s Athletics
One of the most significant shifts in the growth strategy for both the Pac-12 and the Big East is the elevation of women’s sports. No longer viewed as peripheral or secondary assets, women’s collegiate athletics have become a primary pillar of value creation.
Increased viewership and cultural relevance—evidenced by record-breaking attendance and television ratings for women’s basketball—have forced a rethink of how these sports are marketed and funded. For conferences in the process of rebuilding, women’s sports offer a unique opportunity for growth that is less saturated than the men’s football market.
Integrating women’s sports into the core of a conference’s commercial and brand strategy is no longer just a matter of equity; We see a matter of business intelligence. The growth in this sector provides a hedge against the volatility of football-centric realignment and opens new avenues for sponsorship and media partnerships.
The Path Forward
The current state of college athletics is often framed as a series of losses—lost traditions, lost rivalries, and lost stability. But as the experiences of Gould and Ackerman display, disruption is also an invitation to innovate. The challenge for the Pac-12 and other shifting leagues is not simply to replace the members they lost, but to build something that is relevant to the next generation of students and fans.
The next critical checkpoint for this evolution will be the upcoming cycle of media rights negotiations and the potential for new NCAA governance models regarding revenue sharing. These developments will determine whether the “startup” approach to conference management becomes the new standard for all collegiate athletics.
We want to hear from you. Is the era of regional rivalries gone for good, or can a strategic reset save the soul of college sports? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
