Mike Slive brought over 40 combined years of legal and administrative experience when he succeeded Roy Kramer as commissioner of the Southeastern Conference in 2002. The Utica, N.Y., native, with an undergraduate degree from Dartmouth and law degrees from the University of Virginia and Georgetown, practiced law while serving in the athletic administration at Dartmouth, the Pac-10, and Cornell. He was the first commissioner of both the Great Midwest Conference and Conference USA before becoming the seventh commissioner in the 78-year history of the SEC. Slive was the coordinator of the 2006 and 2007 Bowl Championship Series and chairman of the NCAA Division I men's basketball committee in 2008-09. His SEC tenure has been marked by success on the field (the conference has produced the last five national football champions) and off ($209 million in revenue last year alone).
Q. The SEC has produced the last five national football champions. What is the secret to the league’s success?
Slive: Great athletes, great coaches, and a tradition in this part of the country of passion and loyalty. The whole culture here supports college football and college athletics. It’s something that’s very important here and means a lot to a whole lot of people.
Q. But the league has always had great athletes and coaches. Why the pronounced success, especially recently, in football over other sports?
Slive: In some ways, up until the BCS, there really wasn’t a way of measuring the national championship. And the focus has become so pronounced in regard to the BCS and the national championship. In the early years, when good team went to different bowls, we didn’t have the so-called No. 1 vs. No. 2 game. So, I think part of it is that there is now a forum for the national championship in a way that didn’t exist two decades ago.
Q. What does a championship mean to the SEC?
Slive: I think a lot of people try to measure it in economic value. But much of our television and Internet web site are in place. I think at this point it creates a great deal of pride and satisfaction the whole region can enjoy. The other thing, which is one of the most significant and unusual results, is that we’ve had four different teams win the national championship in the last five years. What that means is that there is tremendous depth and quality to the league as a whole. Five in a row is a record that may never be broken, but the fact is, it was done by four different teams in five years. We have won seven of the 13 BCS national championship games -- and we won all seven that we’ve played in. I think the measure is intangible rather than tangible.
Q. And the players know that if they can win the SEC, they have a good chance to compete for the national championship.
Slive: That’s a good point. Our championship game is an event that has grown into an event that stands on its own two feet, regardless of who’s playing. It’s a natural outgrowth of our culture. People kid me, talking about the plus-one. In some ways [the SEC] championship game is the plus-one game for the national championship.
Q. At the time when you became commissioner, the SEC was bringing in a reported $27.7 million in revenue. This year, the SEC brought in $209 million, including $27.2 million for the BCS alone. What has been responsible for the large increase in revenue?
Slive: When we were ready to redo our [television] contracts, we looked very hard at a channel, and I think that was a factor. The fact that SEC football and basketball have become national in scope… I think in the earlier years, everyone knew who we were and that we played well. But I think over the years, the interest in our league has grown nationally, and that has been reflected in our ability to develop a very significant television contract and very significant bowl agreements, all of which have benefited out league in many ways, including financially.
Q. How is that $27.2 allocated?
Slive: In essence, we share equally. We are one of the older leagues. We’re 78 years old. The league was formed long before television existed and so sharing was a natural outgrowth of these relationships. In effect, we share our television revenue equally. We do provide some small additional money for appearances, but effectively we share equally, which is one of the great strengths of the league.
Q. Does that money all go to the athletic programs?
Slive: Most of it goes to athletics. Last year, our athletic departments were able to contribute back about $30 million to the universities’ general fund, either for scholarships or for whatever purposes the universities wanted to use it as a result of our television agreement. We have nearly 5,000 student athletes, men and women. In fact, each of our institutions is required to have two more women’s sports than men’s sports. Most of that revenue is used to support the broad-based Olympic programs that we want to have -- the facilities, coaches, and student athletes. But we are very proud of the fact that our institutions worked out arrangements whereby $30 million went back to the universities’ general side.
Q. The two-to-one women’s sports, is that an SEC guideline?
Slive: Yes, and that was put into place long before I got here in order to, you know, create an impetus for the development of women’s sports, particularly when Title IX came into play.
Q. Should college athletes be paid?
Slive: No. I do understand the challenges that are out there, but what we’re talking about really is whether football players and basketball players should be paid. The question then arises, “Why shouldn’t all student athletes be paid?” And it goes back to the mission. If we’re going to do that, then I think we ought to just reconstruct what we are -- and then we’re no longer part of higher education. We’re maybe a second-rate professional league compared to the others. Our presidents are never going to do that. I think you’d see it go away before we paid players.
Q. A University of Connecticut booster wants the $3 million he contributed to the university returned to him because he was not consulted about the hiring of a new football coach. What do you make of that?
Slive: I was very proud of how [UConn athletic director] Jeff Hathaway handled that. I guess maybe I would suggest that [the booster] ought to buy himself an NFL team.
Q. What storylines in college athletics are you following most closely?
Slive: We just went through an expansion discussion that was significant and certainly caught the attention of you and your friends in the media and the public. It’s sort of quieted down now, but that issue is always there. We’re always looking at the postseason in football. We’re looking very closely now at the question of agents. The major parties have come together and initiated some discussions to deal with that issue. The new technology, the new media, the new age create new challenges for all of us, both in the media and outside the media, and I think we’re all trying to make sure we know how to deal with those issues that come up and how best to work within that new technology.
Q. You have been outspoken about player agents and protecting college players from them. What needs to be done and who needs to do it?
Slive: Internally we need the change the NCAA rules. I think they’re part of the problem, not part of the solution. What’s happened that I’m very pleased about is that all of the groups that need to be involved in the discussions are involved: the NFL, the NFLPA, the NCAA, the American Football Coaches, the commissioner, and the agents themselves. Everyone who has an in in the game is now talking about how best to put together a series of new rules and sanctions that allow student athletes who have that kind of unique talent to learn more about what their future may hold in a way that doesn’t jeopardize their eligibility.
Q. How would you characterize those discussions?
Slive: The conversations have been good, they’ve been ongoing, and they’re going to continue. As long as we’re working together and all parties are willing to deal with it, I think we’ve got a chance for the very first time to put together a scenario that allows the young people to learn what they need to learn and to put everything else in the sunshine and stop these activities at midnight and in back alleys that hurt everybody.
Q. What is the biggest challenge facing the SEC and college athletics?
Slive: We’re at a time when we may be at the zenith of our popularity, and there has been a significant revenue development in part of that. I think the question really is how do we maintain the balance that that requires.
Q. Tell me something about the SEC, or about your job, that would surprise fans of college athletics.
Slive: In almost 20 years, nobody’s ever asked me that. Let me think about that one.
Q. Greg Shaheen, Interim Executive Vice President of the NCAA, told me that he would trade his job for the Director of Homeland Security, and Seth Davis of Sports Illustrated and CBS Sports said that Shaheen's current job is probably the tougher one. Would you trade your job with anyone?
Slive: (laughing) I would not trade my job for any other that I can think of. I’m very fortunate. I am doing what I love to do with the people I love to do it with in a place where I love to do it. And, so, I would not trade it for Greg Shaheen’s job or the Homeland Security job. I really mean that.
Q. O.K., you would not change your job, but if you could change one thing about intercollegiate athletics, what would it be?
Slive: I wish we had the ability to influence the education of so many of our student athletes earlier in their lives. We have so much responsibility in providing opportunity and at the same time in providing education in a way that I would wish that the kids could come to us, many of them, better prepared. Because our goal is to use their experience at our institutions to further educate them and supplement the education in the classroom and give them a chance to have a wonderful life. We work hard at it. Sometimes we succeed and sometimes we fail. If I could change that, I think that would be the most significant change we could possibly have.
Q. Many of the players do not remain for four years.
Slive: I certainly don’t like the one-and-done rule. I would like our student athletes to stay as long…. at least get close enough to a degree where there’s an incentive to return and get it at the appropriate time.
Q. What would you suggest doing about the one-and-done rule?
Slive: Well, obviously I’d love to have the football rule or even the baseball rule. You know, when the student athlete’s got three years in and has come close enough to a degree, there’s a good chance that he would come back and get his degree, or at least have had three good years of college work and relationships and all that goes with a college education.
Q. Is there a danger of the business of college sports compromising college sports?
Slive: We need to always remember that whatever we do athletically is really part of the mission of higher education. There’s a balance here. One of the most important things that I’ve tried to do is to help maintain that balance between athletics and the revenue that it generates and the goal and the mission of higher education. Maintaining that balance, to me, is the most critical and the most difficult thing that we do.
Q. It must be a delicate balance at times.
Slive: It can be, but it’s something that’s worth working for and something that we work tirelessly at. You asked me earlier to tell you something about my job that would surprise people. Fans may think about us in terms of games and officiating and revenue—and we do all those things—but our goal is to maintain the balance and the value system of education.
Q. What has been the highlight of your tenure as SEC commissioner?
Slive: It started the first day I got here and continues to this day. This is my ninth year. I’ve enjoyed the fact that all of our presidents and chancellors and athletic directors and others have always pulled in the same direction, with all the same goals and dreams and aspirations. We have difficult issues on occasion. I measure progress as two steps forward and one step back. None of us in life are fortunate enough to have an upward slope on a graph that never has a little dip in it. The ability of our people to accept on occasion a step back and then reinforce our goals and our commitment has been the most pleasant thing about my job.
Q. Here’s an easy question: What are you reading?
Slive: I’m reading a book I just love: [Ken] Follett’s “World Without End.” If you remember, he wrote “Pillars of the Earth” years ago. This is the sequel. And I’ve got two other books. I’m about to start Churchill’s “Defiant Years.” It’s about his 10 years following World War II. I’m a big Churchill fan. I’ve also got next to my bed the Mickey Mantle biography, which looks very interesting.
