I agree, teams can go for third-tier or new media monies however they wish. But I wasn't talking about third tier rights, which teams negotiate on their own. I was talking about first-tier rights. B1G splits the BTN, ESPN and ABC money evenly. SEC splits CBS and ESPN money evenly. Big East Football splits football money evenly. ACC split is even as well. Pac-12 doesn't split it evenly, so I'll give you that one.You -- and a lot of other people -- are, so, so wrong about this.
The truth is that every school in the country is free to exploit their TV and/or media rights exclusively for their own benefit. To use your example, Bama makes much, much more money off TV than Miss St.
As of earlier in the year, Bama's third tier rights bring in an additional $8.4M+/yr and Florida's at $7.4M+/yr. I've read recently that Florida will be upped to $10M/yr but I can't seem to verify that anywhere. Miss St doesn't have a deal. Their third tier revenue is $0. The Bama and Florida third tier deals dwarf what, for instance, Iowa St would be taking in if 1st / 2nd tier revenue was distributed equally in the Big 12.
That Bama and Florida make shit-tons in third-tier deals means they don't need more money than the other SEC teams from the CBS and ESPN deals. They already get more, so teams like Vandy and Miss. St can survive off of first-tier money. They recognize that without Vandy, Kentucky and Miss St, they don't have a conference, and they don't have brains to beat in on the field
Texas has cash cows in the LHN and merchandising, so they don't at all need more money from the ESPN deal. But unlike Bama and Florida, Texas wants more money from their first tier deal as well. It's like saying "hey, since we have a large competitive advantage, we deserve other competitive advantages" Iowa St doesn't deserve more disadvantages. Look, you don't need to apologize for being greedy. Just recognize that you are.