MIRAMAR ISLAND, Fla. – Georgia athletic director Josh Brooks spoke with a contingent of Bulldog media following Wednesday’s business sessions at the annual SEC Spring Meetings at the Sandestin Hilton.

Brooks took a series of questions from the media ranging on various subjects affecting college athletics today, and how Georgia will face them.

On takeaways from SEC spring meetings

Brooks: "Takeaways? A lot of really smart people in rooms are trying to figure out very complex issues. Someone told me a statement in life a long time ago: When you think the solution is simple it shows how little you understand it.

"You know, we're trying to solve a lot of problems in a short time frame, and there are just a lot of factors that go into it."

On if this was a spitballing session with the coaches on scheduling or if there was more to it than that

Brooks: "Yeah, we always want to solicit great feedback, get the head coaches and ADs in the same room so we can be on the same page and listen and hear their thought process, they hear our thought process, come together. But I think ultimately what you're trying to see from both groups is that you want to make this decision as part of a much bigger decision, right? How does this all fit into the future, whether that be playoff spots or how it affects revenue or how it affects, you know, adding eight losses to the tally. So, you're trying to make those decisions in coordination with several other things that are all coming together at the same time."

Is a Big Ten scheduling agreement now on the front burner after it picked up some steam and then dissipated?

Brooks: "I don't know on that one. I'd have to leave that one on Commissioner Sankey and their commissioner to see if there's any legs or any opportunity there."

His thought of adding a Big Ten game to Georgia's schedule on an annual basis

Brooks: "Yeah, I think we'd be open to it in the right scenario. Obviously, we're one of the schools that we've got — you know, it's well documented we have Georgia Tech every year, and then we have stepped out. If you look at our schedule, we've got — we've had Power 5 opponents on top of that. So there have been years we've already played 10 P5 opponents in certain years.

"So, while I'll say I'd be open to that, I'd have to then take a look at what we're going to schedule and see how it would affect it because we do have Florida State and Louisville, and other teams already lined up. So, all of that fits in that puzzle. So would we be open, yeah, but then we'd have to take a look at what it would look like for the rest of our schedule."

Would that mean getting rid of some non-conference games since Georgia wouldn't play 11 Power 5 games?

Brooks: "I'm not committing to 11 P5 games right now, but I think the credit to Smart: we've always been open to playing a challenging schedule, especially those neutral-site games we've opened the year with."

Is the sweet spot to have10 power conference games per year?

Brooks: "Yeah, I think — and I don't want to speak for any other AD or any other school, but we have rotated, if you look at traditionally, we've been 10-9, 10-9. Because there have been years like last year, we played Clemson or Oregon, and years we didn't, or we did a home-and-home with Notre Dame. So I don't know what that average would be over time. If you looked at it, it would be like 9.5 or 9.75 or you know, if you really, maybe 10-9, 10-9, but, you know, at minimum you've got 9 every year. But if you stacked up how many of those other Clemson, Notre Dame, Oregon games we have, I guess we'd be just under 10 on average."

Has UGA has explored on-field sponsorships in Sanford?

Brooks: "Yeah, you know, some of that stuff is now opened up as categories, so we're having a lot of conversations with those opportunities, whether it be, you know, logos on the 25s or, you know, on the banner on the sidelines, things on the basketball court, things at Foley Field. So, we're open to all those, but you want to make sure when you do it, you do it for the right value, and you want to do it with a brand that meets your brand alignment as well. So those are ongoing, and hopefully we'll see some of them in the future.

"But for the right price, I mean, any of you could — and if our values align. I mean, if you have the right price, we can get one for the organizations."

On the positives and negatives of the different playoff formats

Brooks: "Yeah, there are so many being discussed that are out there right now, right? If you start with the automatic qualifiers, four or whatever, then you're guaranteed four spots. But then if you look historically, if we move to a 14 or a 16-team [playoff] and you look where we were, how many we would've gotten in, I look back to that and say, I'm not sure how — I'm always going to want the decision that's going to get the most SEC teams in, no different than basketball or baseball or softball, right? I want to flood it with as many teams as possible from our conference because that's not only good for our conference, it's good for Georgia, because if there's more opportunities for our conference, and I think if you look at our track record as a conference, we should have a good number between hopefully 5 and 6 and maybe one or even more that fall in that criteria, the top 16. I think you have to look at the historical data as a guiding post, as a guiding star for how you make that decision moving forward."

On what he took from the NIL Go presentation

Brooks: "Yeah, I think we have a great opportunity and a great system. We can sit here and tear it down and talk about the potential pitfalls, or we can talk about how we're going to work together to make this work. It's easy to tear something down, and someone presents a plan and tells you, 'Oh, well, here's the weak spot. Here's the weak spot.' But we haven't done it yet. Let's work together, let's get through it because we've asked for guardrails. Now we have them, so instead of us saying, 'Well, here's how I'm going to attack the guardrails,' let's try to work together and work within these guardrails to make it better. And in that process, we may all have to lose a battle here and there on what we think is better for us to win the war ultimately on what's better for the game and what's better for college athletics by following and staying in line and then agreeing as a conference — us all agreeing that we're going to abide by the terms of the settlement. Those are the things that are going to bind us together."

Was progress made as far as the entire conference following that guideline?

Brooks: "I think so, yeah. And I think there's always been alignment there from day one. Some things get taken out of hand, but I think there's always been alignment within our conference that we want to stick together. We want to abide by the terms of the settlement, and hopefully, when it gets approved."

What were the thoughts in the AD room on the transfer portal?

Brooks: “I'll just speak on my behalf, because I don't have a full straw poll. I would think and feel the majority would want one as well. I'm with Kirby, and Kirby and I are aligned on this vision of one portal window. We support the early January portal window, January 2nd through 12th. That was something that we went … I went with Kirby to the AFCA meetings early this year, and we met with head coaches, we debated it out. We got to a consensus, and everyone agreed, and I think that's the model that makes the most sense. I'm sure there's going to be a debate, but trying to get 130 schools to agree on anything is difficult. I do think there was a great recommendation that came from that AFCA meeting earlier this year that said this is the best move for college athletes, understanding that there is no perfect solution.

“We can't let perfection be the enemy of progress, right? We know this is better for the game, and I think that's where, you know, as my work on D1 Council, I'm going to work to help push that.

“Now, some of these things are going to be handled by the implementation committee, but everything that I'm a part of, I'm certainly going to push for what I think is best for the game moving forward.”

Where are you now with how many of your teams are going to be participating in revenue sharing?

Brooks: “You know, honestly, it varies by amount, but the opportunities are there for all 21, and it could be smaller amounts, but we've really focused on being broad-based and having opportunities.

“If you follow our athletes' social media, you'll see they've had these opportunities, and we're really trying to create those things with our sponsors to have those opportunities where they can utilize that, but then also trying to teach them how to utilize their social media platforms and their presence to grow their brands and have those opportunities as well. So hopefully it's something we can do across the board and for all of our teams.”

You were on the field storming committee a couple years ago that came up with the ratchet-up rules, and I lost track of how many fines had to be issued last year.

Brooks: “I kept track of ours. Zero.”

You and Kirby did the thing after the Florida game to prevent it.

Brooks: “He takes a lot of credit for that (joking), but when it came down to the clock at zero, notice where he was standing and where I was standing.

“But yeah, so there was a modification in midstream last year where we said, look, we understand the intent. We know the students want to come on the court. If we can work together to give a cooling-off period, I believe it was 90 seconds, start the clock, let the teams clear, make sure the teams are clear, then the students can come on the court. Thankfully, we had already been through it a couple of times where students were telling them they couldn't rush the court.

“We said to the athletes in the stands that we had a great working relationship, so when I went into the stands and said, guys, you're going to get to go on the court, just hang with me. When the clock hit zero, I put a 90-second countdown clock on, ran it down, and they participated. I cannot give enough credit to our students.

“I give credit to the league for a great modification to the rule. We followed it, got the visiting team off the court, and then our students were able to come on the court and have a good time.”