The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to wilnerhotline@
In case you missed it, last week’s mailbag examined Pac-12 expansion options (or lack thereof) in the event UNLV isn’t interested in switching conferences.
How about the Big Ten vs. the SEC and the ACC vs. the Big 12 in cross-conference football challenges? With a 24-team playoff field, why not play 10 conference games? Scheduling will follow the money. — Jon J
With the start of the regular season and all the controversy over former NFL players joining LSU’s team (more on that below), it was easy to miss a significant development on the scheduling front that happens to relate directly to College Football Playoff expansion.
It impacts every conference in both the Power Four and the Group of Six.
Here’s the important background:
— The SEC and ACC recently switched to nine-game conference schedules, joining the Big Ten and Big 12 in that regard. That means all 67 teams in the Power Four leagues have three spots available for non-conference games.
— The SEC, ACC and Big 12 have policies requiring their schools to play 10 total games against Power Four opponents: nine within league and one outside of league. The Big Ten has no such policy and, with a few exceptions, its non-conference schedules stink.
What happened this week? According to multiple media reports, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has informed his peers on the CFP management committee that he would consider approving a 24-team playoff if the Big Ten requires its teams to play 10 Power Four games.
(The TV money also has to be right for playoff expansion. But clearly, the SEC cares about uniform scheduling policies.)
The Big Ten will almost certainly agree to the trade: It adds the 10-game requirement, and the SEC approves the 24-team field.
At that point, it’s easy to envision the next steps:
1. The Big Ten and SEC rekindle their discussions about an in-season crossover series that allows them to negotiate for more media rights revenue from their partners, Fox (Big Ten) and ESPN (SEC). The series might not include all 34 schools each year, but it would be designed to generate choice matchups with national appeal.
2. With the crossover series filling one of the three non-conference slots for each school, the Big Ten and SEC begin canceling whatever remaining matchups are under contract against ACC and Big 12 opponents. Why? Because they want to play cupcakes in the two remaining non-conference windows. (The exceptions here would be in-state rivalries like Clemson-South Carolina and Louisville-Kentucky. There are political reasons for those to continue.)
3. Seeing their options for quality non-conference matchups dwindle, the ACC and Big 12 respond with a crossover series of their own. That leaves each conference with the same plan (two cupcakes) for the remaining non-conference slots on their schedules.
4. Obviously, this is problematic for the Group of Six, especially the top programs. As a result, the Pac-12, American and others begin discussing crossover series at their level.
Within a few years, the nature of non-conference schedules changes dramatically.
To be clear, this outcome might not be inevitable. But in our view, it’s more likely than not (assuming the SEC and Big Ten agree on playoff expansion).
The Hotline has long been a proponent of the Big 12 moving to a 10-game conference schedule to increase the value of its total football inventory. But if the above scenario unfolds and a crossover series with the ACC becomes reality, the likelihood of 10 conference games diminishes.
We should have a better feel for the situation by the end of the year.
Sankey and Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti, who favors CFP expansion — one reason for his support is the benefits it would create for non-conference scheduling — are facing a Dec. 1 deadline to agree on expansion in time for the 2027 season.
I never understood how ESPN and Fox led the implosion of the Pac-12 and could not or would not find a seat at the table for Oregon State and Washington State. I know the answer is money, but how much will it take before the Power Four conferences break away permanently and leave the other 70 with table scraps? — Larry L
There is a fair amount to unpack here, but let’s start with this: ESPN and Fox made business decisions with the valuations of specific schools in the realignment game. Their role in who moved where was more passive than active. Conferences presented inventory options, and the networks responded with cash proposals.
The Pac-12’s implosion was the result of many things, but Fox was far more involved — first with USC and UCLA, then with Oregon and Washington — than ESPN.
Once everything went ka-BOOM, the networks were not about to pay the Big 12, for example, two or three times market value in order to make sure WSU and OSU had safe harbors. Again, it was business.
Moving forward, we agree with your premise at a broad level: Another rupture could be coming, but it won’t be the Power Four breaking away from the “other 70” (i.e., the Group of Six). It would be the SEC and Big Ten breaking away from the ACC and Big 12 (and everyone else).
What form that takes is anyone’s guess. It could be another round of expansion in which each of the Big Two add two, four or six teams.
Or it could be a super league with the top football brands leaving everyone else behind, including the second-tier schools in the SEC and Big Ten.
The system is deeply flawed — nowhere else in American business do two profitable subsidiaries pay for 16 money-losing subsidiaries — and it compels the schools to pursue every last dollar.
SEC commissioner Greg Sankey is now open to a 24-team playoff (dumb) if all qualifying schools play 10 games against Power Four opponents. I would imagine the threat of an anti-trust lawsuit from the Group of Six still protects their automatic bid to the CFP? — @NateJones2009
That’s how we see it.
The sport is flattening at the top at warp speed, with more teams in the Power Four capable of contending for the national title (hello, Indiana).
But up and down the food chain, the gaps are increasing: The SEC and Big Ten are pulling away from the ACC and Big 12, and the ACC and Big 12 are pulling away from the Group of Six.
The distance from top to bottom has grown exponentially in the era of NIL and the transfer portal, to the point that it’s difficult to envision a Group of Six team ever winning its opening-round match in the 12-team playoff.
That said, we agree with your premise: The threat of legal action will ensure the Group of Six retains an automatic bid to the 24-team playoff.
Some would argue that the Group of Six deserves two automatic bids. If it’s guaranteed one spot in the 12-team version, it should have two if the field doubles. That’s only fair, right?
Well, college football is no place for fairness and equity. If given the choice, the Big Ten and SEC would open the 24-team playoff to 24 at-large teams, rather than reserving one spot for the 70 schools in the Group of Six.
But their greed ends where lawsuits begin.
One spot will be secure in the expanded event. Anything else must be earned through the at-large pool.
What are the bowl possibilities for the new Pac-12 teams? — Bruce C
The Hotline addressed this topic in detail last month before the lineup was made official and then in brief fashion earlier this week when the Pac-12 confirmed the news. But let’s offer a recap for anyone who missed our reporting.
Because there is some overlap between old and new Pac-12 teams, we’ll include the options for all 18 here.
For the bowl-eligible Pac-12 legacy teams not selected for the College Football Playoff, the lineup is familiar: Alamo, Las Vegas, Holiday, Sun, Poinsettia and Independence Bowls (in that order).
For the six new Pac-12 teams not selected for the CFP, the ties-ins are to the Poinsettia and Hawaii Bowls and what’s called the ESPN bowl pool, in which the network matches teams with openings across the games it operates.
One caveat: Washington State and Oregon State are only eligible for the new Pac-12 side of the Poinsettia, which is based in San Diego and making its return after a lengthy hiatus. The 10 departed schools will fill the other side of the Poinsettia matchup.
Lastly, keep the selection process in mind: For the Pac-12 legacy schools, the pecking order is determined by overall record — there’s no way to apply conference record when they are scattered across four leagues.
Hope that helps.
What is the penalty/fine for schools that don’t abide by their bylaws and put ex-NFL players on their roster? And what will conferences do when one of their teams plays a Group of Six or FCS team that features an ex-NFL player? –@Jimmy0726
That depends on the outcome of LSU’s highly fluid legal fight against the SEC. To this point, the Tigers appear to be the only team planning to have former NFL training camp participants on their roster.
Dae’Quan Wright and Zxavian Harris were two of many players across multiple sports who received a preliminary injunction in Louisiana district court on Thursday. Whether they take the field for the Tigers on Saturday evening against Clemson remains to be seen.
The SEC has filed a federal lawsuit in Alabama that seeks to confirm its authority to penalize member schools for violating conference rules — for instance, rules against former NFL players returning to college.
If the SEC’s authority is confirmed after the Tigers put Wright and Harris on the field, the sanctions will be significant.
To this point, the other 15 SEC schools, plus the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Sun Belt, American and Mountain West have stated their opposition to rostering NFL players. (Notably, the Pac-12 has not, and its silence is becoming increasingly conspicuous.)
So we don’t expect other former NFL players to join rosters this season, but you never know.
Also, one reminder: This should be a one-time issue because the NCAA rule change that created the five-to-play-five policy only impacts members of the high school class of 2022, who were arbitrarily excluded. Players in the class of 2023 are eligible under the five-for-five ruling, so there won’t be cases like Wright and Harris next summer.
Previously, the Hotline identified the ACC exit cost at almost a billion dollars per school. Just exactly how did you calculate those numbers? — @JimSkin70758794
Honestly, I don’t remember publishing a specific cost for schools to exit the ACC prior to the expiration of the grant-of-rights in 2036, but it works in this fashion (for all schools) based on the negotiated settlement between the ACC and Clemson and Florida State:
— Any school that departs in the current fiscal year would owe a total of $1.1 billion, based on the annual exit payments compounding over 10 years.
— Starting in 2030, the annual fees drop to a flat rate of $75 million until 2036.
If the Seminoles, for example, left for the SEC in the fiscal year that begins next July, they would owe $930 million.
If they wait until the summer of 2030, the same year the Big Ten’s media rights deal expires, they would owe $450 million (or $75 million annually for six years).
That’s why the 2030 window is seen as a possible rupture point.
It won’t be cheap to leave for the SEC or Big Ten, but it would be cheap-er.
And there is zero doubt that if given the opportunity, Clemson, Florida State, Miami and North Carolina would find the money needed to make it work.
How did the Apple Cup come to be played on Sunday? How much choice did both teams have, especially Washington State as the visiting team (and it not being under the Pac-12 media contract)? — @draywilson29
The process wasn’t nearly as involved as you might think because both schools instantly recognized the opportunity.
Basically, the Big Ten floated the idea with the Huskies, who then asked the Cougars. Everyone was on board quickly. After all, the absence of competition in that TV window (Sunday at 1 p.m. on NBC) means millions of viewers will have their eyes on the teams. It’s a marketing dream for both teams and schools.
Washington State considered the competitive disadvantage that a Sunday game creates with a short week of preparation before their next game, at Kansas State. But athletic director Jon Haarlow told the Hotline a few weeks ago that “it was difficult to pass up the exposure. We want to get our athletes on the biggest stage possible.”
The Apple Cup is under contract for two more seasons and, in our view, should remain in this spot, on the Sunday of the Labor Day weekend, if at all possible.
Next year, the regular season starts in full force on what is now Week 0, so Labor Day weekend will become the window for everyone’s second game of the season.
That’s fine. Keep the Apple Cup right where it is. Sunday will remain open terrain until the NFL adds an 18th game and starts its season one week earlier.
*** Send suggestions, comments and tips (confidentiality guaranteed) to wilnerhotline@
*** Follow me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline
Share in chat
The post Mailbag: The future of scheduling (SEC-Big Ten crossover series), Pac-12 bowls, G6 and the CFP, ex-NFL players and loads more first appeared on Sports360AZ.