The SEC-Big Ten standoff on determining what’s best for college football could lead to status quo where the College Football Playoff and transfer-portal dates are concerned.
That means the CFP field might remain at 12 and not expand to 16 teams starting in 2026, as many had projected.
It also means that college football might continue to have two transfer portal windows for players to change schools, even though that model has led to tampering and excessive roster turnover.
Meanwhile, a new — and much earlier — college football signing date appears imminent, per a Yahoo Sports report.
Leaders’ mountain meetings
CFP leaders met in Asheville, North Carolina, this week with hopes of ironing out details of the new collegiate sports model before stipulations go into effect July 1 — including a decision on the timing of the transfer portal window(s).
Collegiate sports leadership has until Nov. 30 to settle on which CFP format and field size to put into place, with the current contract expiring after the completion of the 2025-26 season.
Georgia coach Kirby Smart has been vocal on both issues, citing the decision on the portal window as the most pressing issue at the SEC’s spring meetings three weeks ago.
Transfer portal debate
Smart and the SEC coaches made it clear to league commissioner Greg Sankey they were in favor of one transfer window, which would take place in January.
Sankey said at the spring meetings the SEC believed Jan. 2-Jan. 12 the most appropriate time, and the majority of collegiate football coaches agree.
Smart pointed out how the timing would help programs maintain an organized flow chart from the early signing period in December through the end of that month, with a majority of players making their decision on declaring for the NFL draft or returning to the program.
Big Ten administrators and coaches, per a Yahoo report, support an April portal date in the interest of academic and financial considerations.
“You think tampering is a problem? Put that portal in April and see what teams do in January, February and March,” Smart said at the SEC spring meetings.
“I think it’s really important in football to have your team (be) your team at whatever date in January, whatever we decide that is, and then you work those guys out,” said Smart, who is entering his 10th year leading the program. “You train those guys, you lift, you prepare, you do meetings and all this preparation, and then that’s your team.”
Ohio State athletic director Ross Bjork, who served as Texas A&M’s athletic director from 2019-24, said he believes the SEC has the wrong mindset.
“With January, we are only worried about one thing and that’s the football team,” Bjork told Yahoo Sports in Orlando last week.”‘Oh! We got to have everybody there for a second semester because I have to get them in spring ball!’
“If we want to worry about the financial component and the academic component, the best window is spring,” he said. “They’re only worrying about one thing — the football roster — and I think that mindset is in the past.”
Ohio State, it’s worth noting, is one of the biggest spenders in the transfer portal, and its key offseason additions last season helped pave the way for the Buckeyes’ run from fourth-place in the Big Ten to national champions.
Recruiting changes
The transfer portal isn’t the only part of the athletic calendar collegiate sports leaders are working on.
A new signing date for football recruits is expected to be on the horizon, per the Yahoo Sports report.
Per the report, a new “offer” date has been established, with schools able to formally offer contracts to prospects on Aug. 1 entering their senior year.
Washington athletic director Pat Chun reportedly told Yahoo Sports the current signing windows in December and February will not work in this new landscape of NIL deals and transfer activity.
“If a kid surprises a school with an announcement … that school better have that cap space if that kid picks that hat,” Chun told Yahoo Sports. “And what if he doesn’t? Do you then have dead cap space?”
Bjork said “95%” of Division I prospects visit in June, and, “If they are ready to make a commitment, why not let them sign?”
The playoff debate
The speculation on the CFP field moving from 12 to 16 teams in 2026 has been an exhausting offseason topic, and, apparently, it has been just as hard to solve.
The SEC and Big Ten, per a memorandum signed last spring, are controlling the future of the format.
But the two most powerful of the Power 4 leagues first have to agree, and the Big Ten has not been shy about throwing its weight around.
The Big Ten is in favor of an automatic-qualifier model based on conference standings — limiting the effect of the CFP selection committee — and supports all four of the Power 4 conferences playing a nine-game schedule like it does.
The SEC has pushed back on the most popular automatic-qualifier model — which would feature four teams from the Big Ten and SEC, two teams from the ACC and Big 12, the highest-ranked Group of Five conference champion and three at-large teams.
The SEC, like the ACC and Big 12, is in favor of a “5-11” model, which would give berths to the Power 4 conference champs and highest-ranked Group of Five conference champ, and then have the field filled out with 11 at-large teams based on the order of the CFP standings.
CFP executive director Rich Clark made a presentation intended on improving the selection committee process in the area of schedule strength.
Per the Yahoo report, Clark and a data analyst from SportsSource Analytics presented “recommendations” on how CFP selection committee members could adjust their date points in the ranking of teams.
Clark, speaking in the future of the CFP model and playoff field, confirmed the options that are out there:
• Expand to a 16-team CFP field with a 4-4-2-2-1 automatic-qualifier model.
• Expand to a 16-team CFP field with a 5-11 model.
• Keep the CFP field at 12 teams.
About the Author
Keep Reading
The Latest
Featured
