Why the Big Ten, SEC alliance turned sour -- and what it means for future College Football Playoff format

The Big Ten has ideas about what the future of college athletics should look like. It has allies. It has rivals. But can they all come together to form a coherent solution for the future format of the College Football Playoff?

An eight-month partnership with the SEC is suddenly strained after the conference broke ranks earlier this month in the ongoing debate about the CFP's format for 2026 and beyond. SEC athletic directors chose to reexamine the format after spending four months aligned with the Big Ten's unwritten but widely discussed proposal: a 16-team playoff with four automatic qualifiers for the two largest conferences.

"Disappointed," a Big Ten athletics director told CBS Sports. "But not shocked."

The shift came after SEC coaches voiced support at their spring meetings for a 5+11 format — with 11 at-large spots — a model also favored by the other power conferences: the ACC and Big 12. Last week, CFP executives reset the discussion, effectively weakening the Big Ten's influence over the sport's postseason future.

Meanwhile, the SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has remained mostly neutral, encouraging dialogue among coaches and athletic directors to help shape an official stance. Still, he has a preference: keep a 12-team field and eliminate automatic qualifiers, which currently grant bids to the five highest-ranked conference champions.

"I'd give no allocations," Sankey reiterated in an interview on The Dan Patrick Show on June 2. "This whole 5-7 things that exists now, I'd just make it the 12 best teams. I was clear on that. Now, when we get into rooms, we make political compromises … to achieve an outcome."

Whether this is now the Big Ten vs. the world or simply a hiccup en route to a resolution remains to be seen. Commissioners represent their members, including athletic directors. The Big Ten and SEC hold the most sway over the CFP's future format -- a key element in the ongoing drama -- after the 10 FBS conferences and Notre Dame essentially handed over control in a 2024 memorandum of understanding.

Commissioners have not scheduled a follow-up meeting after last week's in-person session in Asheville, North Carolina. They might not meet again in person until Sept. 24 in Chicago, at the Big Ten's headquarters, sources familiar with the talks told CBS Sports.

The clock is ticking. The CFP must inform media partner ESPN by Dec. 1 whether it will stick with a 12-team format or expand to 14 or 16 teams.

Despite the looming deadline, the format was not discussed in detail during the commissioners' two-day session last week. Instead, CFP staff presented proposed updates to the metrics used by the selection committee. The updated criteria's primary focus is on strength of schedule, a point of contention for the SEC after three of its three-loss teams were left out last season.

The CFP hired outside consultants from Google and a professor from the University at Buffalo to help develop the new metrics. Conferences and Notre Dame have been asked to review the data and provide feedback in the coming weeks. More information is expected to be shared soon.

"We need the CFP staff to come back with some additional information, but we're working in a collaborative spirit," ACC commissioner Jim Phillips told CBS Sports. "We may not agree, and we may have some strong disagreements at certain points -- and we have had some strong disagreements – but we all also understand that we have to figure this out. It has to be something that's good for college football, that there's fairness in it, and there's access across the country, whether it's the [Power Four] or the [Group of Six] and Notre Dame. We're determined to do that."

The resolution's fulcrum lies somewhere between the Big Ten and SEC's ideals -- a new Mason-Dixon Line for compromise.

"They're obligated to come to an agreement on what the format is," CFP executive director Rich Clark said last week. "So they'll determine that between the parties and then go forward from there."

How the Big Ten and SEC's reach an eventual compromise will define the next six years of the playoff -- and likely determine whether they remain partners in this new era of player revenue sharing.

College Football Playoff format talks go back to drawing board as SEC gains momentum to keep 8-game schedule

It's been clear for several years that the Big Ten and SEC have separated themselves from the pack as the wealthiest and most powerful conferences in the country. When the conferences agreed to settle the landmark House v. NCAA case last year and pay players revenue shares, they saw an opportunity to lead college athletics into a new era.

They also needed to come to terms with the fact that their differences had transformed into similarities.

After all, the first-world problems they face aren't necessarily the same issues that arise in the Big 12 or ACC. So, the conferences partnered up thanks to a budding working relationship between SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and newly appointed Big Ten leader Tony Petitti and conducted first-of-its-kind summits in Nashville and New Orleans in the fall and spring.

The conferences shared ideas to tackle new problems tied to implementing the vast House settlement, including a new governance structure set to be unveiled July 1 with the creation of the College Sports Commission. It was at those meetings that athletic directors began discussing the future format of the CFP. With a charge led by Petitti, a new model was pushed: 4+4+2+2+1+3. The 16-team format would award 13 automatic qualifiers: four to the Big Ten and SEC, two to the ACC and Big 12, and one to the highest-ranked champion from the Group of 6.

The Big Ten and SEC's relationship was so strong that the SEC showed Big Ten proposals on revamping the football calendar in a presentation to the SEC's coaches at spring meetings, according to documents obtained by CBS Sports.

Over the course of two Big Ten-SEC summits in five months, the leagues' athletic directors agreed to support a multi-AQ CFP format.

There was just one problem: Sankey, who had long supported a more open format, did not commit and instead stretched discussions into the spring and summer. Meanwhile, the ACC and Big 12 developed their own proposal, which they presented to power conference commissioners in May: a 16-team expansion with five automatic qualifiers and 11 at-large spots. SEC coaches took notice, bucking the plans of Big Ten and SEC athletic directors, and exited their spring meetings in support of a model with more at-large spots. The coaches' dissension was enough to reset discussions among the CFP's executives.

Planned or not, Sankey's decision to extend deliberations weakened Petitti's plan, which would have generated more revenue with the advent of play-in games for the playoffs -- a creation only possible if the "Power Two" are awarded multiple AQs.

The Big Ten was not happy with the development.

The SEC has been less concerned about expanding the CFP and more about transparency regarding the criteria and metrics used by the selection committee to select at-large teams.

Some within the SEC want to disband the 13-person committee. The CFP, however, is not changing its protocols and is expected to continue using a committee comprised of athletic directors and former administrators and coaches through at least 2031.

Still, the SEC's cries for help have been partially answered. The CFP, with the help of outsourced mathematicians, was tasked in the spring to refine the metrics the committee studies to inform their decisions. The tweaked metrics presented in meetings last week primarily deal with strength of schedule and include changes that would weigh nonconference games more heavily, thereby negating the need for the SEC to mirror the Big Ten's nine-game conference schedule, sources told CBS Sports.

The development has only deepened the divide between college football's two biggest leagues. The SEC has deliberated for the last three years on whether to expand from eight to nine conference games and has twice come close to doing so. However, with the CFP's new metrics potentially eliminating that need, it appears the SEC is in a better position to stick with eight games.

Currently, the Big Ten and Big 12 play nine conference games. The ACC and SEC play eight conference games. The Big Ten wants uniformity in scheduling. One solution would require all power conference teams to play 10 games against power conference opponents. Otherwise, the SEC might continue with eight conference contests and schedule FCS opponents for nonconference games. Texas was the only SEC team not to schedule an FCS opponent last season, while half of the Big Ten did not schedule an FCS foe.

"It's the biggest of the big issues," a Big Ten athletics director said.

Again, relationships are strained. The SEC sticking with eight games would all but eliminate the possibility of a Big Ten-SEC showcase, which had been discussed previous summits. The scheduling agreement would have pitted all 16 SEC teams against a Big Ten rival. "That wouldn't make sense for our guys to add another tough game," a Big Ten source said.

With partnerships strained and time running out, the final showdown might occur on the Big Ten's turf.

The next in-person meeting among the CFP's management committee is scheduled for Sept. 24 in Chicago inside the Big Ten's offices. Another meeting may occur prior, but for now, it's circled on the calendar as a pivotal date for the CFP.

Petitti has homefield advantage, though he shares voting power with Sankey over the future format of the CFP. All options are on the table. Sankey wouldn't be opposed to sticking with a 12-team format. The Big Ten aims for 16 teams, with four automatic qualifiers. The Big 12 and ACC still want a 5+11 format."I'm going to continue to double down on that format," Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark told CBS Sports.

Ultimately, partnerships will be tested, but professionalism will prevail. After all, the sport has been here before. Former SEC commissioner Roy Kramer recalls the tumultuous relationships among the commissioners during the late 1990s, a period known as the BCS era.

"We hated each other as you walked out, and we always figured a way out," Sankey recalled Kramer telling him recently.

Just don't expect clarity on the CFP format any time soon, even with that Dec. 1 deadline hanging over their heads.

"Oh, we'll come up with something," MAC commissioner Jon Steinbrecher told CBS Sports. "I don't have any doubt about that. But where it's going to end up, I wouldn't predict from where I'm sitting right now."