kAmp?5 3642FD6 @7 E96 |:DD@FC: $E2E6 w:89 $49@@= p4E:G:E:6D pDD@4:2E:@?’D AC:G2E6 D49@@= 724E@C[ E96J’C6 8@:?8 E@ 92G6 E@ ECJ E@ 4@?E:?F6 E92E 2E E96 ?6IE =6G6= @7 AC6A 4@>A6E:E:@? r=2DD a]k^Am

kAm“xE H:== 36 2 492==6?86] x <:?5 @7 766= =:<6 p?5J #6:5 D2J:?8[ ‘(6 H6=4@>6 E96 492==6?86[’ H9:49 H92E 96 2=H2JD D2JD[” |4pF=6J 9625 4@249 p?5J *@F?8H@CE9 D2:5] “xE’== 36 7F?]”k^Am

kAm#6:5 2?5 E96 z2?D2D r:EJ r9:67D 5@?’E 92G6 E@ H@CCJ 23@FE 2 C6=682E:@? 2?5 56=682E:@? DJDE6> 6249 J62C[ E9@F89[ E@ 7:?5 @FE H92E =6G6= @7 4@>A6E:E:@? E96J’C6 A=2J:?8 :?]k^Am

kAm|4pF=6J 92D 366? 4@>A6E:?8 r=2DD ` 2D 2 EC24< 2?5 7:6=5 AC@8C2>[ 3FE 2D 2 AC:G2E6 D49@@=[ :E DF3;64E E@ 2 A@:?E DJDE6> E92E H:== E6== |$w$pp H9:49 4=2DD :E 36=@?8D 32D65 @? :ED C646?E DF446DD]k^Am

kAmp D:I\J62C DA2? >62DFC65 3J A@:?ED 62C?65[ 2?5 @?46 2 D49@@= 244F>F=2E6D b A@:?ED[ :E 7@C465 E@ >@G6 FA @?6 4=2DD] t249 5:DEC:4E 492>A:@?D9:A 4@F?ED 2D ` A@:?E]k^Am

kAmuC@> E96C6[ 2 E@A\7@FC 7:?:D9 2E E96 DE2E6 7:?2=D 244CF6D A@:?ED 7@C E96 E62> 2D H6==] u:CDE A=246 255D c A@:?ED[ D64@?5 H:== 255 b[ 2?5 E9:C5 2?5 7@FCE9 A=246D 255 a] %96 A@:?ED 2C6 ?@E 4@>3:?65j E96 9:896C A@:?E D4@C6 4@==64E65 3J E96 AC@8C2>]k^Am

kAmu@C 6I2>A=6[ |4pF=6J 92D 62C?65 d A@:?ED E96 =2DE E9C66 D62D@?D] x? a_ad[ :E H@? 2 5:DEC:4E 492>A:@?D9:A 3FE E96? 62C?65 2 EC@A9J 2E DE2E6[ E2<:?8 D64@?5 A=246[ D@ ;FDE b A@:?ED H6C6 25565] %96 (2CC:@CD 8@E 2 A@:?E 7C@> 5:DEC:4E E:E=6D 3@E9 a_ac 2?5 a_ab]k^Am

kAmqFE :E 2== 3682? E96 J62C 367@C6 H96? *@F?8H@CE9 H2D 9:C65 2E |4pF=6J]k^Am

k9bmqF:=5:?8 2 AC@8C2>k^9bm

kAm“xE DE2CED 7C@> E96 368:??:?8[ 7@FC J62CD 28@] (96? x 8@E 96C6[ H6 925 2 D@=:5 8C@FA @7 FAA6C4=2DD>6? E92E H6C6?’E G6CJ 6IA6C:6?465 H96? :E 4@>6D E@ C24:?8 2?5 E9:?8D =:<6 E92E[” *@F?8H@CE9 D2:5] “(6’G6 366? G6CJ =F42== D49@@=[ 92G:?8 8C@FAD ]]] E92E 92G6 D@>6 E2=6?E 2?5 56D:C6 E@ 4@>A6E6 2?5 H@C< 92C5]”k^Am

kAm(96? 96 42>6 7@FC J62CD 28@[ E96 AC:G2E6 D49@@= 724E@C E92E |$w$pp 42==D E96 “r92>A:@?D9:A u24E@C” 925 366? :>A=6>6?E65 E96 J62C 367@C6] $@[ 4@>:?8 E@ r=2DD `[ *@F?8H@CE9 2=C625J 925 r=2DD a >:?5]k^Am

kAm“xE’D 366? C6H2C5:?8] (96? x 7:CDE E@@< E96 ;@3[ x E9C6H @FE E96 82F?E=6E @7 ‘(6 H2?E E@ 36 r=2DD a H:E9:? 7:G6 J62CD[’” *@F?8H@CE9 D2:5] “x E9@F89E :E H2D 8@:?8 E@ 36 92C5]”k^Am

The offseason is definitely not the slow season as yet another week delivered news impacting both the Pac-12 legacy schools and other universities across the region.

Here are four developments you might have missed.

1. CFP negotiations stall

Nitty gritty: The Big Ten and SEC control the model for the College Football Playoff starting in the 2026 season and have not found common ground. The former wants a 16-team field based on automatic bids for the power conferences (the so-called 4-4-2-2-1 model) while the latter favored the 5+11 format that’s heavy on at-large bids.

During a meeting this week in Asheville, N.C., commissioners Tony Petitti of the Big Ten and Greg Sankey of the SEC decided a restart is in order.

“I wouldn’t say there’s a leading contender right now,” CFP executive director Rich Clark told reporters, “but they’re taking a fresh look at it.”

Why it matters: The CFP impacts everything in college football, and the model for 2026 has been the hottest topic in the sport for months. The impasse at the top of the governance structure creates the possibility, however remote, that the event won’t expand (to 14 or 16 teams) and, instead, will remain at 12. (That’s our preference, by the way.)

The commissioners are facing a Dec. 1 deadline to notify ESPN of any adjustments for 2026, when a new contract cycle begins. That might seem like plenty of time, but Petitti and Sankey, along with Jim Phillips of the ACC and Brett Yormark of the Big 12, have been discussing possible alterations for months and gotten nowhere.

Whatever format the Big Ten and SEC ultimately select will have sweeping implications for every major college conference, from the Big 12 and ACC to the Pac-12 and Sun Belt.

A model based on automatic qualifiers, for example, would free up the SEC and Big Ten to create a regular-season crossover series. That, in turn, would limit their opportunities to schedule non-conference matchups with teams in other leagues, particularly the ACC and Big 12.

There are other ramifications — too many to detail here, in fact.

Just know that distrust of the selection committee is rampant and common ground will continue to be elusive for the Big Ten and SEC. And they have the only votes that matter.

2. Commissioners mull new start date for football

Nitty gritty: Commissioners from the Football Bowl Subdivision conferences discussed moving the official start of the season up one week, to what is commonly referred to as Week 0: the Saturday before Labor Day weekend.

(If the change had been in place for the 2025 season, for example, everyone would start play Aug. 23. Instead, the season begins in full force Aug. 30.)

Why it matters: The Week 0 discussion has received little attention over the years but is one of the most important issues in the sport. In fact, it’s the key to unlocking the jammed postseason calendar.

College Football Playoff expansion to 12 teams created substantial overlap with the final weeks of the NFL season and playoffs. Last year, for instance, two CFP opening-round games (on Dec. 21) were up against a mammoth NFL doubleheader (Chiefs-Texans and Steelers-Ravens).

That’s a fight college football cannot win and should avoid at all costs.

(Another issue: Playing the semifinals on a random Thursday and Friday to get out from under the NFL’s wild card weekend.)

Starting the season earlier would reduce the frequency of CFP conflicts with the NFL’s stretch run. It would create an earlier date for the national championship. (The title game for the 2026 season is scheduled for Jan. 25, 2027.) And it would allow more mid-December flexibility for additional opening-round games if the CFP expands to 14 or 16 teams.

The move to Week 0 needs to happen for the betterment of the postseason — August is the key to December — which means the change will take years to implement, if it happens at all.

3. Washington State downsizes track and field

Nitty gritty: The Cougars announced Monday a competitive shift “to a distance-focused approach,” meaning they will no longer sponsor field events and will reduce the “number of sprint and hurdle opportunities.”

Why it matters: The canary is chirping, except it’s not in a coal mine — it’s trapped in a financial vise brought about by the revenue-sharing era in college sports.

With a maximum of $20.5 million being shared with athletes, schools must make hard choices about sponsoring the dozens of Olympic sports programs that lose money. (Only football and men’s basketball generate a profit.)

Washington State isn’t the first Division I school to announce a reduction in sponsored sports — Utah is cutting beach volleyball; UTEP has eliminated women’s tennis — and assuredly won’t be the last.

In other instances, Olympic sports could have funding reduced to the point they essentially become club teams.

SANDY — Based on the postgame mood, you wouldn’t have guessed the Utah Royals had just lost their 10th game of the season.

The NWSL’s last-place squad reached the midpoint of its season with a 4-1 loss to the Seattle Reign in its 13th game of the year Saturday at America First Field.

The home team was outmatched from wire-to-wire against the top-five team from Washington, giving up goals in the sixth, 16th, 66th and 91st minutes.

For a brief moment near the end of the first half, it looked like a comeback could be underway when Bianca St-Georges scored her third goal of the season for Utah, but it wasn’t to be.

The goal, which moved St-Georges into a tie with Brecken Mozingo for the team lead in goals, was the only one in the cards for the Royals on Saturday, despite leading the visiting team 14-10 in total shots.

The Royals enter the midseason break on an eight-game winless streak and a four-game losing streak, with the next league fixture not until Aug. 3. But still, a sense of optimism and belief remained with players and coach during press conference comments.

Perhaps it’s because the break gives the team time to recover from a brutal start to the season that featured two season-ending injuries and take another step in building “from the bottom out,” as head coach Jimmy Coenraets described it.

“Make sure you kind of just detach from the game and you get some time by yourself,” Coenraets said of his advice to players heading into the break. “I just want everyone to come back in the best possible headspace.”

The real reason for the optimism, however, is likely because Utah is approaching this season as one piece of a much larger puzzle. Coenraets said that since the Miller family took over team ownership in April, he has felt supported in building a foundation for what he called “a sustainable future.”

“Ever since the change, there was one clear message, and that’s, ‘Let’s build a foundation, and let’s build upon the foundation that we are building the next six months,'” Coenraets said. “We want to be competitive as much as we can, but we also want to make sure that by being competitive, we’re actually building for the future and not giving up the future to just get results.”

Utah will play a pair of friendlies against the San Diego Wave to break up the month-long break and several Royals will continue playing games with their respective national teams, including Ally Sentnor and Mandy McGlynn with the USWNT and Janni Thomsen joining Denmark for the UEFA Women’s Euro tournament.