This Week in the West: SEC makes news (with the CFP), Trump’s planned EO and Pac-12 mediation stalls

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. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey talks CFP

Nitty gritty: During his opening remarks at SEC football media days, Sankey acknowledged his conference and the Big Ten disagree over the future format of the College Football Playoff and suggested the event might not expand for the 2026 season, after all.

Why it matters: The structure of the CFP is the defining competitive issue for college sports over the second half of the decade, with industry-wide ramifications and a deadline approaching.

The SEC and Big Ten control the format and must decide by December whether the field will expand to 14 or 16 teams and, critically, how participants would be selected.

At the moment, the conferences disagree: The Big Ten prefers a radical format based on automatic qualifiers while the SEC prefers a model that leans into at-large selections.

Comments by conference commissioners in recent months indicated expansion (to 16 teams) was a given, but Sankey hinted Monday that the status quo could prevail.

“We have a 12-team playoff with five conference champions,” Sankey said. “That can stay if we can’t agree.”

Not that it matters much, but there is no groundswell of support among college football fans for expanding the event.

2. SEC mulls nine-game conference schedule (again)

Nitty gritty: The conference is engaged in ongoing internal conversations about the schedule change. (Currently, the SEC and ACC play eight conference games while the Big Ten and Big 12 play nine.) Notably, Sankey supports the move to nine but has received pushback from coaches.

Why it matters: This is the issue at the heart of the CFP negotiations — well, this and the general distrust of the selection committee’s process.

The Big Ten simply won’t support the at-large model (five automatic qualifiers and 11 at-large teams) favored by the SEC, Big 12 and ACC unless the SEC adds a ninth conference game to level the playing field.

But the SEC coaches are wary of adding the game, particularly without assurances that the selection process will be tweaked to emphasize schedule strength.

Both issues — the SEC’s conference schedule and the CFP format — must be resolved this fall.

“I think nine games would promote great interest through the year,” Sankey told ESPN, “but it would be hard to coach.”

3. Trump administration prepares executive order

Nitty gritty: The order would direct federal agencies — specifically, the National Labor Relations Board — to determine whether college athletes can be considered employees of their schools, according to a Yahoo report.

Why it matters: Unable and unwilling to course-correct on its own, college sports needs help from Washington before it plunges into the abyss.

Although there are multiple challenges, from the transfer portal to NIL to eligibility rules to the recruiting and competition calendars, the central issue is employment.

If the athletes are declared employees, they could collectively bargain an agreement that would solve all the aforementioned issues.

(To collectively bargain, they need to unionize. In order to unionize, they would need to be declared employees. And to date, the university presidents are unwilling to consider the employment model.)

Any movement on employment within the White House or on Capitol Hill is worth monitoring, albeit with the following caveat: It could fizzle at any time because bipartisan support for employment is limited — also, because there are more important matters facing the country.

If it becomes reality, an executive order would push the employment issue forward. How far forward? That’s uncertain.

“This doesn’t actually do anything,” Boise State sports law expert Sam Ehrlich wrote of the order on the social media platform X.

4. Mediation between Pac-12 and Mountain West fails

Nitty gritty: The conferences spent two months attempting to mediate the poaching penalty and exit fee lawsuits but were unable to resolve their differences. A hearing on the Mountain West’s motion to dismiss the poaching penalty lawsuit is scheduled for September.

Why it matters: With approximately $150 million on the line (in total), the litigation could impact the financial future and membership structure of both conferences.

Our sense, based on conversations with legal sources unaffiliated with either league, is the Pac-12 has a strong case in the poaching penalty lawsuits and the Mountain West has the better hand in the exit fee lawsuit (filed by Colorado State, Boise State and Utah State).

Clearly, none of the involved parties felt pressured to settle at this stage.

“There’s a need to see more cards overturned in litigation,” a source said.

The Pac-12 is under pressure in the next phase of the poaching penalty lawsuit, with the hearing on the Mountain West’s motion to dismiss. But if the motion is denied and the case moves forward, as many expect, the leverage seemingly shifts in favor of the Pac-12.

*** Send suggestions, comments and tips (confidentiality guaranteed) to wilnerhotline@bayareanewsgroup.com or call 408-920-5716

*** Follow me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline