Senate Amendment Could Mean ACC Mad Scramble - FSU, Miami, Clemson, UNC Fighting Over SEC Spots?

A 20-team College Football Playoff is suddenly being discussed — and it could mean the end of conference championship games as we know them.

Tonight on Open For Business, we break down the new 20-team CFP concept, what it could mean for the Big 12 and ACC, and why college football keeps creating increasingly complicated solutions to its biggest problems.

Plus, the Protect College Sports Act has been pushed into September, but a proposed Senate amendment could create a wild new college football realignment scenario involving the ACC, SEC, Big Ten, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, North Carolina and potentially the Big 12.

We’ll also dig into the SEC vs. Big Ten debate. Has everyone been too hard on the SEC? New SP+ data suggests the SEC may actually be deeper than it was during its dominant run — but that depth could also help explain why the conference hasn’t produced the same dominant national championship teams.

Also on the show:

• What a 20-team College Football Playoff could actually look like
• Why the Big 12 may benefit from further CFP expansion
• The latest on the Protect College Sports Act
• The Senate amendment that could impact conference realignment
• What ACC instability could mean for the Big 12
• Why SEC depth may be both a strength and a problem
• Sam Leavitt vs. Will Hammond
• Has the Drew Mestemaker hype gone too far?
• Josh Hoover vs. Drew Mestemaker
• Big 12 College Football Playoff predictions

Subscribe to Open For Business for college football analysis covering the Big 12, SEC, Big Ten, ACC, CFP expansion, conference realignment, NIL, the transfer portal and the forces reshaping the sport on and off the field.

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:00

Senate bill didn't make it this weekend. And a part of the reason why is because of a wild, wild potential amendment to this thing that could lead to six months of realignment all over the place. We'll talk about it. Is it realistic? Could it happen? What would it mean? Are we getting ACC musical chairs? Uh 20-team playoff. Yes, I said a 20-team playoff, not 24, not 16. Here comes a 20-team playoff into the chat. Ladies and gentlemen, we just can't stop making convoluted, weird decisions based on money and bloated conferences in college sports right now. That's the theme of the show tonight. Is the SEC misunderstood? Yes, that is me, myself, and I asking that question after I saw a staff from ESPN's Bill Connolly that raised an eyebrow for me. And getting close to the season, I've got a question to ask you. Who's having the bigger year this year? Is it Josh Hoover or Drew Mestemaker? How about that for a question? Think on that. Hit me up in the chat. Let me know what you think. Uh, thank you. As you file in, please do like and subscribe. It is open for business. I am your host, John Kurtz, here to talk some college football, some college sports, some conference realignment, a schmorgish morgue of it all on the show tonight. Thank you to everybody listening on the audio platform, Spotify, Apple, etc., wherever you listen to your podcast. Thank you very much. You can click the dollar sign below the chat box to leave a super chat. I will get to those at the end of the show. Thank you everybody for being here. You can also hit me up on Venmo at John Dash Kurtz-4. Let's talk Senate bill. All right. Let's talk Senate bill. Uh the Senate bill that was supposed to stop college football chaos could now cause it for six months. Yes, the Senate bill that was supposed to stop chaos in college football could now cause realignment chaos for a span of six months. That is thanks to an amendment coming from the state of Florida. Is it grandstanding or is it legit? Well, answer that question here on the show tonight. Uh the bill, as you guys might imagine, did not make it to an actual vote. It has been tabled until September, where it does have a guaranteed spot on the floor for a vote, so there is at least that. More on that and whether or not it actually happens in a moment. But the crazy thing that you need to hear is a part of the reason that it didn't make it, is because there was pushback in the form of amendments that were proposed to this thing. Some of that, like Tommy Tupperville and Josh Hawley, had one that, you know, to me seemed rather performative. And this one in Florida, you could argue, is performative as well. You get a lot of that. It's politics, right? And the further and further this goes, the more and more that sort of resistance came up. The Black Caucus stood up against this. There was a labor group that stood up against this. Lots of resistance that this thing was met with when it came down to brass tax to actually get a vote out on this thing. So this proposed amendment from Ashley Moody, who's a senator from the state of Florida, would remove the five-year waiting period for any school that was wanting to transfer from a power four league to a power four league. So if you are trying to go from, say, the ACC to the SEC, guess what? You no longer have to sit out for five years as an independent, as was originally written into the bill, unless, and only if, rather, you do it within 180 days of this bill becoming law. So when I say six months, I'm using 180 days to six months. What this means is it's an amendment that would say, hey, six months after this thing becomes law, it's a free-for-all on power for conference realignment. Now, this senator is from the state of Florida, obviously representing Florida State of Miami. They have a vested interest in wanting to get out of the ACC right now. So that's what this is all about. This is the ultimate, like college football and politics colliding into one sort of story. But just follow this for me, okay? Follow this with me. If this were to play out, you still have a 19-team limit for all Power Four conferences, which means the Big Ten could only take one more school. The SEC could take three more. Think about that group of ACC schools that's been really positioning and angling for this. Florida State, Miami, Clemson, North Carolina in particular. You'll notice I just named four schools. There are four spots there total, but the Big Ten, they're going to be holding out for Notre Dame. You would certainly think, anyway. If there are only three real spots up for grabs here, and they're all in the SEC, that's where this musical chairs pit comes in. Would it just be the four schools circling around as fast as they can, trying to slide into one of those and knock the other one out of the way? Like somebody's just trying to bump Dabo out of the way so that Clemson doesn't get one of the chairs or whoever it's going to be. And would the Big Ten and the SEC even want this? Like, do they want realignment to be open for six months? Is a whole entire other discussion here. It would still be expensive. Nine figures over $100 million as far as what the exit fee is right now. But Florida State and Miami clearly have displayed, via putting some political pressure on here, a willingness to do that if it's open. They would have a chance to go take private equity money or whatever it's going to take to make that happen within a six-month window. So, man, this is what happens when things get political. A bill that originally was trying to stop a Super League and cut down on the SEC and Big Ten being able to expand or anything turns into by the end of it before it's even gotten to a vote. Now we have amendments coming out that would just create a six-month realignment free-for-all. At least for most. Because with that 19-team limit, if you are a Utah fan, this doesn't help you at all. You might get excited when you hear about this at first, but it's not really going to help you because the Big Ten is the destination you're angling for. And I think even the most fervent online Utah fan would admit that they are not number one on the Big Ten's wish list there. So that probably would not happen. And you're also probably not getting an SEC invite. So I don't know that it's making a difference there. This is all about the ACC. So the perspectives on this, then if you're a Big 12 fan, what are you? Are you like, hey, actually, if this happened and then the ACC started to splinter, and if it's a musical chair situation in one of these schools, like a Clemson, Florida State, whoever gets left out, is there then some level of interest in the Big 12, like just looking to get out of what's left of the ACC? I could lead to a lot of fascinating discussions. Here, of course, is the problem. The problem is, I don't think this is going to happen. Mostly because if you were to let an amendment get through on this thing before it actually gets voted on in mid-September at the earliest, you would need something that's going to address like some of the widespread pushback here. This is just taking care of Florida State and Miami. This is not appeasing the Black Caucus. It's not appeasing any of the labor issues that have the labor group really fired up. Like Tommy Tubberville is not going to stop complaining about it because of this. Like you're not doing much good with this. So does it appear to be political grandstanding? Probably mostly so. Probably mostly so. And do I have optimism that this is going to actually come to fruition in any form or fashion? I don't. It's decreasing by the day. Time is a killer here. And now you've got at least a full month. It's like more than a full month. I want to, are they coming back on like September 13th? It's something like that. Think of all the things that could happen in our world, how the political news cycle works. You're giving a month for different potential issues to crop up between now and then. That does not seem like a winning formula to me, my friends, to get this thing actually across the finish line. And then we're only talking about the Senate, the House, the AP. I was reading the AP story on this. It still continues to say House of Representatives will be a tougher putt. They're much more split. Uh, there would be a lot that would have to happen for this to get over that hurdle. But that is your update. I promised you updates. I've also promised you football talk later on in the show tonight. And I I'm telling you, we are going to get there. It is not going to be all about Senate bills here. Okay? It's not. But this is important. And if you are a Big 12 or an ACC school, somebody who doesn't feel like you are in, that you're not safe, the only message I could deliver to you at this point is there is going to be a lot more uncertainty. Because if you ask the question, what happens now? If you're not optimistic, John, that this thing makes it through, where is it going next? Ross Dellinger's reporting indicates that the SEC in Big Ten will now start exploring plan B. Uh, remember we talked about this with Greg Sankey about a month ago. They had their plan B, which was going to be exploring self-governance, whatever that looks like. I still don't have a full grasp on that and how it would work. I don't think anybody does. I don't think the SEC fully does. They could talk about it and they do. I don't know that they have a full clear picture of what that actually looks like. So you're just gonna have to sit and wait and wonder will that lead to a full breakaway? Are they gonna get some form of bill passed? Will this lead to Tommy Tellerville's much more lean bill pickup steam? I don't know, guys. I don't know. You were hoping for some level of certainty, like, okay, at least it's gotten through the Senate. That's a big hurdle. Not there. You're just gonna be left in limbo, unfortunately. Now, as if that weren't enough, we've got some college football playoff talk. The other hot button issue here, and not who's making the college football playoff, which is much more fun. I've got to admit, I'm feeling a little bit pressured to release some college football playoff picks because I'm seeing everybody doing that this week. And so I think if I'm going to be a member of the uh college football talco sphere, let's talk T-L T A L K. The college football talco sphere, I've got to release some predictions at some point. But Josh Pate dropped a bomb on everybody today. All right. There is a discussion to be had about the playoff format and what's going to happen with it coming up this week. The 20-team playoff has now entered the chat. Not a 16-team playoff, not a 24-team playoff. Yes, the 20-team playoff has now entered the chat. Look, man, does this make sense to anybody? Does anybody want this? Would the Big 12 or the ACC want this? Do the SEC or the Big Ten truly want this? A 20-team playoff? How exactly would this work? Like, what is the structure? There are a million questions. I'll answer them for you here best that I can. But here's what I can tell you. This is a byproduct of having bloated conferences that don't really make sense, and money ruling everything, and nobody being able to just leave a good thing and let it sit and don't break it. Don't fix it rather if it ain't broken. But that's college football in a nutshell today. There's a ton of that going on. And so now here you get a 20-team playoff. You get a 20-team playoff as a legitimate suggestion here. Let me show you what uh Josh Pate said earlier today. College football playoff management committee meets tomorrow to discuss potential playoff expansion. Pate State investigates is hearing rumblings of a 20-team format idea with play-in games featuring each power for conference, which would replace the value of the lost conference title game revenue. All the talk publicly has been 16 or 24, but this has been privately cooking for a while. Huh, yeah, I can see you guys in the chat. How the heck do you format this? That is a great question. That is a great question. You know, on the surface, this is more or less a compromise, right, between the Big Ten and the SEC, with the Big Ten fervently pushing for 24. The SEC only wanting to go to 16 if there is expansion. Because the SEC, the crux of the issue is they want to keep their conference championship game. So that's why this becomes a compromise, right? Okay, hey, we'll do these four play play-in games on the outskirts of what would be a 16-team playoff, but we'll make it a 20-team playoff with like a first round of play-in games that will replace the conference championship games. So SEC, you can keep your $80 million, presumably, because everybody would be very fascinated to watch this game where it's winner take all advancing in the college football playoff. That that would be, I assume there would be a lot of eyeballs on that, even if it's not the two best teams in the SEC necessarily there. So this is a compromise in that regard. But it's you know, a lot of times the compromises they say nobody wins. Nobody wins. Does anybody win in this? That would really be my question. First of all, a lot of that will depend on how it gets set up. And please do subscribe to the channel, by the way. If you have not, many of you watch, but don't subscribe, really helps me if you do click the subscribe button. Let's start with the SEC. Josh Pay would go on to say, like, Greg Sankey is one of the few voices in the room trying to stand up against this, much like he is against the 2014 playoff as well. So I think you can go ahead and say, like, this is not something that would be deemed ideal by the SEC. Would the Big Ten want this? Well, it's really only half you know whating it on the way to what it really wants. So I'm not sure that the Big Ten totally wants this either. What about the Big 12 or the ACC? Well, it just depends dramatically on how this is structured. And I don't know how exactly you do structure this thing. I the best thing I saw, and I forgot I was gonna bring up the Twitter account that had it. Somebody had it in a Twitter in a tweet reply. Seemed like the best structure I could think of, which was you just you would take like the top 15, right, plus a group of five, and then you would have the next two teams from each Power Four conference playing in a play-in game that would take the place of a conference championship game. That seems like a sensible way to do it, but I have no idea if that's exactly what it would be. So if that's the case, if you're the Big 12 of the ACC, you'd be thinking, all right, well, how many teams will we get in the top 15? And then we would be guaranteed one other because it would be the winner of that game that is getting in. So, you know, maybe you're looking at three in a good year, two or three. Uh, you know, the Big 12 last year, that that would have meant three with Houston and Arizona, I think, playing for a third spot in the playoff. That's obviously not as good as 24. It would be better than 16 for the conference's perspective. Same deal with the ACC. If you're getting three in instead of one, that's definitely better. That's a step in the right direction. But this is where I again separate myself as I have done for a while here, much to the chagrin of some of you on this channel. This being a channel with heavy Big 12 roots. Guys, I just don't think any of this makes sense. I don't know why, if you're looking at this for the sport as a whole, like moving beyond 12. I don't like that we're here at 12, but moving beyond 12 to do this, create these silly like playing games that are no longer conference championship games to go to 20, but not even 24. Like you're just I'm inclined to say if you're gonna go for expanded and go to 24, just go all the way. Just go all the way and do 24. Don't create some convoluted weird system at 20 where people are just gonna be like, why would you do that? If it takes you a full class, like a full dissertation to explain why it is that you're doing what you're doing, what then what is the point of doing it? I don't I will use the healthcare analogy once again that someone has told me about college sports. It's like the healthcare system in America. Like, you would never design it that way from scratch. Never, ever in a million years. But there have been so many weird decisions made to lead you down this winding road to where you're at right now. That's what I think of a 20-team playoff. Nobody would ever design anything like that. Like, why would you do it like that? But we're here because of TV money, conference realignment. And yeah, basically, I saw someone in the chat like, hey, it's America, it's ruled by capitalism. Yeah, basically, overly capitalistic uh college sports combined with a bunch of lawsuit results, which is also very American. So here we are. Uh, I would still say just keep it at 12, man. Just keep it at 12. I I as a Big 12 guy, a guy with deep Big 12 roots, I would love to see the conference have more access to the playoff. It could backfire. I would love to see the ACC have more access to the playoff. It could backfire if you just start losing all the time. If the Big 12 is losing all of those games, you would still have to take advantage, but more access, yeah. I see how it's good for those conferences. I just don't like the fundamental changes to the sport here. And 20 just seems like a weird. We're just not going to make anybody happy. At least with 24. I don't know. Tony Petiti's happy, the Big 12's probably happy, the ACC's probably happy. You've you've accomplished something. I'm not quite sure if you've really accomplished that much with a 20-team playoff that is sitting there halfway in and halfway out with these weird. Think about this too. How are you determining conference champions then? Because it wouldn't be the conference champs that are playing in those games. So what if you have a year, like for instance, most people think Tech and BYU are the two best teams in the Big 12 this year, right? Well, they're not playing each other in the regular season. So if both teams, say, are 12-0 or 11-1, and they're not meeting in a championship game, I mean, yeah, I know your answer will be, well, yeah, they'll have some weird tiebreaker formula. First of all, the Big 12's track record on doing that in an effective way is not great in the Brett Yormark era. But second of all, it's just a weird, dumb way to determine a conference champion. I guess really the answer would be just like Bill John, nobody cares anymore. It's just all about making the playoff. Well, fine. Uh, you can okay boomer me for still caring about uh who is determined and deemed the league champion and having that be something meaningful. Just weird, man. Weird space that we're in. Weird space that we're in. Uh thank you all for being here. Please do like and subscribe if you have not yet. I appreciate everybody uh hanging out. I will take some questions or your comments at the end. If you want to submit a super chat between now and then, you can click the dollar sign below the chat box in order to do that. You can also hit me up on Fenmo at John-Kurts-4 to do that. Uh, before we get to Josh Hoover V. Drew Mestimaker, which I think will be very, very interesting for sake of discussion. Um, I do want to talk about the SEC. The SEC is taking a lot of heat and a lot of crap right now. Kurt Signetti jumped all over the SEC and said, the Big Ten, when we lose, we sit and take it on the chin like a man. That was more or less what Kurt Signetti said about the SEC and all the whining that the league has done about not getting enough love in its eyes per the College Football Playoff Selection Committee, in spite of the fact that they've had more teams in the playoffs than anybody the last couple of years. But I'm here to say we've been too hard on the SEC. Yes, I did say that. We have been too hard on the SEC, and I have some numbers to back that up, okay? Because the SEC has not gotten bad, it's not a bad league, it's actually it's gotten better, and that's the problem for the SEC. Okay, I will explain what I mean. Stick with me on this. Um again, it's fun right now to get your shots in. And I'm not saying that you shouldn't. And I'm not saying that the SEC doesn't deserve what's coming its way right now. For 20 years, the SEC stood and beat its chest on the top of the mountain, rightfully so. It was the best league in college football for, yeah, the better part of two decades. Full stop. Nobody could really say anything to them, and they took full advantage of that as most anybody would. Well, now the Big Ten's on top, and the Big Ten is the best league in the country. This is not a me about to go on a segment where I'm saying, uh, no, actually, no. The currency in college football is winning national championships. The Big Ten has done it not only three years in a row, but with three different schools, one of whom was a historic seller dweller. The Big Ten reigns supreme right now. They've got more national championship contenders, which matters. Most. And another thing that is confirmed here that should not be denied by anybody is just that the SEC is flailing. The SEC's flailing. People don't know how to handle it. I heard someone describe it the other day as a midlife crisis for the SEC. And that is what it feels like for some of the coaches, certainly some of the media, certainly some of the fans. I've said this many times before. If you have like a 20-year-old kid that's in college right now at Georgia or Alabama, this does not compute to them. They have not been conscious for a time when they don't have the Trump card. We're the SEC, we're the best. All of that is very true. But this is not a league that's fallen off a cliff. And Bill Connolly actually has a great stat of this from ESPN who runs the SP Plus. Okay. Uh, which to me is it's my favorite power rating to abide by in college football. Here you go. Bill Connolly says the SEC hasn't fallen off in any way, and a few teams have improved. The average SP plus rating in 2024, 2025 was 14. The average in the 10 years prior was 13.1. But Georgia's taking a step back. Bama's taken two, and that's the entire perceptions difference. He also goes on to say it's made the SEC worse at winning national titles, and it's made league play super fun. I think I generally agree with most of that. Like I think, first of all, the stat, I can't disagree with the number. The number is the number. In the power rating, the SEC as a whole, the average strength per team in the league has gotten better. The SEC has gotten better as an overall top-to-bottom league. Again, that's not the currency here. That's you've got some Euros, but you're in America, buddy. We need dollars and cents. The dollars and cents is are you winning national championships? However, this is a sign that like the SEC is not a terrible league. Obviously not. They're still a very, very good league. But the talent's more spread out. What have we said about college football in general right now? The talent is more spread out because of the portal and because of NIL. That combo, you can't just sit around and hoard talent in your three-deep like Georgia used to be able to. And a lot of times this has been explained in terms of the Big Ten and the teams that it has and all of college football in general. But even if you hone it down to the SEC, look at how talent has become more spread out through the SEC. For instance, Vanderbilt, right? Jared Curtis, number one quarterback in the country, committed to Georgia, flipped to Vandy. You're going to see him playing for the Commodores this fall. Texas AM, Ole Miss. They have made big moves. They have become much more talented, way more talented rosters than what you would have thought of over that 10-year stretch before. Texas and Oklahoma have been added to the league. That's another thing that you just can't ignore about this. That has made the league deeper. And nothing against Texas or Oklahoma, but Big 12 fans will be sitting here screaming saying, well, they're not national championship good. You could loosely, I suppose, call them national championship contenders, but Oklahoma wasn't winning playoff games. Texas wasn't even getting there in the Big 12. So all of that to say, it's just made the SEC deeper, tougher on a week-to-week basis, but they don't have anybody at the top. And what the SEC desperately needs is for a program or two to rip off a run like that. Is it going to be Texas? Is it going to be Georgia? I don't know. From my money, I don't see anybody outside of Georgia doing that right now. I don't Sark's got to prove that to me before he would be actually ready to do that. And I don't, Caitlin DeBoer, I'm not feeling that at Alabama. Like he's about to just go rip off something trying to work Alabama without a running game. I don't see that working out in that way. Maybe Lane Kiffin, if you're a big lane guy, which like I am, I like him, but I don't know. LSU's basically had one super team in the last decade. And other than that, it's been all Alabama and Georgia that the huge reputation of that conference was built on because again, the currency is winning national championships. So much like the Big 12, my message actually to the SEC would be very similar. You got to win playoff games. You're going to need somebody to emerge again. You're going to need somebody to pull above the pack, and it's going to have to happen in the playoff. Because the problem here is that I can see SEC fans agreeing out there and like shaking their head, yes, yes, we have gotten better, and that is the problem. We are a better league and we're deeper and what you can't use the same tired argument that we've been seeing from SEC fans lately, like, oh, we beat each other up and the Big Ten, it's not fair. The schedule's so much easier. You're not beat up, come playoff time. You cannot have it both ways. When for years it was iron sharpens iron, now it's you're beating each other up. You've still been playing one fewer conference game until this year. No, no, no, no, no. You don't get to use that. You show it in the playoff. It matters in the playoff. Can you go out there and win playoff games? And that has not been happening. Notre Dame has been more effective at that than you. The Big Ten has been more effective at that than you. Miami has been more effective at that than you. So that's where it's got to change. Just like if the Big 12 wants the narrative to change about its league right now, it's going to have to win playoff games. So look at what I did there. I started this by saying I've been too hard on the SEC, and I finished it by putting the SEC in the same basket as the Big 12. That, my friends, is called skill. Okay. Uh you can thank me later. SEC fans, let me know all about it in the comments. Hey, by the way, Kurt Signetti, who took his shot at the SEC, the shot heard round college football the other day. If you want to know why that could actually be the best thing that ever happened to the SEC, click here. All right. Thank you everybody for being here. That's for everyone watching the uh clipped version. Those of you hanging out live, just keep hanging out. Thank you all for being here. I appreciate you very much. Uh, liking and subscribing is very helpful. If you have a question that you want to make sure gets on the show tonight, click the dollar sign below the chat box. I'll take it in some super chats uh at the end of the show. All right. Let's do a little either or. Alright. I was trying to brainstorm a good name for this segment. I was like, you know, back in the day when I used to watch Pardon the Interruption a lot, they would have toss up. You know, you'd have the guy yelling from the back of the room, toss-up. This is basically a toss-up. And we're gonna do it with some Big 12 and Big 12 adjacent quarterbacks. Has the Drew Mestimaker hype gotten out of control? Look, before you come after me, I I I love Drew Mestimacher. I want him to be great, but has the hype gotten out of control? And is LSU expecting way too much from Sam Levitt? A couple of questions I want to raise and lay it all out there with some big time quarterback projections for the upcoming season. Okay? I've got two toss-ups for you today to debate, and I am I am very interested actually to see what the response is going to be with this and who's rocking with me and who's not. Today we're talking Big 12 or Big 12 adjacent quarterbacks. All right. Sam Levitt, Will Hammond, Josh Hoover, Drew Mestimaker. Couple of quarterbacks still in the Big 12, couple of quarterbacks who left the Big 12 for what they what they think are greener pastures. See if that works out this year. That's a part of the point of this segment. So first I will ask you, who's going to have the better year? This is how I will frame it. The question I'm asking is who will have the better year? Not who would you take on your team, not who would you start building a team around? It is who's going to have the better year? Sam Levitt at LSU or Will Hammond at Texas Tech. Now, the reason that I pair these two guys is because of the injury issues. And Texas Tech and LSU were both sniffing around the same transfer quarterbacks. We know what happened with Brendan Sorsby. This would have been an apt comparison in question to ask if it were Sorsby v. Levitt, but I think it still works with Will Hammond. All right. Both of these guys have injury concerns. And this is where I know Will Hammond is coming off of a major knee surgery, right? But I I did just see him on Texas Tech's social media the other day moving around on that thing pretty well. It seems like he's going to be available to play most, if not all the season. How does that compare with a Sam Levitt who also had to miss spring ball? He had the Liz Frank thing last year. He he's been beat up a lot throughout his college career and generally plays with a reckless abandon as a quarterback. I actually I have it's gonna sound crazy. I have more concern with Sam Levitt getting hurt again this year than I do Will Hammond because Levitt's style of play really is this like kamikaze, go crazy. That's it worked wonderfully in 2024. I can still see him like running around that Texas game making plays. It worked wonderfully. But eventually we saw that cause him some problems in 2025 and never could stay healthy, missed a bunch of the season, missed spring ball, and now he's going to the SEC. And I hate to be the guy that's like, oh, step up in competition, but I just went through an entire segment about the depth of the SEC, and there's a lot of talent there on defense. It's undoubtedly going to be a step up in terms of the defensive talent that he's going to see and the physicality that he will see in the SEC on a week-to-week basis. LSU also couldn't run the ball last year. Now, I know Lane Kiffins brought in a $40 million transfer class to try and fix that, but offensive line, not exactly a strength. They've got almost a totally new offensive line this year, and they only rushed for 104 yards per game last year. I don't know how much help Levitt is going to have. He's got nine transfer receivers, so there's a lot there, including a guy I know well, Jace Brown from K-State. He'll have weapons, but I fear that Sam Levitt is going to have to try and do too much with his legs, andor that that's just what he is going to be trained to do because that's his instinct. I don't know how well that's going to fly in the SEC based on what we've seen. Plus, I just LSU feels like a team that will be a tiny bit of a letdown this year to folks. Let me let me be stronger with that. I think LSU will be a letdown for folks that think they are going to be a legit national championship contender this year. I was just reading one of the preview magazines today that had them like in the top seven. I don't, that to me is not LSU, especially with a schedule. It's at Ole Miss, AM, Bama, Texas, at Tennessee. Do have Clemson and at Kentucky, which could be sneaky, tough games too. I just think all the money, all the hype, all the hoopla, all the Lane Kiffin stuff, Sam Levitt staying healthy, um, so much new. So much new that has to come together on that roster because they hit the portal so very hard. I think you combine that with their schedule. There's a chance that LSU is going to be a disappointment this year. And that would leave Will Hammond to be able to just lean on a big time running game that includes Jacoby Williams, Cam Dickey, Quentin Joyner. Yeah, remember Quentin Joyner, USC transfer now healthy this year. Like that backfield's totally loaded. The offensive line should be strong this year. Again, Texas Tech is going to be great up front on both sides of the ball. They should be the most physical team in the Big 12. And how much have I been talking about Texas Tech's schedule here lately? Not to blame you, Red Raiders, but I know that that's the knock on tech, and everybody's been talking about it all year. They do not have a tough schedule. They have a pretty damn manageable schedule that misses BYU in Utah, Arizona State, Arizona, Houston, the toughest games are all at home. That just feels like Will Hammond is going to wind up by the end of the year having a better season. I'll just say, I'll say it like that having a better season. That doesn't mean I think his numbers will, at least on like a per game basis, be outright better. But I feel better about the chances of him staying healthy the entire year because of what is going to be on his plate. And I wonder how that is going to work with Sam Levitt in the SEC. So I give me on that one advantage actually to the Big 12 quarterback in Will Hammond. Call me a homer. That's fine. Now let's talk Big Ten versus Big 12 with Josh Hoover or Drew Mestimaker. Okay. Now, as I said before, I want to see Drew Mestimacher light it up. That is, this will be a good list to make. Players I'm most excited to see play in the Big 12 this year, he might be number one. Like I need to see Drew Mestimaker get out there and sling it. And Oklahoma State deserves for him to have a big year and for the team to be back in a big way. I love Chris Barnes. I love Wyatt Young. He'll have Caleb Hawkins in the running game. It's a lot of infrastructure there on that offense. I think he's going to be very good. I do not think this will be a flop or anything. But I do wonder just some of the stuff that I hear, I'm like, have we let the Mestimaker hype get a bit out over its skis? Have we let that get a bit? I, you know, the athletic was ranking quarterbacks by tier, and they had Drew Mestimaker in tier one, and they had Josh Hoover in tier two. So that's why I come to compare these. A part of the Drew Mestimaker write-up actually said, This is I'm quoting from the athletic here. Uh the step up in competition from the American to the Big 12 isn't viewed as too daunting by those who we spoke with. I gotta roll my eyes a little bit there, people. I'm sorry. I going back to Bill Connolly's S Plus, he says it's a bigger step up than going from going from the American to the Big 12 is a bigger step up than going from the Big 12 to the Big Ten by a long shot, by over double. It's over doubly as difficult to go from the American to the Big 12 as it would be to go from the Big 12 to the Big Ten. So I've got to disagree a bit there. I I think Big 12 defenses will put up some level of resistance. But the bigger thing here is again, we're talking about who has the better season. That you can define that a bunch of different ways, but I'm thinking Oklahoma State and Drew Mestemaker hype is getting up, up, up, up there. A lot of people thinking they can compete for a Big 12 championship. I think they'll be much better. I think they can go to a bowl. I think they'll be fun. I think they'll be infinitely more watchable, Oklahoma State, than they were last year. I don't think they're going to compete for a Big 12 championship spot. I do think Indiana is going to compete for a national championship. Like I think they will be in the playoff. I think they'll make a deep run. I think Hoover has way, way more talent than necessary for that staff and that infrastructure to work with and squeeze quite a bit out of. The way Hoover was turning it over was wild. I've seen it, I realize it, I get it. But Kurt Signetti was right. Okay, he took that shot. He took that shot, remember, at Sonny Dykes when Sonny pointed out, well, you know, Josh will turn it over a lot. And he said, Well, Sonny, guess what? He's got defense in a running game now. And he is right. Indiana was incredibly physical last year. Running back is going to be different, but they've got three studs back on the offensive line and added another one in the portal. They'll have a running game. They're going to have a defense. That's going to be a complete team. Less will be asked of Josh Hoover. I think that's a perfect situation for him. I think he's going to light it up and have a great year. And by the end of the year, again, I don't know if this works out statistically. Mesta Maker may do more statistically, in part because he has to. But I think if you asked people at the end of the year, like who had a better year, I think people would say Josh Hoover because of what is going to come from that in terms of what the team accomplishes. So I'm bending the rules a little bit to what I want it to be in terms of the definition of this. But that's actually where I would fall on it. That's where I would fall on it. I'm going to go as my answers here. I'm taking Josh Hoover over Drew Mestemaker, and I'm taking Will Hammond over Sam Levitt. All right. Let me know in the comments what you think about all that. I'm sure that there will be, I'm sure that there will be some feelings about that. Oklahoma State fans, look, if you want to read about the rise of Oklahoma State football, how it's going to come back up, and why I and an Oklahoma State insider are believing hard in Eric Morris, click here. That's for everybody watching the clip version. Those of you hanging out live, just keep hanging out. Let's see what's in the chat. If you've got a question or a take that you want to get off here to uh to end the show, hit me up in the chat. I'm gonna uh just wade through this real quick. See what we got. Wet blanket says, I think Mesta Maker will throw for more yards, but not win as much as Josh Hoover. Wet blanket, I appreciate that. One of our resident cowboys here. I appreciate that you can be on board with my line of thinking there because, of course, I'm the smartest person in the room. No, not because of that. I appreciate like the humility to understand and be able to convey that. I think that is that's where I'm at with this. And what did I say earlier with the SEC, the currency of college football? It's it's winning games, winning playoff games, ultimately winning championships. I I definitely think Josh Hoover has the better chance uh to do that. But I think Mestermaker will light it up. I do think he will light it up. Uh let's see, let's see, Bob. Bob, enjoy your content. I is this are you a fighting Irish fan, Bob? Is that what the is that what the Clovers are for? I appreciate that. I appreciate that. Um here was the question earlier from David. How do you format a 20-team playoff? It's a great question, David. It's a great question. Again, I think the only real way. I don't know. The way that made the most sense to me, if you take the top 15, give the group of five a spot, and then you're taking the final four spots just as little playing games from the next two teams from each conference. That's about the only way I could see it happening. And I just say that out loud. Can you see that actually being accepted by most of the college football world that they'd be like, yeah, then we'll just take the next two? I mean, you know, it depends on the year, but if you've already got say three ACC or Big 12 teams in the top 15, which the Big 12 had that for a while last year, what did you did? Utah wind up 16? It was close to that. Then the next two, you know, I mean, people will be looking at that, like, why are we letting one of these teams in the playoffs? Like, I just don't, I don't see that being something that's going to be very popular. Um boy, Jason says I only look at college football as an exhibition now. Well, I was thinking about this earlier because my take would be look, I'd rather go back to the BCS than continue to do what we're doing with the playoff, expanding, expanding, expanding. Just pick two teams, have them go play for the championship. Because to me, it's a the the sport should be about regional rivalries and the regular season and the urgency of the regular season. That's obviously what I grew up with. It's what the sport's been like for a hundred years up until very, very recently. Um, but I understand that that's kind of an antiquated look at it right now. And if I if you were to do that in the current conference realignment setup that we have, like we're not even really getting the regional rivalries, and then you're only picking the two teams. So we're already like halfway there. I understand why you would say just go the full way and go lean into the playoff industrial complex, which is that's unfortunately where we're at. Like the playoff industrial complex has won. Uh, it has won. Let's see here. Recently, I'll check in with uh with Alan there. Alan says, John, still like Utah trade for Nebraska. Yes, those of you who were not here the other day, Allen officially offered up trading Utah for Nebraska in a little conference realignment trade. So I don't know if somebody can get uh, boy, I almost said Jim Delaney on the horn. If someone could get Tony Petiti on the horn, maybe Jim Delaney, maybe he could help broker a deal too. Uh, you know, Utah would be on the first train out of here. Get Nebraska back in the conference. Uh, that seems like it would certainly be fun. It would fit my regional rivalry narrative. Alan says KU could be eight and four this season, but happy if the only wins are against K-State and Mizzou. Uh details on the wheel and Mizzou game finalized and coming. Rockchalk Jayhawk Allen. Alan, hit me up, man. Ofbnews at gmail.com. Hit me up because I was trying to get just trying to get one of my three mock co-hosts on board to go to the game. I would love to actually attend the game. Uh KU Mizzou in Lawrence, but then he was looking at ticket prices and like, I don't know that that's gonna happen. So I don't know, Alan. If you got a plan, you let me know because I would genuinely really like to go to that game. Short drive for me in Kansas City Friday night. Love that rivalry. Great college football game. I would be 100% on board with going. So you just let me know. Alan, thank you for uh thank you for popping in and hanging out here. Uh I do Lisa, I appreciate you, Crimson Tide fan. Sometimes I agree with you, sometimes I don't, but I like your show. It's one of the better all-around college football shows. Lisa, thank you. Please spread the word in SEC country. Let's get more folks coming around. Uh, that would be wonderful. I appreciate you. Seriously, thank you. Thank you for that. Thank you for hanging out and watching. Guys, I think I'm gonna cut it off there. Uh, I'm excited. We're getting closer and closer to football season. I've been planning out the next few weeks. And it all includes coming up on a little week zero action between the Hornfrogs and Bill Belichick. Are we all ready to see TCU just go clock Bill Belichick again? Because I sure am. Like and subscribe, spread the word to all your friends. If you're a Big 12 fan and you want extra coverage in your inbox, OFBnews.com is how you can get my open for business Big 12 newsletter. Uh, thank you guys. Take care, and I will talk to y'all very soon.