Proposed college football ‘Super League’ details unveiled

By Kevin Kelley -

College Sports Tomorrow, which is a group of executives and administrators, has proposed streamlining college football into a “Super League” called the College Student Football League (CSFL).

Details of the plan have been in the works for months, but were unveiled by the group on Tuesday. The plan includes the reorganization of the 136 Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) schools into two conferences. The top 72 programs in the country would compete in the Power 12 Conference, which would be made up of 12 six-team divisions based on geography.

Names of those divisions, based on regions, include East, Mideast, Great Lakes, Midwest, Carolinas, Midsouth, Southeast, South, Plains, Texas, Southwest, and West.

The remaining 64 teams, most of which make up the current Group of 5, would compete in the Group of 8 Conference. Divisions in that conference include East, Mideast, Midwest, Atlantic, Southeast, South, Central, and West.

According to the release, some of the top teams in the Group of 8 would be eligible for promotion to the Power 12 Conference the following season, but there would be no relegation of schools from the Power 12 to the Group of 8.

Below are graphics of the proposed conferences and divisions for each team.

Power 12 Conference
Group of 8 Conference

Below are more details on the College Student Football League from the the official release:

The CSFL would apply only to football; other college sports would stay in their current conferences or return to their traditional, geographic conferences, reducing the need for other sports to travel cross-country. The CSFL would include all the current FBS schools in two conferences made up of geography-based divisions. The top 72 programs would compete in the Power 12 Conference with the remaining 64 schools facing off in a second conference, the Group of 8. The best eight schools in the Group of 8 would have the opportunity to “play up” into the upper tier the following season, enabling promotion without “relegation” of any of the Power 12 schools.

Centralized, results-based league scheduling, including non-division games played between schools with similar records from the prior season, would ensure more competitive matchups and allow more schools to stay in the hunt deeper into the season. It would also allow results on the field, not a committee, to determine playoff participation, which in turn would generate more fan engagement in more parts of the country all the way through the regular season and postseason. The College Football Playoff (CFP) would be folded into CST’s proposal so a single league could be charged with managing and growing college football at all 130+ FBS schools.

“The CSFL’s format is better for schools, student-athletes, fans and media partners because more schools will be in the hunt for the playoffs well into November, unlike under the current system in which most schools are out by October,” said Jimmy Haslam, longtime University of Tennessee philanthropist and owner of the Cleveland Browns and other sports teams. “Historically, the beauty of college football has been how many schools around the country were competing for the championship. We need to bring college football back to the broad, national model of its golden years in a system which fosters more competitive balance.” said Haslam.

The CSFL model would be economically advantageous and sustainable in the short- and long-term. Consolidating and centralizing college football allows greater revenue to flow into one unified league, enabling universities to fairly compensate players, create reasonable competitive balance, cover rising NIL costs and continue to underwrite other intercollegiate sports that generate less revenue, including women’s sports and the U.S. Olympic program. The CSFL would directly compensate all student-athlete football players, not just the stars, and NIL and transfer portal rules would be the product of collective negotiations between the CSFL and an association representing football student-athletes. The CSFL supports legislation seeking a determination that student-athletes are NOT employees, but through collective bargaining, the CSFL would give players a voice in rules and economics while providing protection from antitrust claims via the “non-statutory labor exemption,” rather than through a formal, legislative antitrust exemption. This approach should provide a permanent solution to the myriad antitrust challenges plaguing college sports.

Although the idea sounds good on paper, it’s very doubtful that this proposal could be implemented anytime soon. Each FBS conference would have to agree on the change, and then there are the existing television contracts, some of which already extend into the early 2030’s.

What do you think? Is the CSFL a good idea and will it eventually become a reality?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments (48)

I am a fan of Northwestern, Illinois & Michigan & I would rather have a eighteen team conference than a six team conference which sounds ridiculous.

I found Army and Air Force in the “play up” box below the group of 8. Apparently they will “play up” every season, whatever that means.

C’mon , including UL Monroe and leaving out Tulane . Ridiculous .

Vanderbilt a “power” , ridiculous .

Ditto on Vandydorks! That’s what check first! If we’re to downgrade or remove 1 school from SEC they are easily choice would make! Especially in football they having a winning record once every 10-15 years!!!

This is THE stupidest thing that I have ever seen in college athletics history! It will never come into fruition! Whoever came up with this idea should be fired from college sports at once! #pathetic #badmove #ignorant

Boise State is relegated while Purdue, Navy and Vanderbilt are in the ‘power’ conference. What a joke.
Also, how is Navy a ‘power team’ while Army and Air Force are not? (In fact, I don’t see them in either group).

No, this is the rich get richer proposal. No relegation for top league schools is ridiculous. If a team like UCLA sucks they should move down. This is not a good idea period! It’s down right unamerican.

How the hell do they expect promotion to work but have no relegation on the back end to keep the divisions balanced? This makes zero sense.

Zero chance of the B10 and SEC (specifically the powers in those leagues) signing off on this so zero chance of this happening anyway (I notice that it doesn’t respect some major rivalries either).

There’s no point wasting any more time on this.

It’s a great idea but I don’t get the movement up of Group of 8 schools. That would distort the balance between the two leagues. But the bottom line is that this is a long ways away. And yes, where is Army and Air Force in all of this?

This is great…

…if you think the last 130 years of college football history is meaningless.

…you want to throw countless rivalries out the window and just pretend like they never happened.

…you have no concept of the rich and wonderful history of the game.

…you have never spent a second of your life watching college football.

…you think the earth is flat and are a communist who hates everything about America.

But otherwise, this is a bunch of baloney.

You do realize that realignment has thrown countless rivalries out the window too right.

I love this idea. Geography matters again. Olympic sports won’t have to fly cross country for conference games. Logical divisions that preserve history and rivalries (look at P12 Southeast– you get WLOCP, UGA-GT, the Sunshine Cup all in one division, or the P12 Mid-South- you get TSIO, UT-UK, UT-Vandy, Commonwealth Cup, Iron Bowl, and renewal of Auburn-UT all in one division– you’re not getting this in the new SEC more than likely)

Except geography doesn’t matter.

If it mattered USC would still be in the Pac-12. Notre Dame would be in the Big Ten. The Southwest Conference would have worked and not collapsed.

This alignment doesn’t add many, if any, classic rivalries and destroys plenty.

I’m amused that Ohio State jumps over the Great Lakes conference and plays in the Midwest Conference so that Michigan & Ohio State are not together. If you’re looking at regionality it make much more sense to have Northwestern or Illinois swap with Ohio State.

Steve Chapman I fully agree with you Northwestern & Illinois should be in Midwest & Ohio State & Wisconsin should be in Great Lakes plus I really want Michigan & Ohio State to be in same division.

Definitely creative, but I really don’t think it’s gonna work. Why isn’t Michigan and Ohio State not in the same conference? Plus, where’s schools like Tulane and others?

Plus, how come schools such as Vanderbilt and Navy are power schools? Instead, have Boise State and UTEP, or something familiar.

I actually… don’t hate this. I wish there was more legit promotion and relegation, but the divisions make logical geographic sense, as do the numbers, which is a nice change from California being considered Atlantic Coast, Missouri being considered southeastern, and the Big 10 having 18 members. Historic rivalries lost to realignment are preserved (Bedlam, Apple Cup, Cal-UCLA, Mizzou-Kansas, etc.), really the only ones lost are the War on I-4 and Colorado-Colorado St. If there are opportunities for G8 teams to play P12 teams, then sure… I am 100% for this.

I would trade Navy down to the G8 for Boise State. Place Air Force in the G8 central, and Army/Navy in the G8 east. Rearranging would be needed a bit too.

Though it says 64, only 61 are actually listed below — AF, Army, Tulane apparently omitted inadvertently — hence so much confusion.

Here is my breakdown based on geography and rivalries:

PACIFIC: USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Oregon, Oregon St., Washington, Washington St., Colorado, Air Force

GREAT PLAINS: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa, Iowa St., Illinois, Northwestern

GREAT LAKES: Indiana, Purdue, Michigan, Michigan St., Ohio St., Cincinnati, Notre Dame, Miami (FL), Army, Navy

NORTHEAST: Connecticut, Boston College, Syracuse, Rutgers, Villanova, Temple, Penn St., Pitt, West Virginia, Maryland

APPALACHIAN: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina St., Duke, Wake Forest, Kentucky, Louisville, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

SOUTHEAST: South Carolina, Clemson, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida St., UCF, USF, Alabama, Auburn

MID-SOUTH: Mississippi, Mississippi St., LSU, Tulane, Arkansas, Memphis, TCU, SMU, Houston, Rice

SOUTHWEST: Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Utah, BYU, Arizona, Arizona St.

ROCKY: Fresno St., San Jose St., San Diego St., Hawaii, UNLV, Nevada, Boise St., Utah St., Colorado St., Wyoming

LONE STAR: New Mexico, New Mexico St., UTEP, North Texas, UTSA, Texas St., Sam Houston St., Stephen F. Austin, Abilene Christian, Tarleton State

RICE BELT: UAB, Southern Miss, UL-Monroe, UL-Lafayette, Louisiana Tech, Arkansas St., Middle Tenn. St., Western Kentucky, Tulsa, Missouri St.

SUN BELT: Appalachian St., Coastal Carolina, Georgia St., Georgia Southern, Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Kennesaw St., Jacksonville St., Troy, South Alabama

MID-ATLANTIC: Massachusetts, Buffalo, Delaware, Delaware St., Marshall, Liberty, Old Dominion, James Madison,
East Carolina, Charlotte

RUST BELT: Ball St., Western Michigan, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Bowling Green, Toledo, Akron, Kent St., Ohio, Miami (OH)

GREAT SKY: Northern Illinois, Illinois St., North Dakota. North Dakota St., South Dakota, South Dakota St., Montana, Montana St., Idaho, Idaho St.

As an avid sports fan for 20 plus years, I love any proposal that brings back regional rivalries. College sports, especially football, needs to be reigned back in. There’s too many games, too many injuries, and the season is longer than ever. Relegation is the best thing, ever, for all sports! Just look at how successful the EPL has been. Relegation keeps fans interested and forces programs to continue to play. For anyone that likes the way college football is heading, then boo to you. The NCAA is ridiculous and not managing any of this correctly. For example, Cal being in the ACC is the dumbest thing ever. I say all this, and unfortunately nothing will change because it’s all about greed.

Fully agree Dan & as a fan of Northwestern, Illinois & Michigan I am very happy & satisfied that they are in eighteen team Big Ten also I am a fan of Big Television contractional obligations especially CBS at 3:30PM.

For all the haters, you may be looking at it the wrong way. These are 6 team divisions, not conferences. Nothing prevents continuation of existing rivalry games, such as Ohio St Michigan or Texas vs Okl.

I like it in principle, but there should be relegation. A team like Rice would benefit by moving down occasionally and how can you move teams up and not move others down.

A good start, but needs work.

Scott Smith I really want Michigan-Ohio State to play on Thanksgiving weekend & six team division is not solution to it.

Last thing I want to see is Michigan playing both Northwestern & Illinois every year & living in Chicagoland I really like both Northwestern & Illinois in addition to Michigan & there are plenty of Michigan Fans living in Chicagoland too.

Still not a fan of proposal however here is my suggestion for couple division format.

Midwest: Northwestern, Illinois, Iowa, Iowa state, Nebraska, Minnesota

Great Lakes: Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Purdue, Indiana

I am a fan of Bugs Bunny & Yosemite Sam cartoons also I like when Bugs Bunny face Anthill Harry a.k.a. Babyface Finster.

Vicious, blatant money grab. College athletics is rapidly being choked out by corporate suits who only understand greedy profits. The long held rivalries and traditions of generations of fans will be eventually snuffed out by this obscene over reach and Saturdays in the Fall will never be fun again.

Do we need a true minor league of pro football organized this way? Since college football is already a minor league for the NFL?