The "big breakaway" now seems to be right around the corner. It's been hinted at, speculated and discussed for years: a growing possibility of some combination of the power conferences detaching themselves from the current NCAA structure.
The concept has never been more likely. On Thursday, Ninth District judge Claudia Wilken is expected to give preliminary approval to the House v. NCAA settlement. Among the conditions is a tranche of revenue-sharing money that will change college athletics significantly in this already dizzying age.
Schools will be given the option of funding up to 22% of their annual revenue -- an average of about $23 million per school -- to be set aside annually for athletes for the next 10 years beginning next year. In essence, it is true pay for play ... with conditions.
If the separation of FBS isn't imminent, the mechanisms are definitely in place. The Power Four are already likely to form their own governance structure within the NCAA. How far that authority goes is up for debate.
For now, the revenue-sharing conversation starts with if schools can afford to fully fund $23 million for 10 years (or by how much). Remember, membership in that club is optional. That all-in list would likely include all of the SEC and Big Ten.
After that?
"What are we talking about ... 50 teams that will be able to compete?" said Jason Montgomery, a veteran sports law attorney at Husch Blackwell.
How that list of top competitors are determined has long been the No. 1 topic in the halls of college football powers from here to Pullman, Washington. Revenue-sharing might be the tipping point.
"We do know one thing, Division I is too big when you go from Ohio State to the last Division I program," Ohio State AD Ross Bjork said. "To me, there is no question there has to be some other process in Division I."
And that assertion strikes to the heart of everything as college sports reshapes itself: recruiting.
Revenue-sharing threatens to draw more of a distinct line between the haves and have-nots. Example: Georgia's recruiting budget -- $4.5 million in 2022, according to USA Today -- is higher than what 74% of FBS schools paid their coaches.
You can eat a bowl of nachos at Alabama's Bryant-Denny Stadium with the same number of hands it takes to count the number of FBS programs that are profitable. What happens in recruiting to those who can't pony up the $23 million each year?
"I don't think they'll be competitive," said Zach Burr, co-founder of Canes Connection, Miami's school-affiliated collective.
At the same time, Burr also believes most schools will find some way, somehow to raise that kind of money. Failure to do so could doom an athletic department already separated physically, financially and recruiting-wise from the 34 teams in the Big Ten and SEC.
"The SEC and Big Ten are making so much more money off their TV contracts, an extra $20 million bucks isn't that big a deal for them," said Kansas City-based sports law attorney Mit Winter.
For the rest of the sport, this is a decision-making moment. In 2015, Power Five autonomy was celebrated as a breakthrough in allowing power conferences their own direction in legislation. In the 10 years since, "we've exhausted everything [we can do]," Bjork said.
"You almost have to create a new layer of things you can vote on, things you can coalesce around," he added.
"Things will move fast because recruiting doesn't stop," Washington AD Patrick Chun said. "We're all going to have to figure out what we're giving, telling, selling our prospective student-athletes. The days of us being able to have black and white rules relative to things related to money are done."
Two recent reports should at least give pause when considering the current structure. In February, "one high-ranking official" told ESPN that both the SEC and Big Ten were having conversations "about whether to continue their NCAA membership."
"Those conversations are happening," a source told ESPN back then, adding that some felt "pretty strongly about pulling away. I'd say very strongly."
SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has said on several occasions his conference could stage its own playoff. In May, he got emotional in explaining his frustration with the NCAA.
Authors of "The Price," a newly released book about the inner workings of college football, included this anecdote: Former NCAA president Mark Emmert is quoted as saying the SEC was "very unhappy" with an NIL working group proposal as part of a strategy that one high-ranking SEC school official claimed would set up a possible NCAA breakaway.
Several conferences, not just the SEC, were concerned at the time in 2021 with how NIL was taking shape amid external pressures. A Department of Justice letter to the NCAA warned of anti-trust issues. The Alston Supreme Court case was also being finalized.
We've already told you what some of this is going to look like. To save money, the likes of Ohio State are already planning not to offer scholarships at the lower end of their sports that don't produce revenue.
These are example of how athletic departments at the top end are going to look. What about everyone else? Some will fund a percentage of revenue-sharing and hope for the best. TCU has made it known it intends to fully fund that new tranche.
"We're going to be focused primarily on putting that [$23] million of rev-share in the hands of the players," TCU AD Jeremiah Donati said last month. "We understand that does not guarantee championships. It does not guarantee wins, but it's a way in which we think that we can be competitive across the board here. We've got to figure out a way to create a new business model in more or less six to eight months."
Yes, time is running short with implementation of settlement terms less than a year away. Sources at Miami and Florida State told CBS Sports those schools will fully fund. But asking informally around the remainder of the Power Four beyond the SEC and Big Ten about fully funding the $23 million, the answer was several shoulder shrugs.
They want to, they just don't know if they can. Failure to do so hangs a (figurative) sign outside any program that reads, "We don't measure up." Fully funding revenue share will become a recruiting tool itself.
"The programs that are $100 million-$150 million [in revenue], you can't cut $23 million from that budget," said Bjork, who oversees the largest athletic department in the country. "We can find it in our budget. I don't even know if Texas A&M can find it."
Bjork was Texas A&M's AD for six years. That department is currently seventh nationally in revenue at $193 million. He recently called a peer in the ACC to ask where he's going to come up with $23 million.
"We don't know yet," came the reply.
SMU is a good example of the advantages of being all in. Billionaire booster David Miller powered through 35 years of malaise to get SMU into a Power Four conference. Now, the Mustangs are aligned with Duke and North Carolina instead of Rice and East Carolina in the American.
Look at the lengths UConn is going to in securing its place by trying to get into the Big 12. The likes of TCU, Utah and Cincinnati spent decades upgrading their product before being invited by the Big 12.
Market forces recently decided that Washington State and Oregon State -- for now -- didn't make the cut when the Pac-12 splintered.
Chun recently considered an objection against the House settlement (since rejected) filed by Houston Christian, a Southland Conference school that plays in FCS.
"You shouldn't be in Division I," Chun told CBS Sports. "The only reason why you want to be in Division I is because you want to be aligned with Texas and Texas A&M, and you're not."
The idea of a "super league" made waves earlier this year. Commissioners largely panned the idea behind the scenes. The idea of 10 eight-team divisions of football in a single entity like the NFL actually sounds like a logical conclusion to where this is all headed.
That is, only the strong surviving.
The possibility of further separation remains the talk of the industry. It hasn't happened since Division I-A (FBS) and Division I-AA (FCS) were created in 1978.
"[The settlement is] officially allowing their schools to directly compensate their athletes," said Jim Cavale, founder of Athletes.org, a college athletes' rights organization. "That's something for over 100 years they [NCAA] fought desperately ... It's here. It's going to happen."
Revenue-sharing is free money for players, basically. The fascinating details lie in how those millions are allocated. Schools are falling all over themselves adding general managers/player personnel guys to act as de facto NFL GMs.
Whether and how much revenue-sharing is funded fully by any school is really the story. How close any school gets to that $23 million will define schools' willingness to play in the big time.
"It's going to depend on who you're recruiting against," said Rob Ianello, general manager at Kansas. "If you're in the Ohio State world [it's] who you're recruiting against. But if you're School X in the Big 12, and Arizona and Oklahoma State and Arizona State, Kansas and Kansas State, if we're all operating at the max and then you're not, how can you compete? How can you keep your roster like the other schools will?"
Those general manager/player personnel types are becoming some of the most important members of any staff. Those specialists are increasingly visiting NFL teams to get an idea from those front offices and their "salary capologists" on how to allocate money for each position group.
Alabama's GM Courtney Morgan was recently given a raise to more than $800,000 annually. That number reset the market for major college GMs, several sources said.
"You've got make sure in the halls of your program you've got good [talent] evaluators," Ianello said. "It's not like the NFL where you cut them and take a cap hit."
The House settlement has been a boon for Opendorse, an industry-leading athlete marketplace and NIL technology firm. The company has long since developed its "book" that shows valuations for positions. It is available to schools for a price.
"We're finding our lane and it's getting bigger," said Blake Lawrence, Opendorse president of collegiate operations. "It's about clean data and real market numbers. We have made it really easy to answer questions like, 'What does a starting quarterback in the ACC earn on an annual basis?'"
The split, if there is one, will come with its share of acrimony. The NCAA/FBS brand impacts the ability to land grants, donations and talented faculty. CBS Sports reported in July NCAA president Charlie Baker had proposed a separate governing body for the Power Four. Late last year, Baker proposed a new NCAA subdivision for top schools.
"We're trying to conflate governance and championships," Nebraska AD Troy Dannen said. "Keep the championships out of it, we've already had Power Four governance in autonomy and never exercised it. Without question, the Power Four are going to have to govern themselves in a different way. That doesn't mean the championships will be any different. People talk about, 'Well the NCAA is gonna have a new division.' Maybe a new division of governance, but that doesn't mean anything else needs to change."
A revenue-sharing "floor" has been discussed. Conference schools could agree as a group to spend at least "X" millions of the revenue share on football. All of it would subject to not-so-insignificant Title IX considerations.
"The feeling around a lot of athletics right now is that's [$23 million] not a cap. That's a floor," Miami AD Dan Radakovich said. "It's kind of one of those things where, if you want to be in this game, this is what you're going to have to be able to do ... each year. It's a $20 million mortgage that you've got no building for."
That will cause some schools to default on that "mortgage." Athletic departments even at the highest level are subsidized by some combination of student fees, institutional money and state funds.
"How are they going to handle it when the money goes to student-athletes?" Bjork wondered.
In considering that $23 million, schools will have to make a decision on two other factors -- whether to fully fund Pell Grants and scholarships in other sports made available through House. Pell Grants are financial aid based on need. House will also allow sports such as baseball the flexibility to reach the roster cap of 35 with full scholarships.
Accounting for those two factors would take $5 million off the top of the $23 million. That total number will increase by 4% annually.
Bjork recently mentioned it took $20 million to assemble this year's Ohio State transfer class – one of the best in the country. That was definitely on the top end.
"The floor for every team, if you want to be competitive, is spending $13 million-$15 million on your football team," Burr said. "You're flooding the market with a lot of money. The idea that the money isn't going to go up is fool's gold."
Wilken split the back damages of House this way: 75% to former football players, 15% to men's basketball, 5% to women's basketball and 5% for the other remaining minor sports. Some schools hope to use that formula for revenue-sharing for current and future athletes.
Action is demanded to stay relevant. Group of Five schools have talked about their own postseason. Kansas is spending $400 million on its Gateway Project that centers around a stadium remodel. Northwestern is spending $800 million on similar stadium project.
Georgia Tech signaled recently it isn't going to be left behind. Last month, the school got a commitment from its first five-star of the recruiting rankings era. Offensive lineman Josh Petty pledged via what was described as a "multi-million dollar" NIL deal, turning down the likes of Florida State and Ohio State .
"Georgia Tech was never spending that kind of money on players 12 months ago," Burr said.
It isn't alone now. It definitely won't be alone in the future. But in the cut-throat world of recruiting, it can't afford not to.