The policy in brief
What this part would establish
- Power Four institutions play nine conference games, two meaningful nonconference games, and one flexible game.
- One meaningful nonconference game becomes part of a centrally coordinated interconference challenge.
- No FCS game is scheduled after approximately October 1.
- Each team may protect up to three annual conference opponents, subject to balancing rules.
- Large conferences publish strength-adjusted tiebreakers before the season.
How it works
A common schedule floor
The standard makes résumés more comparable while preserving one flexible game. Meaningful opponents can include Power Four institutions, FBS independents, or other FBS teams meeting a published quality threshold. Double-bye eligibility also requires a minimum schedule standard.
The College Football Challenge
Designated conferences rotate pairings on a multi-year cycle and match teams by prior-year performance tiers. Most games are home-and-home. A limited number can become neutral showcases operated by bowl organizations. Independent and qualifying non-Power Four institutions join through a pool balancing quality, geography, and home-game equity.
Rivalries are a design requirement
Rivalry Week remains the final regular-season weekend, and protected opponents remain part of conference schedule construction. A schedule can be mathematically balanced and still be a cultural failure; the reform explicitly rejects that trade.
Fairer large-conference standings
When teams with identical records did not play, head-to-head cannot solve qualification. Conferences would use a published adjustment built from opponent conference performance and shared-opponent data rather than an unexplained national ranking. Divisions, pods, and protected-opponent systems all remain available.
Safeguards
What keeps the rule honest
- Challenge rotations and matchup tiers are announced far enough in advance for travel and ticket planning.
- Campus home-game equity is tracked across the full rotation.
- Schedule thresholds reward ambition without making geography or existing contracts impossible to manage.
Still to resolve
Questions testing must answer
- What opponent-quality threshold should satisfy a meaningful nonconference requirement?
- How should conferences compensate institutions that give up existing high-value home inventory?
- Which strength-adjusted tiebreaker is transparent enough for fans and stable enough for qualification?
Discuss this rule
The proposal ends.
The thread starts here.
Open a focused discussion without leaving the policy chapter. Threads and replies are moderated before publication and also appear in the main community forum.