Mailbag: Comparing Washington State to Oregon State, CFP changes for 2026, the Big Ten schedule, ACC outlook and more
The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to wilnerhotline@bayareanewsgroup.com and include “mailbag” in the subject line. Or hit me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline. Some questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.
And if you missed it, last week’s mailbag examined the implications of former Alabama basketball player Charles Bediako’s attempt to regain college eligibility after playing in the G League.
At this point, would you rather be an Oregon State fan or a Washington State fan? WSU has recovered remarkably well after losing its head coach two years in a row, while OSU has well-documented issues with NIL and coaches salaries. Is there any hope for the Beavers? — AC
To a certain extent, their range of likely outcomes is comparable because talent acquisition and retention challenges exist for each due to remote locations, modest in-state recruiting pools, recent competitive trajectories and limited financial resources.
But if the Hotline were forced to choose, we would side with Washington State whether the timeframe is this moment, the next year or the next five years. And frankly, it’s not particularly close.
The Cougars have a vastly better chance to succeed in the new Pac-12, both on the field and on the court, and remain somewhat relevant on a national scale.
Two reasons come immediately to mind:
1. Leadership
More than ever, success in football and men’s basketball starts with institutional commitment and leadership alignment.
We give Oregon State president Jayathi Murthy high marks for her role in salvaging and rebuilding the Pac-12. It would have been easy for Murthy and former WSU president Kirk Schulz to shutter the conference and join the Mountain West back in the roiling fall of 2023. Instead, they did what was necessary — that included taking the departed schools to court — to keep the Pac-12 alive.
But is Murthy as committed to winning over the next five years as WSU’s new president, Elizabeth Cantwell? Not in our view. It’s not that Murthy is anti-football or anti-basketball. It’s not that she doesn’t see value in competitive success. It’s just that Cantwell’s commitment is next-level, and the Cougars should be thrilled that she was selected to replace Schulz.
In her previous post, at Utah State, Cantwell pushed for the Aggies to join the rebuilt Pac-12 and hired Bronco Mendenhall. Her early-tenure decisions in Pullman over the past nine months, which include dismissing athletic director Anne McCoy, suggest Cantwell is dead set on doing everything possible (within reason) to produce a winner on the field.
One example: The video message Cantwell delivered to WSU fans in December in which she sought $5 million in NIL support and deftly connected the dots between on-field wins, increased enrollment and a “healthy” university.
The Cougars don’t have a permanent athletic director in place — Jon Haarlow is the interim AD — and that would be concerning with a different president. But Cantwell’s commitment is such that WSU could continue its current existence without incurring long-haul damage.
In Corvallis, longtime athletic director Scott Barnes has experienced a rough patch at precisely the wrong time, from the fateful hiring of Trent Bray to the NIL collective chaos (with Blueprint Sports) to the subpar men’s basketball product. (Coach Wayne Tinkle’s contract extension, signed in 2021, was a colossal mistake, at least in duration.)
Barnes, 63, seemingly is near retirement. Combine the management missteps with his uncertain future and the risk level that will accompany the hiring process and, well, OSU fans have good reason for concern.
2. Recent history
Because of limited financial resources, the football abyss is always one wrong turn away for WSU and OSU. But despite everything the Cougars have experienced — that list starts with five coaches in seven years — they continue to win.
Somehow, they became bowl-eligible under Mike Leach, Nick Rolovich (with Jake Dickert as the interim), Dickert and Jimmy Rogers. We have no reason to expect a significant regression under Kirby Moore.
Meanwhile, Oregon State’s downside has been exposed under two of the past three head coaches: The Beavers bottomed under Gary Anderson and again under Trent Bray.
(Do the Cougars have a hidden advantage that allows them to retool more adeptly than Oregon State? Are they simply better at identifying coaching talent? Those issues are worthy of a deep dive at some point before the 2026 season begins.)
Both schools opted to hire first-time coaches, Kirby Moore (WSU) and JaMarcus Shephard (OSU), as they transition into the new Pac-12. In our view, the Cougars have a higher ceiling and a higher floor than the Beavers based on the resilience shown in the past few years and the university’s commitment to success.
That commitment takes many forms, but dollars are a huge piece. And by our estimates, WSU is spending $6.5 million on compensation for Moore and his staff in 2026, whereas OSU is paying Shephard and Co. roughly $4.75 million.
The difference is substantial and, in our view, reflects different trajectories for the Pac-12 holdovers in the rebuilt conference. We’d rather be WSU than OSU.
After this year’s mess, where does the College Football Playoff process go from here? — MrEd315
It’s a mess, sure, but it’s an acceptable mess. There’s nothing inherently wrong with a 12-team field, whereas four was far too small and 24 (the Big Ten’s plan) is preposterously large.
The status quo announced last week could last one more season or several seasons. It all hinges on the Big Ten and SEC finding common ground.
But once again, the CFP management committee has tweaked the format in a fashion that could have major ramifications next December.
For those unfamiliar, here are the changes:
— The champions of the Power Four leagues (ACC, Big 12, Big Ten and SEC) will receive automatic bids regardless of their position in the selection committee’s final rankings. The stunning twist that materialized with five-loss Duke missing the CFP despite winning the ACC title won’t repeat. Under the format in place in 2026, the Blue Devils would have received an automatic bid for winning the conference.
— The automatic bid for the Group of Six no longer is earmarked for a conference champion. In other words, the No. 2 team in the American could make the cut ahead of the Pac-12 winner. (It’s unlikely but possible.)
— Notre Dame will receive an automatic bid if ranked in the top 12. Remember what happened eight weeks ago? The Irish were No. 11 but didn’t make the field because of spots assigned to lower-ranked automatic qualifiers. That won’t happen in 2026.
Of course, there’s absolutely no chance special treatment for the Irish will cause any controversy!
Now the Group of Six representative for the CFP doesn’t have to be a conference winner, should the Pac-12 and others scrap their championships? Seems like that 13th game could hurt them more than it helps. — @NateJones2009
The change, which was revealed this week by The Athletic, should prompt the Pac-12, American, Mountain West, Sun Belt, Conference USA and MAC to reassess their competitive processes, particularly the tiebreaker and the staging of a championship game.
Whether they should eliminate the championship game is another matter entirely.
After all, the likelihood of a non-champion being the highest-ranked team from any given conference over the span of multiple seasons is less likely than the alternative — than a champion being the highest-ranked team.
And don’t forget the potential for the championship game to provide the resume boost necessary to propel a team into the CFP. It could help more often than it hurts.
Pac-12 presidents and athletic directors met for three days this week to discuss a litany of issues, including the 2026 football season. We have no doubt they discussed the merits of the championship game given the CFP format tweak but fully expect the conference to eventually announce a date and model for the event.
One option is to stage the game at a neutral site. Our hunch: The highest seed will host.
How are TV ratings determined when watching games in multi-view on YouTube, for example? — @mobility_mode
Great question, and we have a good (not great) answer.
The Nielsen ratings are based on audio. In a sports bar with five screens airing five different games, for example, the Out-of-Home measurement tool will register the screen with the sound on.
(We explained the Out-of-Home system this week as part of the Hotline’s examination of college football’s ratings boom: A critical change in Nielsen’s process is responsible.)
The system works in the same fashion with multi-view screens in your home: Nielsen will rate the game with audio.
What happens if you switch the sound from one feed to another every two minutes for three hours? Admittedly, I’m not sure. But there is undoubtedly a tool in the measuring system that accounts for that change.
Hope that helps.
Where do you see Notre Dame and the ACC’s top 10 football schools going in the next four to five years? — Jim S
The Hotline doesn’t foresee them going anywhere before the end of the decade. There isn’t an obvious impetus to hit the eject button.
What does that mean? Well, the Big Ten and SEC are locked into media rights contracts until 2030 and 2034, respectively, so their desire to expand into ACC territory probably won’t gain steam for a few years. At the same time, the cost to exit the ACC remains exorbitant (in excess of $100 million) until the turn of the decade.
And Notre Dame has zero reason to join a conference. If anything, the change to the CFP format mentioned above — the Irish are guaranteed inclusion with a top-12 ranking — offers more reason for them to remain Independent.
That said, the outlook becomes muddled if the window is expanded. The 2030s could bring a massive round of realignment in which the Big Ten and SEC expand to 22 or 24 teams or a super league forms.
In either case, the number of ACC football programs with tickets to the front of the FBS bus is limited to five or six, at most: Florida State, Clemson, Miami, North Carolina, Georgia Tech and perhaps Virginia, Virginia Tech or Louisville, depending on the size and shape of the next structure.
And obviously, Notre Dame would be part of whatever comes next.
Heard you on KJR in Seattle this week talking about the Big Ten schedule and teams on the margins. In your opinion, which teams weren’t treated well? — @MistUncle
Indeed, that topic was discussed during my weekly spot on ‘Softy and Dick’, but allow me to offer context for readers who were not listening.
To a great extent, the Big Ten’s yearly schedule is beyond the conference’s control.
Why? Because the schools agreed to an opponent rotation in 2023 that remain in place for three more seasons; the NCAA sets the calendar and thus the number of bye weeks; each school has specific requests the schedule-makers must consider; and the Big Ten’s media partners have input, as well.
(These issues exist for all the conferences to various degrees, by the way.)
The malleability from one year to the next exists primarily in the sequencing of games.
For the most part, the degree-of-difficulty is roughly comparable for 13 or 14 teams while a handful face unusually easy sequences or unusually difficult sequences. It’s impossible to make everything equal with 18 teams playing nine games.
When it comes to the 2026 schedule specifically, no team has a more daunting challenge than Northwestern. The Wildcats have an early bye (Sept. 12), then play 11 consecutive weeks.
(The school’s decision to schedule a non-conference game in October, against Ball State, contributed to the outcome.)
Indiana probably isn’t thrilled with playing consecutive road games (Rutgers and Nebraska) immediately before back-to-back showdowns with Ohio State (home) and Michigan (road).
And as we referenced in a previous column on the Big Ten schedule, Oregon’s November is nasty with Ohio State, Michigan and Washington.
But generally, there were few instances of teams receiving the short straw on the sequencing front.
Why don’t you cover the ACC in the same way you do the Big Ten and Big 12? Is it because there are only two former Pac-12 schools in the ACC? — @StripsNDips
Fair question, for sure. And yes, the limited number of Pac-12 legacy schools competing in the ACC (two) compared to the Big 12 (four) and Big Ten (four), certainly plays a role.
But the explanation is a bit deeper, and broader.
The Hotline’s core readership is based in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones. That has been the case for years and has remained true in the post-realignment era.
What’s more, our syndication partners are in the region: Spokane, Seattle, Portland, Salt Lake City, Denver, Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix and Tucson.
Within that footprint, there’s very little interest in the ACC unless a development in Charlotte impacts other conferences — for example: The legal settlement with Florida State and Clemson last spring.
In our view, the terms of the deal reset the sport’s Doomsday Clock, and we authored a column on the issue.
Put another way, the Hotline publishes ACC commentary/news from one of two buckets: conference issues at the 40,000-foot level; or Cal and Stanford content that is specific to our local readership through the Bay Area News Group.
*** 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