By BJ Bennett
SouthernPigskin.com

Follow us at Twitter.com/SouthernPigskin.  Become a fan at the SouthernPigskin.com Facebook Page

Even on the brink of the start of another season, it seems like there are just as many shoulder shrugs as shoulder pads.

There is so much to say about college football right now. For me, much of it starts with “I don’t know”. Sometimes it’s easiest to get right to the point. I don’t know. I have lots of ideas, but I don’t have many answers. Who does? And what, exactly, are the questions? I very much care. I’m somewhere between compelled and concerned. I also am somewhat confused. What is next? I don’t know.

As we look ahead to college football’s future and I hold my hand over my brow and squint, I don’t have much of an idea at what I’m looking at or, as the purview changes from day-to-day, what I’m looking for. Not only do more questions than answers await on the sprint-turfed horizon, we sometimes don’t even know what to ask. Forget what is the next game…what is the end game? The sport’s unanimous number one, at this point, seems to be uncertainty, which is currently undefeated and undeterred.

Even on the brink of the start of another season, it seems like there are just as many shoulder shrugs as shoulder pads.

Needless to say, it’s difficult to come up with a play when you don’t have the exact down or the distance. Though there has always been controversey in college football, the latest points and counterpoints are quickly running up the score. Moving forward, there doesn’t appear to be much agreement on logistical basics like how to determine a champion, how entry to that postseason tournament should be determined, what type of non-conference games should be played or what conferences, overall, should even look like.

Debate is college football’s new All-American consensus.

The sport has long needed an update on many fronts. From access to amauterism, much of that development is happening all at once. There are countless different perspectives, motivations and interests at play. And it’s difficult to see through the proverbial trenches, moving from what the sport is to what the sport could or should be. Or what we even want it to be or who “we” even are. There is a lot of traffic at this line of scrimmage, much of it moving in different directions. The NCAA has been lost in the shuffle.

Watching the discussion ebb and flow has been a competition all its own. Whether it has been College Football Playoff format changes, conference expansion considerations or the idea of future partnerships, we have eagerly sprinted between speculation and declaration and have already turned back for yet another lap. So much has come and gone so fast that it’s tough to keep track of where we are on the track. Is whatever is upcoming the finish line or a new starting point?

The massive news of the SEC adding Oklahoma and Texas dramatically accelerated whatever timeline there is, sending college sports spinning. An announced alliance between the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12 may simply be those leagues scrambling to call timeout. How the unofficial three-conference agreement works in terms of collective bargaining, scheduling implications and postseason influences is yet to be determined. Clearly, an acknowledgement of the unknown was a leading part of the basis for the accord.

If the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12 are going to enter uncharted territory, they appear to be doing it together.

Does this sudden, abstract alignment of 41 teams come with more clarity or more confusion? Though we still don’t know the Ultimate Question, the answer, from the supercomputer Deep Thought in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, was 42.

All of this has been difficult to process, much less predict. The design of the incredibly popular College Football Playoff is an obvious catalyst for the brave, new world. Teams want leverage and teams make up leagues. This is all about positioning. As the final four undoubtedly expands, conferences want to make sure their profiles grow right alongside. What is fascinating is that even though it isn’t yet known how many teams will make playoff 2.0 or how bids will be awarded, the lobbying is well underway.

Understandably, college football is arguing with the officials before the call has even been made.

When setting a new depth chart, which is essentially what is happening in the sport, not everybody is going to be happy. College football very much needed an update, but it has been tough to figure out how and tough to figure out when. Some of this has been inevitiable. The reality is that this is a billion dollar business with an ever-changing infrastructure that is being built and rebuilt as we speak. It’s only likely to continue, as options are weighed, for quite some time.

Will there be new superconferences or direct Group of Five representation? More league games or increased non-conference pairings? More league partnerships or more conference autonomy? Will the College Football Playoff expand to eight or 12 teams or even stay at four? How will revenue be shared and distrubted? What is the future of media rights? How are these decisions made? Who makes them? What is the timetable? What are the goals? Do we even know yet?

There is just so much to discuss. As we are still very early in this transformation, it’s obviously great to have ideas. Innovation will lead college football forward. Consideration will, too. It’s also okay, however, to say “I don’t know”. Especially when we don’t, especially when there is barely even an outline. One way or another, college football, through alliances and realignment, is a reflection of that ambiguity.

College football is absolutely awesome. So are the student-athletes who make it so special. How to best champion all of it has to be priority number one.

“I don’t know”, of course, can’t continue forever. That said, it can also be something to start with. For now, it might just be the one topic where everybody agrees.