Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the structure and governance of the Football Bowl Subdivision postseason should prioritize broad-based athletic opportunity, financial sustainability for college athletics, and competitive balance, and that innovative proposals to expand broad based postseason participation-such as proposals advanced by Coach Mike Leach-warrant serious consideration to mitigate anticompetitive effects in top-division college football.

Summary

Expresses support for expanding the top-division (FBS) college football postseason into a broad, bracketed tournament (examples: 16-, 32-, or 64-team brackets) combined with a redesigned regular season and unified media packaging. Presents data and findings arguing this format could fit the calendar with a shorter regular season, increase meaningful late-season games, preserve competitive balance, better distribute revenue, and be run in a student‑athlete and academic-friendly way.

• Advocates expanding FBS postseason into a broad bracketed tournament (e.g., 16–64 teams) combined with a shorter regular season and unified media packaging.
• Compares FBS current CFP model (small field, concentrated revenue) with larger-championship brackets used in other NCAA divisions.
• Cites financial data showing many FBS programs run deficits and that CFP revenues are highly concentrated among a few conferences.
• Presents projections and claims that national packaging or pooling could unlock $4–$7 billion of additional value.
• Argues the bracketed model could increase meaningful late-season games and distribute benefits more widely.
• Asserts calendar feasibility and compatibility with student‑athlete academic obligations if the regular season is redesigned.
• Does not enact rules or funding; it records findings and supports a particular postseason and media approach.
• Implementation would require major coordination among conferences, the NCAA, broadcasters, and institutions.