College football really needs a commissioner, or better yet a czar, to lead the sport into the future.

While I am plenty busy with my day job, I would be more than willing (for a couple of bucks, of course) to sit atop the college football world and help shape the sport in positive direction.

Some of my suggestions (or edicts if I truly am the czar and given power to make and change policy) will seem like no-brainers, others may be a little bit more controversial.

There will be a few topics that I will just stay away from in this fun series. I really don’t want to tackle NIL (name, image, likeness) but don’t let that lead you to believe that I am against it, I am just not sure how I would implement it best and because of that, and this just being a fun series to start with, I am going to pass on things of a serious nature like that and concussion protocol and a few other issues that really get to the core of things.

At risk of completely changing the structure of conferences (more on that in a minute) then we need to have equal scheduling across the Power Five. Under no circumstances should two leagues play nine conference games, three play eight, some get to play Division I-FCS opponents while other do not, etc.

Some leagues are going to be tougher than other leagues and a ninth league game may not seem as daunting on the surface. And while there may be something to that, the reality is that when it comes to playing league opponents, while there could still be a huge difference in overall talent between the two rosters, there are a couple of factors in play here. First, these are teams that are regular opponents on the schedule, there is yearly scouting, even if it is just through crossover tape. There are no real surprises when you play a conference opponent be it a player that has not shown up on tape, a scheme that is unknown or any other sort of surprise.

Secondly, it is not as if teams that only play eight league games are going out and play two top-teams, a mid-range team and then a low-ranked team. Generally, we are seeing maybe one solid intersectional match-up and then several less desirable games. And at other points, we are seeing some teams put two Division I-FCS teams on the schedule (more on the FCS in a second as well).

The SEC may want you to believe that their schedule is that much more difficult than everyone else’s and while it may be the most difficult in some regards, it is not as if it warrants an extra open week or two by way of playing an extra pair of tomato cans.

This is also not something to bask Division I-FCS programs, we have seen the upsets through the years and there are a couple of programs that perennially put out teams that would be very competitive against lower-level P5 opponents.

We are never going to have true parity under the current makeup of Division I-FBS football between the Power Five and the Group of Five. Nine league games in the SEC or the B1G Will be more difficult than nine league games in the ACC or Pac-12.

But it makes little sense for leagues to set their own parameters in the scheduling and create an unfair advantage with every league having different scheduling tweaks that could help or hinder come decision Sunday.

Anybody who has been part of the community for a number of years knows my view on what the future of college football is going to be and that is a future that will see a top-64 teams (that number could be different but it needs fit the equation) break away and “start their own thing.”

Four 16-team divisions would make a lot more sense than what we have now. Let’s face it, of the 130 teams in Division I-FBS, how many of them really are putting in the same resources as the top teams?

This is not a goal to make the greatness that is college football a smaller thing, but it actually might be more fair to the teams that cannot compete with the top teams to have a playing field where everyone is operating within the some constraints and not hurting opportunity by sending them down a division to FCS and cutting scholarships and ultimately limiting scholarships for players.

Conferences will remain, but just not for college football. There is too much at stake for these associations that deal with much more than athletics, especially when you look at the Big Ten and what it means to be part of that conference with all of the research dollars that are in play (the former CIC is now the Big Ten Academic Alliance).

But are teams going to be able to really compete with the raised stakes of the new world of the NIL, on top of cost of attendance and other expenses that top teams will be in a better position to be a part of?

Is football better off by diluting the schedule with teams that really are not going to be competitive on a weekly basis? Sure, we all love a good upset and a Cinderella story. But this is not the NCAA Basketball Tournament where a double-digit seed is crashing the dance come March.

If the goal is determining a true national champion, it would be better to focus on a smaller number of teams, take the “buy games” off the table and create a 12-game schedule that protects natural rivalries, provides a more balanced schedule for all teams and truly makes every game matter.

College administrators would be against the six home games and six road games that this would create on the schedule and programs all claim to need seven home games to make things work out. But television deals and other sources of revenue associated with this reworking of schedules would certainly make up for any shortfalls that may occur from losing one home gate.

Television partners would be falling all over themselves to secure these deals with these conferences, not having to air top teams against directional sacrificial lambs.

And there are plenty of television partners out there, there would still be a place for the teams that did not follow into this new horizon of college football. And don’t think for a second that people would not watch the remaining FBS teams just because they were not part of this new scheduling alliance. We all have watched some odd games on a Tuesday or Thursday or Friday night, because any football is better than no football.

But this move to break off into a top-64 would make the playoff math work, would make the dollars work and would create a better playing field in football.

So, let’s do it.