ATLANTA — The SEC and Big Ten are scheduled to hold a second joint meeting of their athletic directors next month, where conference leaders are expected to deeply explore the future of the College Football Playoff format.

The meeting — set for Feb. 19 in New Orleans — comes a week before CFP commissioners meet in Dallas to discuss the future of the playoff, its format and governance structure. Those with knowledge of the meeting spoke to Yahoo Sports under condition of anonymity.

The SEC’s and Big Ten’s gathering marks a second step in the budding relationship between two leagues that announced a partnership last spring. Their athletic directors met in Nashville in October, a historic event and one of the first gatherings of two major conference administrators in recent NCAA history.

The Feb. 19 meeting is expected to focus on CFP format and governance as well as the transition into a post-settlement world with athlete revenue sharing. The NCAA and power leagues’ landmark settlement of the House case is up for approval in April and implementation in July.

But perhaps the most interesting topic is the expanded playoff’s future format.

As part of an agreement struck last spring, the Big Ten and SEC believe they have authority over any change to the playoff format starting with the 2026 postseason, the first of a new six-year extension of the CFP. Changes for the 2025 playoff — unlikely at this point — require unanimity among the 10 FBS conference commissioners and Notre Dame’s athletic director.

While executives agreed on a future revenue distribution model last spring — weighted heavily for the SEC and Big Ten — a future format was not finalized. But certain “protections” were agreed upon, including an automatic spot for the five highest-ranked conference champions; a 12- or 14-team field; and qualification guarantees for independents like Notre Dame related to their place in the rankings.

The format is a divisive topic at times.

Many expect the Big Ten — and perhaps the SEC too this time — will again propose a format that assigns multiple automatic qualifiers to single conferences.

There is discussion of a 14-team model that designates four automatic qualifiers each to the SEC and Big Ten; two each to the ACC and Big 12; one to the best Group of Five champion; and one at-large, intended for Notre Dame if it finishes ranked inside the top 14 (or, if not, the next-highest ranked team after the automatic qualifiers are selected). Officials describe it as a 4-4-2-2-1+1 model, with the top two seeds receiving a first-round bye. It is a way, too, in limiting the subjectivity and power of the selection committee.

The Big Ten made a similar proposal during meetings last spring that was roundly rejected. That proposal featured one less automatic qualifier for the SEC and Big Ten and more at large spots: 3-3-2-2-1+3. In either proposal, conference championship games likely become less valuable and a reimagined championship weekend could feature conference play-in games for the automatic berths, something Yahoo Sports reported last month.

On Sunday, in an interview with ESPN, ACC commissioner Jim Phillips says his league is weighing possible changes to championship game weekend, suggesting a play-in style tournament.

“The conference championship games are important, as long as we make them important, right?” Phillips said. “Do you play two versus three? You go through the regular season and whoever wins the regular season, just park them to the side, and then you play the second-place team versus the third-place team in your championship game. So you have a regular-season champion, and then you have a conference tournament or postseason champion.”

Many believe that conference championship games within an expanded playoff need re-evaluation — a story Yahoo Sports explored last month. However, conference title games are big-time money-makers for the power leagues and are tethered to their league TV contracts.

If the 4-4-2-2-1+1 model were used this year, the SEC and Big 12 would have each gotten one more team into the field (Alabama and Iowa State).

The two conferences have plenty to discuss outside of the CFP too.

The power league commissioners are making key decisions in the transformation of college sports into a more professionalized entity — rife with unprecedented issues like the situation between Wisconsin and Miami. The P4 has created a “transition team” of athletic directors from the Big Ten, SEC, Big 12 and ACC to explore issues.

The leagues are responsible for creating a new infrastructure to manage and enforce the capped revenue-sharing concept as part of the settlement. Schools will be permitted to distribute NIL pay directly to athletes at a capped amount of at least $20.5 million next academic year.

A new enforcement arm (not the NCAA) will feature a clearinghouse — run by Deloitte — that will approve or reject agreements between athletes and third parties that are affiliated with a school, such as boosters or booster collectives. Members of the seven-person Deloitte clearinghouse team have met with college administrators over the last several weeks in an effort to educate them on the process — one that remains murky as schools already gear up to go above the revenue pool cap.

They became more cloudy last week with the Department of Education’s guidance around Title IX and a Department of Justice’s filing to the judge that criticized the capped pay. Both opinions could soon change as a new presidential administration replaces DOE and DOJ leadership.

There are more hurdles, though. Several objections have been filed against the settlement as they are due by the end of this month. Many of the objections are related to the thousands of roster cuts expected as schools align with the settlement’s new roster and scholarship structure.

Outside of the House case, the power conferences are integral to a reshaped governance model in both the NCAA and CFP. In fact, the power conferences proposed a governance model that expands their autonomous legislation powers within the NCAA and also grants them decision-making powers in the postseason NCAA championships.

When the two conferences met last in October, athletic directors also discussed a scheduling arrangement with one another. Such moves could generate additional revenue to the leagues, presumably from television networks seeking matchups of the biggest brands in the sport.

Discussions are expected to go beyond the regular season with the possibility of what officials describe as an “overhauled postseason” for those programs not advancing to the CFP. Administrators are exploring ways to arrange more matchups that pair teams from the two leagues as opposed to their current bowl agreement pairings. The bowl agreements expire after the 2025 season.

All of it is an effort to generate untapped revenue at a time when schools are bracing to spend more than $20 million annually in an athlete revenue-sharing concept tied to the House antitrust settlement.

To that end, SEC school executives continue to discuss adding a ninth conference game starting in 2026 (the Big Ten already plays nine). The conference is somewhat split on the concept, and a requirement for any ninth league game involves receiving extra revenue from ESPN, the league’s media rights holder.