Decision time for the FA
The Council will rightly be concerned about the FA's future revenue stream, although finding a way through the TV rights maze and coming out the other side without taking a serious financial whacking is a headache for the Executive Board rather than the ultimate decision-making body of the English game.
One decision the Council will have to make, however, could potentially cost the FA tens of millions of pounds.
It will be asked to sign off the FA's new doping regulations even though, at the time of writing, there's serious doubt as to whether they will be compliant with the new World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) code as favoured by the organisation and its president John Fahey.
If they're not, UK Sport is expected to suspend the FA from the national drug-testing programme, which, in turn, will oblige the likes of Sport England to ask whether it can continue to fund a sport which isn't code compliant.
The public funding guidelines say it shouldn't.
The Sport England Whole Sport Plan for football is worth £25.6m to the FA over the next four years.
It is money that should go directly to grass-roots funding, which raises yet another dilemma.
At a time when the Government's focus is all on getting more people to play more sport, torpedoing grass-roots funding looks like a seriously retrograde step.
Perhaps the money could be diverted through another investment platform, like the Football Foundation, but that wouldn't be straightforward or, I understand, terribly desirable.
So the simple solution is to make sure the doping regulations are code compliant.
Everyone else seems to have managed it - rugby, golf, tennis - so what's football's problem? It's this: the testing pool.
UK Sport say it has the responsibility of deciding who goes into the elite pool of footballers obliged to give individual details of their whereabouts for an hour a day, 365 days a year.
That pool will be made up of a maximum of 30 players, which, as I understand it, UK Sport would want to include England squad players.
As previously discussed here, that means Wayne Rooney would have to say where he and Coleen are going to be on their summer holidays for an hour a day so the testers can come and find him.
This idea appears to be anathema to football, despite the fact other sports have accepted it.
I hear rumblings about proportionality and detect concerns about legal action from individual players if they're obliged to do something their counterparts in other nations might not be asked to do.
Fifa's published roadmap to Wada, explaining how the world governing body intends to become 'code-compliant', says that the testing pool should be risk-focused, only consisting of those players returning from serious injury and those who've tested positive before.
Instead of filing individual whereabouts, everyone else would go into team-based whereabouts testing, which means, for example, that if the testers want to locate any Manchester United players, then they'll be told to turn up at the club's Carrington training headquarters every Tuesday morning from 10am.
Fifa says Wada has indicated this is OK. Wada privately find football's attitude arrogant but is playing a long game, insisting it will say nothing more until the new code has been in operation for 12 months and it has had chance to assess it.
At the same time, Wada is telling UK Sport to allow no exceptions and no concessions, that the FA has to meet the requirements of the code. Which explains why hurried final negotiations have been taking place.
The regulations put before the FA Council may yet be OK and withholding funding turn out to be a worst case scenario, but I know of a few who are holding their breath.