For the last 20 years, the chaos in college football has often been blamed on a lack of leadership. But now, two powerful players, the Big Ten and SEC, are stepping into control.
This week, leaders from these conferences are gathering in New Orleans. Their aim? To reshape the College Football Playoff (CFP) system.
Beginning in 2026, they plan to expand the playoff to include 14 or 16 teams. Each of the Power 2 conferences would automatically secure four spots, while the ACC and Big 12 would have two, and the Group of 5 would get one. This leaves a slim selection of one to three at-large bids for other teams.
This move seems both extreme and unnecessary. The Power 2 has already secured favorable terms in the new CFP contract, allowing them to set the agenda. Previously, all 10 FBS conferences needed to agree on changes. Now, the Big Ten and SEC can dictate terms.
The idea of granting four automatic bids isn’t new, but it’s bold after the SEC’s mixed performance, earning just three bids last season. The first year of the 12-team playoff had its flaws, especially regarding seeding and byes, but it also brought fresh excitement. Teams like Arizona State, Indiana, and SMU got their chance to shine, adding vigor to bowl season.
Formalizing such a biased structure from the start could undermine the playoff’s integrity. Big Ten and SEC leaders might argue that their approach reflects the current landscape of college football. But many forget that they played a significant part in shaping it. Oklahoma and Texas didn’t merely join the SEC; they were recruited. The Pac-12 would likely still be viable if the Big Ten hadn’t expanded by adding USC and UCLA.
Big Ten and SEC officials might also insist that this model decreases inconsistency in selections, leaning on league standings rather than subjective committee decisions. But their own league’s confusing tiebreakers can be just as arbitrary.
If the proposed system had been in place last season, the SEC’s bids might have gone to teams like Texas and Georgia, along with a tie-breaker scenario for the last entry. A tiny difference in win percentages could mean the difference between playoff glory and a lesser bowl.
The irony doesn’t escape many observers. Over the past few years, these conferences have criticized other sweeping changes, such as the emergence of NIL deals and transfer portals. Still, those changes have actually created more balance and made playoffs accessible for more teams.
However, the recent wave of realignment poses a real threat to college football’s popularity. Many schools have lost traditional rivalries or have been marginalized. Making these divisions official in playoff selection could alienate fans beyond the Power 2 conferences.
Despite their dominance, the Big Ten and SEC only represent 25% of all FBS schools. Alienating the remaining 75% isn’t a sound strategy.
They are already reaping significant rewards, with a share of the existing $1.3 billion TV deal and at least two additional playoff games on the horizon. This wealth boost may not be shared equally, potentially leading to even more disparities in college football.
The need for more TV money is clear, but it raises questions. At what cost does this ambition come? The Big Ten and SEC might be popular, but their self-interest could risk turning away a large portion of college football fans.
Source link
Temple Owls, Connecticut Huskies, Cincinnati Bearcats, UCF Knights, East Carolina Pirates, South Florida Bulls, SMU Mustangs, Tulane Green Wave, Tulsa Golden Hurricane, Houston Cougars, Memphis Tigers, Navy Midshipmen, Louisville Cardinals, Clemson Tigers, Florida State Seminoles, Syracuse Orange, North Carolina State Wolfpack, Wake Forest Demon Deacons, Boston College Eagles, Virginia Tech Hokies, Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets, Pittsburgh Panthers, North Carolina Tar Heels, Virginia Cavaliers, Miami Hurricanes, Duke Blue Devils, Oklahoma Sooners, Kansas Jayhawks, West Virginia Mountaineers, Baylor Bears, Texas Longhorns, Iowa State Cyclones, Texas Tech Red Raiders, Kansas State Wildcats, Oklahoma State Cowboys, TCU Horned Frogs, Maryland Terrapins, Indiana Hoosiers, Michigan State Spartans, Ohio State Buckeyes, Michigan Wolverines, Penn State Nittany Lions, Rutgers Scarlet Knights, Minnesota Golden Gophers, Illinois Fighting Illini, Wisconsin Badgers, Nebraska Cornhuskers, Northwestern Wildcats, Purdue Boilermakers, Iowa Hawkeyes, Middle Tennessee Blue Raider, College Football, Opinion, Sports Business
