 |
| College football’s bloated leagues are creating negative consequences for the 12-team College Football Playoff. / Kirby Lee-Imagn Images |
The College Football Playoff was supposed to bring clarity. Expand the field, give more teams a chance, and the sport would be fairer and more predictable. Instead, as the first 12-team playoff era unfolds, the race feels more chaotic than ever — not because the format is broken, but because the sport’s decision-makers chased money first and logic second.
Years of conference realignment, TV-driven schedules and power consolidation have created a landscape where the playoff picture is tangled, tiebreakers are confusing and entire conferences are fighting just to stay visible. The chaos isn’t an accident. It’s the predictable outcome of greed.
- Realignment Super-sized conferences have destroyed regional balance and made schedules uneven, turning tiebreakers into weekly arguments.
- Money First TV contracts and streaming deals now dictate who plays when and where, often at the expense of competitive integrity.
- 12-Team CFP The expanded playoff adds access, but it can’t fully fix a system tilted toward the richest leagues.
How We Got Here: Realignment and the Pursuit of Cash
Long before the 12-team playoff kicked off, college leaders reshaped the map of the sport to chase bigger TV deals. Historic leagues were gutted, the Pac-12 essentially vanished, and the Big Ten and SEC grew into coast-to-coast giants loaded with brand-name programs. :contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}
On paper, the realignment era created more “big games” for television — Ohio State vs. USC, Texas vs. Georgia, and so on. In reality, it also:
- Destroyed longstanding regional rivalries that anchored fan interest.
- Added travel strain for athletes in every sport, not just football.
- Turned conferences into oversized collections of brands rather than cohesive leagues.
When conferences balloon to 16 or 18 teams, not everyone plays each other. That means unbalanced schedules, which means more debates about “deserving” vs. “lucky” when playoff spots are on the line. And when billions of dollars are at stake, every perceived slight becomes a national controversy.
Expanded Playoff, Same Old Power Imbalance
The 12-team playoff was sold as a fix: more automatic bids for conference champions, more at-large spots, more chances for outsiders to crash the party. Analysts have argued that expanded access could even stabilize college sports — if the system weren’t operating in such an extreme money-driven era. :contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}
In practice, however, the new format still leans heavily toward the richest leagues. The SEC and Big Ten, with their super-sized memberships and massive media deals, are positioned to grab a disproportionate share of at-large berths in most seasons. When those leagues also benefit from favorable media windows and constant exposure, the perception of superiority becomes reality in the rankings.
The playoff got bigger, but the true power of the sport became even more concentrated — in TV boardrooms and conference offices, not on the field.
Tiebreaker Nightmares and Schedule Gamesmanship
If you want a snapshot of how messy things have become, look at leagues that swelled quickly after the collapse of the Pac-12. The Big 12, for example, is now fighting through multi-team ties and convoluted tiebreakers just to determine who makes its own conference title game, before the playoff committee even gets involved. :contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}
In these super-conferences:
- Teams with identical records may never face each other head-to-head.
- Championship berths can hinge on obscure “common opponent” rules.
- Strength-of-schedule comparisons are distorted by which powers a team skips.
The same dynamics bleed into the playoff race. A program might go 11–1 while missing the league’s top contenders, while another takes two losses against elite opponents and gets punished for daring to play them. The selection committee is left to untangle a mess created by expansion and TV-driven scheduling decisions.
Who Pays the Price?
Players
Athletes face longer seasons, more cross-country travel and higher stakes in every game — all while sorting through coaching changes, NIL deals and transfer-portal churn. They’re the ones burning their bodies on short rest weeks so that networks can stack prime-time kickoffs across multiple days.
Fans
Traditional road trips and regional rivalries are disappearing, replaced by unfamiliar league opponents and neutral-site showcases built for television. Start times bounce from noon to late-night to accommodate broadcast windows, making it harder for fans to attend in person or plan travel.
Left-Behind Programs and Leagues
Schools outside the richest conferences — or in leagues that were weakened by realignment — now have a steeper climb to the playoff. Even when they stack wins, they’re often dismissed as “unproven” because their conference brand doesn’t match that of the SEC or Big Ten. :contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}
What Would a Fairer System Look Like?
1. Smarter Conference Structures
If mega-conferences are here to stay, they need more logical internal structures. Divisions or pods — with guaranteed rotation and protected rivalries — could at least ensure more balanced schedules and clearer paths to league title games. Some observers have even suggested conference semifinal weekends to avoid tiebreaker disasters. :contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}
2. Transparent Tiebreakers and Ranking Criteria
Conferences and the CFP should publish clear, fan-friendly explanations of how they evaluate teams. That means:
- Simple tiebreaker hierarchies that don’t require a legal brief to interpret.
- Publicly available metrics (strength of record, strength of schedule, etc.).
- True weight given to road wins and non-conference challenges.
3. Guardrails on Scheduling
TV partners will always have a say, but leagues can set baseline rules: limits on short-week turnarounds, minimum standards for non-conference scheduling, and protections for key rivalry games. Those decisions would prioritize competitive integrity over one more late-night kickoff window.
4. Revenue That Reflects Risk
As media money grows, schools taking on tougher schedules and longer travel should not be penalized financially compared to those protected by geography or brand. More thoughtful revenue-sharing models could create incentives for balance instead of just chasing the biggest logo matchups.
This Season’s Race: Chaotic by Design
As the regular season winds down, fans are tracking not just wins and losses, but also:
- Which conference title game appearances hinge on tiebreaker math.
- How the committee values one-loss teams from super-leagues vs. unbeaten upstarts.
- Whether a “brand name” with a messy résumé gets the benefit of the doubt over a smaller program with a cleaner record.
None of this is random. The sport chose this path when it prioritized TV money, coast-to-coast realignment and super-leagues over competitive balance and regional identity. The result is a playoff race that feels thrilling and exhausting at the same time — every week matters, but nobody is quite sure what matters most.
Can the Chaos Be Fixed?
The irony is that the playoff itself isn’t the core problem. A 12-team bracket can absolutely work — it gives more players meaningful games and more fans reasons to stay engaged deep into November. But no format can fully overcome a system that keeps bending every other rule in the name of revenue.
College football has always lived in a gray area between amateurism and big business. The difference now is that the money is too big, the decisions too public, and the consequences too obvious to ignore. If the sport wants a playoff race defined by performance rather than politics, it has to decide that competitive integrity is worth more than the next marginal dollar.
Until then, expect more chaos. Not the fun, upset-filled kind that makes college football special — but the slow, grinding kind that comes when greed writes the rules.
0 Comments