A history of confusion: Untying the knot of NCAA playoff football

(Graphic by Mitchell Fox/INTERMISSION SPORTS)

By Francesco Cautillo

As the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) 136 division one football programs close out a tumultuous season, the league’s playoff committee takes the hot seat. At the end of each year, as the postseason looms, they hold in their hands the fate of the 12 teams who will be selected for the chance to win college football’s most historic trophy.

While most North American sports leagues employ a standings-based playoff system, the NCAA puts their trust in a committee of twelve members including coaches, athletic directors, and retired media members. The chosen few bear the responsibility of selecting which teams make the cut, balancing factors such as wins against conference opponents or overall strength of schedule. 

It sounds simple enough. But over the years, this committee has proven inconsistent, giving false hope to performing programs and unpredictability for viewers. As a result, the football community is puzzled not only by the committee’s decisions but the convoluted factors behind them.

This year, it manifested in one of college football’s biggest controversies. As one team who finished their season on a 10-game win streak questions why they are watching from home, another with a similar record stares at a lopsided scoreboard against them and another eyes the national final, discourse runs rampant.

When the entire college football world is split between three teams, each side weighing heavily on a certain team to be preferred, how does one decide who should get the chance to compete? That’s the question every fan has been asking this playoff season, along with whether or not the committee should discuss a potential expansion to the 12-team system.

Pre-Playoff (1891-2014)

As chaotic as the current formatting is, fans can unanimously agree that anything was better than the pre-playoff era. This era had no committee, no playoffs or knockout games, just straight winners and losers. 

However, they also had ‘ties’. National champions were crowned unanimously by fans and media, but when approached with two first-place contenders holding the same record, the title was shared, with the media glory being split between the networks.

Fans associate this age of football with simplicity. A time before the complications of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals and the player transfer portal. Recruits and players were committed to their program, igniting pent up aggression towards rivalry games and team glory. 

In 2014, the NCAA finally decided to move on as television networks continued to strike major deals with sports leagues across the nation, realizing the association could profit off the broadcasting of additional, high-stakes games.

Four-Team Playoff (2014-2024)

The four-team playoff was by far the most iconic of the eras, introducing the first-ever playoff method. For a decade, two extra elimination games created iconic matchups such as the Rose Bowl game, which was played on New Year’s Day in 2015, 2018, 2021, and 2024. 

These end-of-year “bowl games” meant something more than another line on the schedule. For the four teams chosen, the semi-final bowls symbolized another chance to prove themselves on the national level. The top two teams aimed to claim their rightful place in the final, while the third and fourth-ranked teams sought one last upset to leapfrog their opponents into the national championship. The result is a dramatic display for fans.

However, not all fans were quick to support these matchups, which exposed inequalities embedded within the NCAA. In 2024, AP News reported that college football faithful found the bowl games “became consolation prizes, distorted by player opt-outs and coaching changes.”

Here sparked the original ‘conference bias debate’, which continues today. This theory believes that the two most notable conferences, the Big Ten and South East Conference (SEC), get priority over others, such as the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) and Big Twelve. These conferences have produced the most national championships—with the Big Ten claiming 45 and the SEC claiming 40—and are known to produce not only top talents but some of the largest paycheques in the sporting world. Last May, Amanda Christovich of Front Office Sports highlighted the clash of the conferences and their race to one billion U.S. dollars in annual revenue, with the majority of the income accumulated from television rights. Third-party viewers can’t help but be drawn to this red flag of media representation, which many associate with preference in playoff selection.

After the official announcement of a 12-team playoff format in Dec. 2022, the 4-team era ended with the same controversy it set out to destroy. The Florida State University (FSU) Seminoles fell victim to SEC bias this time, as the undefeated Tallahassee-based university found their fourth playoff spot robbed by the 12-1 Alabama Crimson Tide. The Crimson Tide had taken down the former first-place University of Georgia (UGA) but also lost against the third-ranked Texas Longhorns and struggled against Arkansas and South Florida.

Although the Seminoles were major underdogs against eventual champions Michigan Wolverines, Florida State athletic director Michael Alford told ESPN “The consequences of giving in to a narrative of the moment are destructive, far reaching and permanent”. With the committee’s decision, FSU became the first undefeated Power 5 champion to miss the final four in the playoff era.

Despite the committee coming under fire from this controversy, they only needed to persevere for the 2023-24 post-season, as they knew their plan for 12-team expansion would never create this much backlash. Or so they thought.

12-Team Playoff  (2024-2026)

The committee felt they had struck gold with the original 12-team method, where they seemingly accommodated every possibility. Spots one to four were reserved for the conference champions, which meant there would never be another Florida State scenario. The next six spots (5-11) were reserved for the six highest ranked teams, therefore accommodating for skilled teams who may have lost a conference final in addition to other deserved programs. Finally, the twelfth position was marked for the fifth-highest ranked conference champion, which allowed underdog teams to prove themselves against the nation’s best.

One flaw of this plan was the addition of a first round bye, awarded to the conference champions. Although smaller conference champions like the Arizona State University (ASU) Sun Devils and Boise State University (BSU) Broncos got the recognition they had been stripped of in the 4-team playoff, this doesn’t directly justify playing one less playoff game than other formidable teams. ASU and BSU were ranked ninth and twelfth respectively, but were granted the bye over teams who were statistically better than them. While the Sun Devils put up a fight against third ranked Texas, the Broncos lost by over two touchdowns to the Penn State Nittany Lions. This not only eliminated these two programs from the playoff but damaged the reputation of their respective conferences on the national level.

The following year the NCAA made an adjustment, giving the bye to the top four ranked teams instead of conference champions. Since conference champions were already assumed to have clinched playoff berths, there would be no benefit in giving the bye to a 10-3 conference champion if they beat a 13-0 opponent. This would simply create more chaos by putting a formerly undefeated team against one of the weaker playoff teams, ending in blowout games and less competition.

With the top four spots designated accordingly, the NCAA settled on leaving the eleventh and twelfth spots for the ‘Group of Five’ champions. From there, spots five to ten were selected based on national ranking. However, the playoff selection process did not proceed the way the committee intended.

The chaos - this year’s debacle

Before breaking down the vulnerabilities of the College Football Playoff (CFP), we must track back to gameday one in 2025, where the Notre Dame University Fighting Irish took on the University of Miami Hurricanes at Hard Rock Stadium. From freshmen flares to composed comebacks, the ranked matchup had it all, ultimately ending in a game-winning field goal by the Hurricanes to claim a 27-24 victory. The next week, the Irish fell at home again to a top-15 opponent in the Texas A&M University Aggies, ending with a controversial missed holding call and a walk-off touchdown (Remember this in a couple paragraphs). The Irish then went on to win ten straight, including an important win over the ranked University of South California Trojans.

The Hurricanes also finished the season with a 10-2 record, picking up losses against unranked Southern Methodist University and Louisville University. Led by fifth-year Georgia transfer Carson Beck, the head-to-head win would have been the final push to rank the Hurricanes above the Irish. However, despite an equal record through the final weeks of the season, the committee continued to rank the infamous ‘Gold Helmets’ higher than their Miami rivals and in possession of a playoff spot. This sent fans and writers into a spiral, with seemingly every opinion contradicting the previous in attempting to explain the decision.

All the while, another story was blossoming in Tuscaloosa, as the Crimson Tide also held a 10-2 record. After an embarrassing opening night loss to FSU, Alabama dug their way back into the playoff conversation after major wins against third-ranked Georgia Bulldogs and fourteenth-ranked Vanderbilt Commodores.

With three deserving teams and only two spots remaining, it would all come down to the final conference championship week to confirm the placements. TheScore put Notre Dame at -900 odds to qualify, with the remaining spots subject to a battle between the Tide and the Hurricanes, along with competitors Texas and Vanderbilt.

Notre Dame, an independent catholic university, are currently not placed in a conference, meaning they do not get the playoff safety of a championship game. Miami, whose two losses came to conference opponents, were also excluded from participation in the conference championship weekend. This left Alabama as the only team of the three playing that week, with the Crimson Tide and Fighting Irish in possession of the two desired playoff positions.

Conference championships are said to not affect the bracket, but history proves otherwise. In 2017 (4-team playoff), Auburn University were ranked second, but after a twenty-one point loss to the sixth-ranked Georgia Bulldogs in the SEC Championship game, the Tigers were eliminated from playoff contention. This came weeks after Auburn had beaten two top-ranked teams in Georgia and Alabama.

Based on this history, if Alabama lost to UGA in the 2025 SEC Championship, they would most likely be eliminated from playoff contention, putting both Miami and Notre Dame in and ending the ‘head-to-head’ feud the committee has ignited all season. 

Yet this was not the case. Alabama lost to Georgia by twenty-one points but to the shock of many, the 10-3 Crimson Tide were selected above the 10-2 Irish, with Miami jumping their northern rivals to claim the other spot.

Once again, the committee’s inconsistency sparked debate. Some see this as a threat to Notre Dame, a poke in the gut to say their slacking schedules are overdue for a change and the program must join a conference to gain more respect on the national level. Others believe that this is another case of SEC bias, as an Alabama and Oklahoma rematch always sparks a frenzy in the Southeast.

Either way, the confusion continues. No format seems to do the trick when it comes to selecting the nation’s best, while fans are left uncertain of whether a win or loss will even decide their team’s fate. 

A potential solution

While there are a number of solutions the NCAA could employ here, a 16-team playoff would be my recommendation. Going from four to sixteen teams in just a few years may seem excessive, but the 2025 season has shown just how close the competition is.

Of course, it’s not a perfect solution to go bigger. Many CFP reddit users agree that “if the playoffs was one hundred teams, the one hundred and first would be complaining.”

As a fan of upsets and underdogs, I enjoy the inclusion of the ‘Group of Five’ conference champions. But not when we are talking about the twelve best teams in the nation. The Tulane University Green Wave and James Madison University (JMU) Dukes were clinched as the eleventh and twelfth teams respectively this year. In the final Top-25 rankings though, they were twentieth and twenty-fourth respectively. Ultimately, the two teams found themselves outmatched against their first round opponents. Although JMU’s offence shocked and impressed many, both teams were immensely outscored, allowing a combined ninety-one points.

Not to call these teams “undeserving” of a playoff spot or national recognition, but until they prove themselves by scheduling against the football giants of the SEC, Big Ten, or even the ACC or Big Twelve, there will be no way to prove themselves worthy of a CFP spot. 

The ideal sixteen-team playoff would also scrap the first round bye, having the first place team play the sixteenth, and so on. Over the two years of the twelve-team playoff, the bye has proven nothing short of damaging, causing players and teams to lose momentum or preparedness for their games. Out of eight teams who achieved the bye week, only one has advanced, which was the first-ranked Indiana University Hoosiers this season. Simply put, if you are a top-four team, you’ve beaten a plethora of worthy opponents over the course of your season, so a matchup against a 12- to 16-seed should be competitive yet controllable. Of course, teams one to eight would hold home field advantage, giving them the momentum they deserve for their accomplishments over the season.

The chaos of the CFP is just one of many unsolved issues in the NCAA, leaving viewers doubtful of their own committee and the decisions behind the most ludicrous sport in American collegiate athletics. It’s time to find a workable long-term solution, whether with more teams or a new format altogether.