MITCH HORUCY
Asst. Sports Editor
Figure skating, diving, gymnastics, sometimes mixed martial arts fights and now college football.
All the sports listed are decided based on scores from judges, and not a set time and scoring format.
Now, one of the sports I listed isn’t like the others. That sport is college football.
In 2014, the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) made the switch from the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) National Championship game to the College Football Playoff (CFP).
From 2014-2023, the format was simple, as each of the top four ranked teams in the country made the playoffs. Starting this year, the format has switched to a 12-team playoff with a more complex setup.
The four highest-ranked conference champions get seeds one through four, getting a bye in the first round.
The fifth-highest-ranked conference champion, which would normally be the highest-ranked group-of-five team, will also get an automatic bid, but won’t receive a bye.
The other seven spots are given to the other seven highest-ranked teams.
The new-look playoff hasn’t been the problem thus far.
Instead, it’s been what we’ve seen in years past: brand bias.
Dating back to last year, the Florida State Seminoles went 13-0, winning the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC). However, in the team’s second to last regular season game, they lost their starting quarterback and the 2023 ACC Player of the Year, Jordan Travis, to a devastating injury that ended his season.
Despite the injury, the team finished the year with a win over Florida on the road, and they beat a top-15 team in Louisville in the ACC Championship.
In the final rankings, they dropped a spot in favor of the Alabama Crimson Tide, who won the Southeastern Conference (SEC) championship, but had one loss.
This was the first and only time in the four-team CFP history that an undefeated power-five team missed the playoff.
At the time, it was a polarizing decision, and it still is a year later.
As we approach the final rankings heading into championship weekend, it’s clear that the outrage from the public has had no impact on the committee.
Before getting specific, let’s compare two teams blindly:
Team One:
- 10-2 (6-2)
- 12th strength of record
- 4.5-points average margin of loss
- Losses: @8-5 team and @9-3 team
- First-ranked offense
Team Two:
- 9-3 (5-3)
- 10th strength of record
- 11-points average margin of loss
- Losses: @6-6 team, @10-2 team, @6-6 team
- #11 ranked offense
Team One is the Miami Hurricanes and Team Two is the Alabama Crimson Tide.
Alabama is currently ranked 11 and Miami is at 12.
Alabama is currently the last at-large bid in the playoffs, and it’s looking like they’re going to get in heading into championship weekend.
Committee Chair Warde Manuel was on ESPN’s CFP selection show, and made the statement that teams not playing in conference championships will not have their rankings adjusted.
“[For] any team that is not playing right now, we don’t have a data point to rearrange where we have those teams ranked, and so that is set in terms of how we see them going into the final week of championship week,” said Manuel.
This means there’s no chance Miami can get into the playoff, and that Alabama will likely get in if the current favorites in the ACC and Big 12 Championship games win, as both teams do not play in their conference championships.
Speaking of conference championships, I’d like to point out some logic that the committee uses that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
It happened to the University of Southern California (USC) in 2022 and very well could happen to Southern Methodist University (SMU) this season, and that is being punished for playing in your conference championship game.
In the 2022 season, USC was 11-1 and ranked fourth in the country, but more importantly, they were on track to make the CFP going into the Big 12 Championship game. They ended up losing to Utah, who was ranked 11th in the nation at the time.
Due to this loss, they have dropped six spots back to 10th and missed the playoffs.
Meanwhile, Ohio State, who was sitting at home after not making it to the Big 10 Championship, moved up a spot, making the playoff.
With how the rankings are currently set up, if SMU loses to Clemson in the ACC Championship, the committee will likely drop them out of playoff contention and Alabama will get in.
Punishing a team for playing in their conference championship and rewarding teams that didn’t isn’t fair or reasonable, yet the committee has done it before and will likely continue to do it.
If I were the head coach of the SMU Mustangs, I’d heavily consider not playing in their game, which is completely ridiculous, but it’s a result of how the committee operates.
This is plain and simple SEC bias by the committee, which isn’t new, although most thought it would be stopped once the playoff was expanded.
A few quick examples of this SEC bias taking place have occurred right in front of our eyes.
In Week 13, Miami had a bye and Alabama hosted Mercer, winning 52-7.
In the rankings following that week, Alabama jumped Miami in rankings, meaning that the committee believed that Alabama beating a lower-level school in November was a “meaningful” win.
Another example is that when Miami lost to a 9-3 Syracuse team by four on the road this past weekend, the committee dropped them six spots.
When Alabama lost to a 6-6 Oklahoma team on the road by 21, they were also dropped six spots.
By doing this, the committee is saying a 21-point loss to a 6-6 team is the same as a four-point loss to a 9-3 team, which is ridiculous.
There’s no perfect way to settle the rankings, but with what we’ve seen over the past two seasons, one thing is clear. College football has become a money-making business.
Last season, the NCAA reported that college football brought in roughly $1.3 billion, with Alabama football accounting for $129 million of that revenue.
On the other hand, Miami only brought in $74 million.
Also, if you look at the top 50 most-watched games of last season, Alabama is tied for most in the country with eight.
It’s no secret Alabama is one of, if not the biggest, programs in college football, but that should not be a topic of discussion when ranking teams.
A final argument I’ve seen that I wanted to discuss is the take that since “Team One” would be favored over “Team Two” in a game, they should be ranked higher, end of story.
If we were going to base rankings based on odds made in Las Vegas, why even play a regular season?
Why not just take the top 12 teams in terms of odds to win the championship at the start of the season and have those teams just start in the playoffs?
Not to keep going back to Alabama, but they were a 24.5-point favorite against Vanderbilt and lost.
Ohio State was a 20.5-point favorite against Michigan and lost.
The final example you should note is that Notre Dame was a 28.5-point favorite against Northern Illinois and lost.
There’s a reason we play the games — they should matter when we rank teams. There’s almost no perfect format or formula when it comes to forming a postseason in college football, but it’s disappointing to see the state it’s currently in.