Big Ten coach calls out anti-West Coast bias in College Football Playoff system
The first season of the 12-team College Football Playoff certainly created plenty of controversy. While ultimately, most people felt as though the selection committee took the correct 12 teams, the process of getting there was anything but smooth.
This week, a Big Ten head coach called out the committee for alleged bias against West Coast schools. Interestingly, however, the coach in question is not in charge of a West Coast program himself. Rather, the man behind the comments, was, of all people, Penn State head coach James Franklin.
"There's a lot of challenges," Franklin said, via CBS Sports. "You've got East Coast people voting on this, and they haven't watched enough of the West Coast games based on the time. All the different rankings that are out there. In my mind, a formula makes the most sense because it takes the bias out that we all have."
Franklin's proposed solution to the matter was going back to a BCS-style formula to determine the rankings.
"It's funny, because I think there's all these complaints about the BCS, but then we go to this, and I think it goes back to really, my answer is, the problem is, everybody voting and everybody involved in the process—whether you want to be biased or not, we all are biased. I think in a lot of ways, you could make the argument a formula could be better. But we didn't love the formula. So we went to this other system."
USC fans know all too well, however, that leaving the rankings to the computers does not always work out. After all, back in 2003, the Trojans infamously got screwed out of the BCS Championship Game despite being ranked No. 1 in both the AP and Coaches Polls.
However, Franklin's point about the current system having major issues is certainly a valid one. Perhaps one day, college football will be able to come up with a method of selecting a postseason field that will not inevitably make people mad. Right now, however, that day feels like a long way in the distance.
As for Franklin, his comment was not entirely altruistic. Given that Penn State plays in the same conference as four West Coast schools, USC, Oregon, Washington, and UCLA getting more national respect could certainly help the Nittany Lions' resume in seasons to come.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rece Davis ranks his preseason top 10 college football teams
ESPN "College GameDay" host Rece Davis is also a voter in the AP Poll. Davis recently ranked the top 25 college football teams in the country on his AP Poll ballot. Davis ranks the Clemson Tigers as his No. 1 team in the country. He was one of four AP Poll voters to rank Clemson No. 1. Additionally, he ranks Penn State No. 2, Texas No. 3, LSU No. 4 and Ohio State No. 5. We'll find out in Week 1 just how good most of Davis' top five teams are. Texas opens the season at Ohio State while LSU opens the season at Clemson. Davis ranks the Georgia Bulldogs as the No. 8 team in the country. He's a bit lower on Georgia than most other college football experts, but it is understandable. Georgia enters the 2025 season with a lot of questions after losing a significant amount of talent to the transfer portal and having 13 players selected in the 2025 NFL draft. Davis still needs to see how Gunner Stockton performs to have more confidence in the Dawgs. Rece Davis' top 10 college football teams Clemson Tigers Penn State Nittany Lions Texas Longhorns LSU Tigers Ohio State Buckeyes Notre Dame Fighting Irish Alabama Crimson Tide Georgia Bulldogs Oregon Ducks Arizona State Sun Devils Follow UGAWire on Instagram or Threads for more Georgia Bulldogs coverage! This article originally appeared on UGA Wire: Where Rece Davis ranks Georgia football in his preseason top 10
Los Angeles Times
3 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Sierra Canyon's Mikhal Johnson is one of many difference-makers on defensive line
Sixth in a series of stories profiling top high school football players by position. Today, Mikhal Johnson, Sierra Canyon defensive lineman. Mikhal Johnson, 6 feet 2 and 255 pounds, has played defense all his football life. Then came the moment last season when Sierra Canyon coach Jon Ellinghouse gave him a chance to catch a pass from quarterback Wyatt Becker in a Mission League championship game against Gardena Serra. Johnson called it 'something out of a movie.' 'We practiced it a couple times during the week,' Johnson said. 'Coach called me over, 'We're running the play.' I lined up at tight end. I did a fake block. I go out, nobody is guarding me. This is it. Wyatt throws me the ball over my shoulder. I catch it. It was like, 'Yes.' I was so excited. My first ever touchdown the first time I played a skill position in my life.' Nothing comes as a surprise for Johnson, who also had a baseball game in the spring in which he hit two home runs and had seven RBIs against Camarillo. Ivy League football schools have been lining up trying to get him to consider their experience of academics and athletics. He had 16 tackles for losses last season. 'I think he's almost unblockable,' Ellinghouse said. 'I've seen him screw up several of my practices and go up against some the best high school players in the world. He's a perfect combination of strength and twitchiness. He has long arms and deceptive strength.' Johnson is one of many outstanding defensive linemen and edge rushers set to make an impact this season. The position might be the strongest of any in Southern California when considering talent and depth. Richard Wesley of Sierra Canyon changed his classification to class of 2026 because he's been a standout since freshman year and is a Texas commit. Mater Dei has the most dominant lineman in Tomuhini Topui, a 315-pound USC commit known for throwing around blockers and running backs. Khary Wilder of Gardena Serra, an Ohio State commit, is coming off a junior season in which he recorded 11 tackles for losses. Andrew Williams of Fremont is a 6-5, 220-pound USC commit trying to prove you can still make it out of the City Section. Sophomore Marcus Fakatou of Orange Lutheran and junior ElijaHarmon of Inglewood are big, strong and intimidating young stars in the making. Anthony Jones of Crean Lutheran is a UCLA commit known for his pass-rushing skills. Malik Brooks of St. Pius X-St. Matthias is a 330-pound tackle committed to USC who knows how to take apart double teams. Devyn Blake of Edison has the size to cause havoc. Elijah Staples of Marquez is a defensive end who had 13 sacks as a sophomore. Dutch Horisk of St. John Bosco is an Oregon commit who had four sacks last season. There's many defensive linemen this season ready to be difference-makers, and Johnson fits right in. He has used baseball to help him excel in football. 'I feel they both help me,' he said. 'Baseball is good hands-eye coordination and because I'm a defensive linemen I use my hands a lot. Seeing a baseball, the reaction time is like an offensive lineman using their hands.' Sierra Canyon is still trying to find a way to get past Mater Dei and St. John Bosco in the Southern Section Division 1 playoffs, a roadblock that most teams in Southern California have failed to get through. 'It's a fire under our butts to keep going,' Johnson said. 'We practice hard.' Monday: Ventura linebacker Tristan Phillips. Malik Brooks, St. Pius X-St. Matthias, 6-4, 330, Sr. USC commit is big roadblock in the middle Marcus Fakatou, Orange Lutheran, 6-7, 265, So. His talent level is off the charts Dutch Horisk, St. St. John Bosco, 6-3, 240, Sr. Four-year starter is Oregon commit Mikhal Johnson, Sierra Canyon, 6-2, 255, Sr. Had 16 tackles for losses Anthony Jones, Crean Lutheran, 6-4, 285, Sr. UCLA commit keeps building up strength Simote Katoanga, Santa Margarita, 6-5, 250, Sr. JSerra transfer is physical specimen Izak Simpson, Simi Valley, 6-3, 260, Sr. Sacramento State commit has 29 sacks the last two years Tomuhini Topui, Mater Dei, 6-3, 320, Sr. USC commit could play for any college in the country Richard Wesley, Sierra Canyon, 6-5, 250, Sr. Texas commit had nine sacks last season Khary Wilder, Gardena Serra, 6-4, 260, Sr. Ohio State commit is four-year starter who shows up every game
New York Times
34 minutes ago
- New York Times
Need a College Football Playoff expansion plan that makes sense? Look to the FCS format
In case you haven't heard, the latest crackpot College Football Playoff expansion idea was presented to Big Ten athletic directors recently. It goes something like this (you're forgiven if you lose track): Either 24 or 28 teams, with the Big Ten and SEC receiving six or seven automatic bids, the Big 12 and ACC receiving two fewer and four slots designated for non-automatic qualifiers. Advertisement Come again? In recent months, CFP expansion has flooded the discourse, with the SEC and Big Ten's standoff over whether there should be a 16-team bracket with five conference champions and 11 at-larges or Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti's plan, which includes four autobids each for his league and the SEC, two each for the Big 12 and ACC, and one for the Group of 5. This is all nonsense. Codifying favored status for a conference into a postseason format is now a four-decade college football tradition, dating back to the Bowl Alliance and Bowl Championship Series days, but that doesn't make it right. Let's course correct, starting with the next iteration of the CFP. There's one Playoff format that has proven to work and would appease almost everyone in the sport. It can be found in the FCS ranks. And it's pretty simple. Twenty-four teams qualify. Ten of them are conference champions. The rest are at-large entrants selected by a committee. The top eight seeds receive a first-round bye, the other 16 play each other, and off we go. Sounds a lot simpler than 4-4-2-2-1-3 or 7-7-5-5-4 or whatever the heck else is floating around. Before you poo-poo the idea and decry an even bigger role for the selection committee, consider the upside. This format provides a path to the Playoff for virtually every team in the FBS. Win your league, and you're in. It's right. It's fair. And it would work. Also, it allows the two wealthiest conferences — the Big Ten and SEC — more teams into the field, via at-large selection. Upset that 9-3 Alabama didn't make it last year? South Carolina, Ole Miss, Missouri and Illinois — also all 9-3 last year — would have made it in such a format. So would Miami from the ACC and BYU from the Big 12, a team that somehow wasn't even in the conversation despite an impressive 10-2 campaign and a road win over a team that made the Playoff last year, SMU. At the end of the day, chances are the SEC and Big Ten would gobble up a large chunk of those 14 at-larges, and the Big 12 and ACC would get a few extras, too. Everybody wins. Advertisement But the FCS format would also create opportunities for schools in other conferences as well. Instead of having 68 teams outside the Power 4 vie for one berth, the American, Conference USA, MAC, Mountain West, Pac-12 (once it has eight teams again in 2026) and Sun Belt would each get one team in the field. Though having a true Cinderella in the CFP is much less likely to develop than it is in the NCAA basketball tournament or other sports because of football's physical nature and the role depth plays, it's still fairer than what we have now. The fact that we have allowed college football as a sport to predetermine which conferences get autobids and which don't without any officially stated objective criteria never sat right with me. If you purport to all be in the same subdivision — the FBS — then every league's champion deserves respect and a seat at the table. 'People have been grandfathered in over the course of time and some have a seat at the table and some don't and they're deemed Autonomous Four and everyone else is not, and here's your one seat at the table to get to the CFP,' Boise State athletic director Jeramiah Dickey told The Athletic in May. 'That just doesn't feel right.' A system like this works in other sports as well, most notably in basketball every March. It works in the NFL — division champions get an auto bid, then wild-card teams get the rest of the berths (via records, not a committee, of course). The biggest sport that has a system similar to what the Big Ten is proposing is European soccer, via the Champions League. Some leagues, like the Premier League, get more bids to the tournament each year than others. It's wildly popular — I'm a fan and I watch it annually — and some may argue that something akin to the Big Ten's proposals makes sense because college football operates more like European soccer than it does the NFL. They have a point, but I still say, why not create a system that gives both equal access to each conference and still allows the 'big dogs' the added opportunities they desire? Advertisement A 24-team field, using the FCS format, would have looked like this last year, using the final CFP rankings and a straight seeding format. For the unranked G5 champs, I used Chris Vannini's final 134 to order them. Byes: Remaining seeds: Now, I know what you might be thinking. The Big Ten isn't doing this for fairness — it's doing it for money. It's true. The idea of installing multiple automatic bids for conferences is a money play. I don't see hordes of fans calling for conferences to get multiple bids. Only conference commissioners — or their coaches, who follow their lead — are advocating for a bigger piece of the financial pie, which, by the way, the Big Ten and SEC already get. When is enough enough? An expanded Playoff is going to mean more money, no matter what format it is, autobids or not. That's not to say the FCS format is necessarily the best solution available. There are other alternatives, like keeping the 12-team format (nothing wrong with that! We're only one year in!) or eliminating autobids, taking the top 12/16/24 teams regardless of conference affiliation. But that increases subjectivity even more. And if you're concerned about going to 24 teams creating a precedent that we're always going to look to expand further, I'm sorry to inform you: We got on that path as soon as we established a Playoff. There will always be advocacy for expansion as long as expanding the postseason equates to more dollars. Even the FCS format has undergone expansion multiple times, from four in 1978 (sound familiar?) to eight in 1981, 12 in 1982, 16 in 1986, 20 in 2010 and the current 24-team format in 2013. If we're going to change the College Football Playoff format, let's do it in a way that doesn't perpetuate an inherently unfair postseason system through multiple conference autobids. Let's use something that has proven to work. It's right there if the power brokers are willing to just open their eyes and ears and, for once, consider the greater good of the sport. (Photo of Cam Miller: George Walker / Icon Sportswire via Getty Images) Spot the pattern. Connect the terms Find the hidden link between sports terms Play today's puzzle
