College Football Playoff seeding change is SEC, Big Ten power move
Until they couldn't -- until their false bravado of public statements wilted in the face of reality.
So it should come as no surprise that the College Football Playoff announced Thursday that this season's 12-team bracket would be a straight-seeded format.
No more highest-ranked conference champions earning first-round byes, a format that benefits the ACC, Big 12 and Group of Five. No more Mr. Nice Guy from the Big Ten and SEC.
"After evaluating the first year of the 12-team Playoff, the CFP Management Committee felt it was in the best interest of the game to make this adjustment," said Rich Clark, executive director of the CFP.
Translation: the SEC and Big Ten said take it or leave it, and the rest of the Football Bowl Subdivision conferences fell in line.
More damning: this is just the beginning of the Big Ten and SEC power play -- and there's nothing anyone can do about it.
If you don't believe it, consider this: any change to the final year of first CFP contract needed a unanimous vote.
The next CFP contract beginning with the 2026 season, which will effectively be controlled exclusively by the Big Ten and SEC, doesn't.
TOP 10 RANKING: Identifying the best SEC college football rivalries
BAD IDEA: College football hiring CEO going to be another typical failure
So if the minority didn't agree with the majority on the straight seeding for 2025 (which they could have), they may as well have signed their own pink slips for the next CFP contract.
The Big Ten and SEC control everything - format and financials - beginning in 2026. A new 16-team format will likely exceed $1.2 billion in revenue annually, and no one wants to be left out.
So while Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark and ACC commissioner Jim Phillips have accomplished some heavy lifting to save their respective conferences, while the Group of Five conferences have done all they can to hang on for revenue scraps, the Big Ten and SEC have doubled down and flexed.
It's their postseason world, the rest of college football is just surviving in it. And the Big Ten and SEC haven't even begun to take big swings yet.
Soon enough - more than likely shortly after the SEC spring meetings next week in Destin, Florida - the College Football Playoff will announce the format for 2026 and beyond.
It wasn't long ago that the Big 12 and ACC were publicly questioning a move to 16 teams, and against the idea that the Big Ten and SEC would be gifted four automatic qualifiers each -- or half of the field.
It wasn't long ago that Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti and SEC commissioner Greg Sankey floated the idea that maybe, with the new contract, they wouldn't use a committee to pick the field -- or they would, but it would be tweaked. Shoot, maybe they'd bring back computer polls.
Understand this: the Big Ten and SEC aren't floating ideas publicly (or leaking them) to gain an understanding of how far things can be pushed. They're telling you what they're doing.
And then they're going to do it.
When the SEC meets next week in Destin, the league could finally and officially approve a nine-game conference schedule. This will put the Big Ten (which already plays a nine-game conference schedule) and SEC on an even playing field, and eliminate the final point of structural friction between the conferences.
It will also send a shot across the bow to everyone else in college football. The two super conferences are now in lockstep in format and focus, and they're going after big financial paydays.
If you don't like how we structure the postseason beginning in 2026, we'll take our ball and have our own playoff. Better yet, we'll schedule each other in non-conference games, and effectively shut out the rest of the sport.
There's a reason the Big Ten and SEC have been talking about an expanded non-conference schedule for nearly a year. Network television (and eventually streaming) wants more Big Ten vs. SEC.
So don't be shocked when the new 2026 CFP format includes an expanded championship week prior to the beginning of the playoff. That week - which long has been a standalone week for conference championship games - would include a championship game and three play-in games from the Big Ten and SEC.
The teams playing in the two championship games, and the winners of the play-in games, would advance to the CFP. That's four automatic qualifiers each from the Big Ten and SEC.
More problematic for the ACC and Big 12 (and Group of Five): the Big Ten and SEC play-in games will suck the oxygen (not to mention, television money) from that final regular-season weekend.
More games, more television inventory, more revenue for the elite 34 schools of college football.
The ACC and Big 12 would get two automatic qualifiers each beginning in 2026, Notre Dame would be guaranteed a spot if it's ranked in the top 16, and the highest-ranked Group of Five conference champion would also earn a spot.
That leaves three at-large spots in a 16-team field. Three spots for the Big Ten and SEC to more than likely share, or earn a majority -- based, more than anything, on strength of schedule.
It's all there, plain to see. The Big Ten and SEC are telling us how they're going to take over college football, and it's time we start listening.
This is just the beginning, everyone. And there's nothing anyone can do about it.
Matt Hayes is the senior national college football writer for USA TODAY Sports Network. Follow him on X at @MattHayesCFB.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
2 days ago
- Glasgow Times
Ten amazing pictures of huge cycling event across Glasgow
City centre roads closed for the Lloyds Tour of Britain Women as a huge crowd gathered to watch. Following a thrilling race, Ally Wollaston sealed the title by the narrowest of margins ahead of Cat Ferguson. Speaking on her victory, she said: 'I am feeling very overwhelmed, it is so exciting and it really couldn't have gone any better for me today. I was lucky that there were a lot of seconds up for grabs. "The plan was to get as many seconds as I could, and unfortunately, Cat was on my wheel for every single one, so it really came down to the last sprint. 'The team were so amazing today, I really couldn't have done it without them. I'm just so grateful for the work that they did. I couldn't be happier in this team, so I am very grateful for the support I have received over the last four days. 'Mum and Dad will be a bit shocked, I imagine. I called them last night and said that the plan was to go for all three bonus sprints, and I said Cat will probably be thinking the same thing! I think they will be super proud back home.' Here are ten wonderful pictures of the event. READ NEXT: Hotel near SEC to get whole new look after refurb (Image: (Image: (Image: (Image: (Image: (Image: (Image: (Image: (Image: (Image:
NBC News
4 days ago
- NBC News
U.S. judge approves $2.8 billion settlement, paving way for colleges to pay athletes millions
A federal judge signed off on arguably the biggest change in the history of college sports Friday, clearing the way for schools to begin paying their athletes millions of dollars as soon as next month as the multibillion-dollar industry shreds the last vestiges of the amateur model that defined it for more than a century. Nearly five years after Arizona State swimmer Grant House sued the NCAA and its five biggest conferences to lift restrictions on revenue sharing, U.S. Judge Claudia Wilken approved the final proposal that had been hung up on roster limits, just one of many changes ahead amid concerns that thousands of walk-on athletes will lose their chance to play college sports. The sweeping terms of the so-called House settlement include approval for each school to share up to $20.5 million with athletes over the next year and $2.7 billion that will be paid over the next decade to thousands of former players who were barred from that revenue for years. The agreement brings a seismic shift to hundreds of schools that were forced to reckon with the reality that their players are the ones producing the billions in TV and other revenue, mostly through football and basketball, that keep this machine humming. The scope of the changes — some have already begun — is difficult to overstate. The professionalization of college athletics will be seen in the high-stakes and expensive recruitment of stars on their way to the NFL and NBA, and they will be felt by athletes whose schools have decided to pare their programs. The agreement will resonate in nearly every one of the NCAA's 1,100 member schools boasting nearly 500,000 athletes. The road to a settlement Wilken's ruling comes 11 years after she dealt the first significant blow to the NCAA ideal of amateurism when she ruled in favor of former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon and others who were seeking a way to earn money from the use of their name, image and likeness (NIL) — a term that is now as common in college sports as 'March Madness' or 'Roll Tide.' It was just four years ago that the NCAA cleared the way for NIL money to start flowing, but the changes coming are even bigger. Wilken granted preliminary approval to the settlement last October. That sent colleges scurrying to determine not only how they were going to afford the payments, but how to regulate an industry that also allows players to cut deals with third parties so long as they are deemed compliant by a newly formed enforcement group that will be run by auditors at Deloitte. The agreement takes a big chunk of oversight away from the NCAA and puts it in the hands of the four biggest conferences. The ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC hold most of the power and decision-making heft, especially when it comes to the College Football Playoff, which is the most significant financial driver in the industry and is not under the NCAA umbrella like the March Madness tournaments are. Roster limits held things up The deal looked ready to go since last fall, but Wilken put a halt to it after listening to a number of players who had lost their spots because of newly imposed roster limits being placed on teams. The limits were part of a trade-off that allowed the schools to offer scholarships to everyone on the roster, instead of only a fraction, as has been the case for decades. Schools started cutting walk-ons in anticipation of the deal being approved. Wilken asked for a solution and, after weeks, the parties decided to let anyone cut from a roster — now termed a 'Designated Student-Athlete' — return to their old school or play for a new one without counting against the new limit. Wilken ultimately agreed, going point-by-point through the objectors' arguments to explain why they didn't hold up. 'The modifications provide Designated Student-Athletes with what they had prior to the roster limits provisions being implemented, which was the opportunity to be on a roster at the discretion of a Division I school,' Wilken wrote Winners and losers The list of winners and losers is long and, in some cases, hard to tease out. A rough guide of winners would include football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, which will devote much of their bankroll to signing and retaining them. For instance, Michigan quarterback Bryce Underwood's NIL deal is reportedly worth between $10.5 million and $12 million. Losers, despite Wilken's ruling, figure to be at least some of the walk-ons and partial scholarship athletes whose spots are gone. Also in limbo are Olympic sports many of those athletes play and that serve as the main pipeline for a U.S. team that has won the most medals at every Olympics since the downfall of the Soviet Union. All this is a price worth paying, according to the attorneys who crafted the settlement and argue they delivered exactly what they were asked for: an attempt to put more money in the pockets of the players whose sweat and toil keep people watching from the start of football season through March Madness and the College World Series in June. What the settlement does not solve is the threat of further litigation. Though this deal brings some uniformity to the rules, states still have separate laws regarding how NIL can be doled out, which could lead to legal challenges. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been consistent in pushing for federal legislation that would put college sports under one rulebook and, if he has his way, provide some form of antitrust protection to prevent the new model from being disrupted again.
The Herald Scotland
5 days ago
- The Herald Scotland
SEC wants College Football Playoff respect? Stop playing cupcakes
When the scheduling debate resurfaced two years ago, some SEC members expressed reluctance to add another conference game without additional compensation from its media partner. ESPN didn't sweeten the pot. The SEC stayed at eight. The latest excuse? Many SEC coaches feel loath to welcome a ninth conference game without first knowing the College Football Playoff format for 2026 and beyond. What's next, no ninth SEC game until there's peace in the Middle East? I'm losing my appetite for this eight-or-nine debate. The number should be 10 - as in, every power-conference team should play a minimum of 10 games against Power Four opponents. MAN WITH PLAN: Lane Kiffin pushes promising 16-team playoff model BIG DECISION: SEC's Greg Sankey can be hero or villain in playoff debate SEC craves more CFP respect while playing cupcake games The SEC routinely insists it should gain preference from the playoff selection committee because of its run of national championship dominance the past 20 years, plus its strength of schedule. I won't argue that the SEC often boasts the strongest top-to-bottom conference. The SEC's pandering to the playoff committee, though, plays weak considering how the conference structures its schedule. Teams only play half the other members of their 16-team conference, and most only play one Power Four non-conference opponent, while supplementing the schedule with a few layup games. In this era of the ever-expanding playoff, it is time for the SEC to curtail its feast of cupcake games. Either stay at eight conference games, or go to nine - so long as it adds up to 10 games against real competition. Power Four teams playing more games against legitimate opponents - and fewer games against directional schools - would provide clarity to the playoff's at-large selection process. Alabama, Florida and South Carolina will play 10 regular-season games against Power Four opponents. The SEC's other teams will play eight or nine games against power foes. By comparison, TCU and Baylor will play a nation-leading 11 games against Power Four competition. Let's not spare the ACC, either. The ACC joins the SEC in playing eight conference games, while their Big Ten and Big 12 peers play nine. Most ACC schools, at least, will play 10 games against power-conference opponents, if you include Notre Dame as a power foe. Alternative to a ninth SEC game? Play another Power Four school Prominent SEC voices continue to trumpet that the committee erred by rejecting three 9-3 teams from the inaugural 12-team playoff, and that the committee does not sufficiently reward the SEC's schedule. "I have a hard time seeing Ole Miss, Alabama, and South Carolina not being in the best teams last year," Georgia coach Kirby Smart said, in reference to 9-3 teams that didn't make the playoff. I maintain the committee flubbed by selecting two-loss SMU, which beat nobody of substance and lost its two games against Top 25 opponents. Mississippi, which smashed Georgia after suffering a resume-staining loss to Kentucky, would have been a better choice. And yet, the SEC's three-loss also-rans could have tempted the committee more if they'd played and won another conference game or at least played and won an additional game against a Power Four opponent, instead of creaming a Championship Subdivision school. We don't know how the committee would view a 9-3 SEC team that played 10 games against Power Four competition. We do know what the committee thought of the SEC's 9-3 teams that played only nine games against power-conference foes. They thought them undeserving of a playoff bid. If Florida, which plays Miami and Florida State, goes 9-3 this season, it likely would have a stronger case for an at-large bid than the SEC's three-loss teams last season. The same is true of South Carolina, which plays Virginia Tech and Clemson for 10 Power Four games. Alabama's games against Wisconsin and Florida State give the Tide 10 games at the big-boy table, too. Those teams stand in exception to the SEC's majority that choose a path of lesser non-conference resistance. The SEC keeps floating the myth that the playoff committee does not respect strength of schedule. That's untrue. Indiana won 11 games last season, but the Hoosiers' soft schedule meant Indiana ranked behind four other at-large playoff qualifiers that won fewer games. Also, the SEC's three-loss teams reached the playoff's doorstep largely because of their strength of schedule. Another marquee victory could help get a three-loss team across the playoff's threshold. I can understand the SEC's reluctance to add a ninth conference game. Another league game would guarantee another loss to half the conference. Those additional losses would hinder playoff pursuits across half the league. The alternative to a ninth SEC game, though, should not be a game against Weasel Tech or Seventh-Grade State. Schedule another opponent from the big leagues. Non-conference scheduling includes the hurdle of needing two to tango. Not every power-conference team wants to play an SEC foe. Nebraska ducked out of its series with Tennessee. Wake Forest canceled on Ole Miss. Still, the SEC cannot relent. SEC coaches would be wise to keep the pedal down on this blue-sky idea of a Big Ten-SEC challenge. The SEC insists it wields the nation's strongest conference and that the committee should honor it as such. That argument holds merit, but the case would become easier to prove if SEC teams scheduled fewer games against Coastal Cupcake and more games against power-conference peers. Blake Toppmeyer is the USA TODAY Network's national college football columnist. Email him at BToppmeyer@ and follow him on X @btoppmeyer.
