
CFP for Dummies plan: What college football can learn from March Madness blueprint
CFP for Dummies plan: What college football can learn from March Madness blueprint
Show Caption
Hide Caption
US LBM Coaches Poll: Ohio State claims top spot after national title run
See where your team landed in the final US LBM Coaches Poll ranking of the year.
Sports Pulse
They're making this more difficult than it is, which falls in line of late with just about all things college football.
So while we soak in the majesty of the three-week event that is March Madness, it's time to reassess the postseason football clunker rolled out last season by the smartest men and women in college sports.
Something, everyone, must be done about the College Football Playoff.
It's time to introduce the CFP for Dummies plan.
'We're only one year into the new playoff format,' said Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione. 'I don't know that you make drastic decisions based off one year.'
While I'm all about not being trapped as a prisoner of the moment, there's something so reassuring about the simplicity of the NCAA basketball tournament that can't be ignored.
Everyone has a chance to play in it, and the highest seeds get more favorable draws. That's it, period.
Hence, the CFP for Dummies plan.
But as we move toward the new CFP contract in 2026, and a likely increase to at least 14 teams, they're reinventing the wheel again. And by 'they' I mean the Big Ten and SEC — the insatiable beasts running college sports.
They've got grievances, and they want to be heard.
They want more guaranteed admission to the CFP, and they're not sure they like the idea of a selection committee — which doesn't exactly use strength of schedule as the determining factor.
They're talking about turning Championship Week into play-in week, but each of the Power conferences have different ideas about how to pull it off.
They're still not sure about campus games, or if more are needed. And the seeding thing is an absolute mess.
This isn't rocket science. Simple is better.
Follow the lead of the NCAA tournament, and begin the 2026 season with a clear and unmistakeable path to the national championship. Here's how it happens:
SPRING POWER RANKINGS: Big Ten | SEC | ACC | Big 12
LOOKING AHEAD: Our way-too-early college football Top 25 for 2025
Commit to the selection committee
This begins and ends with clear and unambiguous metrics from disinterested sources. Translation: computer nerds!
The NCAA tournament uses NET, KenPom, BPI, KPI and – tada! – strength of record (see: record in relation to schedule difficulty) to decide selections for the 68-team field. I refuse to believe the highly qualified mathematicians running these programs can't easily translate their formulas to college football.
The human committee will still have the ultimate say, and there will undoubtedly be questionable decisions (hello, Indiana). But at least there's transparency.
Commit to a 20-team field
How did we jump all the way to 20, you ask? It's less postseason games, in totality, than what the power conferences are currently discussing.
The need for new revenue streams has led the power conferences to the idea of play-in games. More games for television means more money from the CFP contract.
More money from the CFP contract means less of a financial hit when universities begin spending as much as $20 million-23 million annually on de facto pay for play, beginning July 1.
By moving to 20 teams, championship week doesn't change, and conference championships aren't minimized because the winner of the four power conference championships receives a spot in the playoff.
The other 16 teams are at-large selections, much like the NCAA tournament. But here's the catch: just because you're a power conference champion doesn't mean you avoid a play-in game.
Commit to a basketball bracket
After championship weekend, the selection committee releases its field of 20, and the bottom eight teams will compete in play-in games at campus sites. The winners then move to the round of 16, where the CFP is seeded just like the NCAA tournament: No. 1 vs. No. 16, No .2 vs. No. 15, and so on.
The round of 16 is played on campus, and the seven remaining games – quarterfinals, semifinals and championship game – will be neutral sites through the bowl system.
If this system were in place for the 2024 season, the SEC would've had seven of the 20 teams, and the Big Ten five. The Big 12 and ACC would've had three teams each, and the final two spots would've been committed to Boise State and Notre Dame.
The play-in games: Illinois (20) at Miami (13), Missouri (19) at Mississippi (14), Iowa State (18) at South Carolina (15), and Brigham Young (17) at Clemson (16). The four winners move to spots 13-16 in the playoff, based on their end of season CFP ranking.
It is here where I need to stress that the Big Ten and SEC are pushing a 14- or 16-team format for 2026 that includes four automatic qualifications for their respective conferences, and two each for the Big 12 and ACC.
In the CFP for Dummies plan, everyone increases their access. And, more to the point, their ability to earn.
Don't believe it? Check out this empirical evidence of teams per conference (with current conference alignment) beginning with the first CFP after the Covid season.
2023: SEC (7), Big Ten (6), ACC (3), Big 12 (2).
2022: Big Ten (7), SEC (6), Big 12 (3), ACC (2).
2021: Big 12 (6), Big Ten (5), SEC (4), ACC (4).
A simple plan for a simple process.
Welcome, everyone, to The CFP for Dummies plan.
Matt Hayes is the senior national college football writer for USA TODAY Sports Network. Follow him on X at @MattHayesCFB.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
Ohio State 2026 Big Ten baseball schedule released on Wednesday
Ohio State 2026 Big Ten baseball schedule released on Wednesday It was nowhere near the baseball season the folks around Ohio State were hoping for. The Buckeyes finished 13-37 overall and won just five of 30 Big Ten games. OSU did get an 11-10 walk-off win to end head coach Justin Hare's first season, but it was one of transition and uncertainty. Hopefully, next season is a much better one. The College Baseball World Series might be just now getting underway in Omaha, but that didn't stop the Big Ten from releasing the 2026 Big Ten baseball schedule on Wednesday. We won't get into all eighteen teams and who they will play, but we assume you are interested in what the conference schedule looks like for the boys next season. Here's how it all lays out for next spring. All dates and series are three-game sets: Friday, March 6 through Sunday, March 8: vs. UCLA (Columbus, OH) Friday, March 13 through Sunday, March 15: at Washington (Seattle, WA) Friday, March 27 through Sunday, March 30: at Minnesota (Minneapolis, MN) Friday, April 3 through Sunday, April 5: vs. Maryland (Columbus, OH) Friday, April 10 through Sunday, April 12: vs. Penn State (Columbus, OH) Friday, April 17 through Sunday, April 19: at Purdue (West Lafayette, IN) Friday, April 24 through Sunday, April 26: at Rutgers (Piscataway, NJ) Friday, May 1 through Sunday, May 3: vs. Nebraska (Columbus, OH) Friday, May 8 through Sunday, May 10: vs. Michigan State (Columbus, OH) Thursday, May 14 through Saturday, May 16: at Michigan (Ann Arbor, MI) The nonconference part of the schedule has yet to be released. That will come to a media outlet near you at a later date. When it does, we'll bring it to you. Contact/Follow us @BuckeyesWire on X (formerly Twitter) and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Ohio State news, notes and opinion. Follow Phil Harrison on X.


Business Wire
an hour ago
- Business Wire
Hagens Berman Responds to Appeals to NCAA College Athlete Name, Image and Likeness Settlement
OAKLAND, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Following the federal court's final approval to a historic $20 billion plus settlement with the NCAA allowing payments and benefits to college athletes for the use of their name, image and likeness (NIL), Hagens Berman responded to the first appeal. 'If these lawyers believe that a Title IX case will succeed, they should bring it and not hijack payments to college athletes that could be lifechanging.' To address questions from NCAA athletes about the impact of the appeal, Hagens Berman issued the following statement: 'Attorneys John Clune and Ashlyn Hare of Hutchinson Black and Cook LLC and Rebecca Peterson-Fisher of Katz Banks Kumin LLP have filed a notice of their intent to appeal the historic NCAA settlement approved June 6, 2025, by Judge Claudia Wilken. 'This appeal will block payments to hundreds of thousands of athletes, delaying payments by a minimum of several months to potentially a year or more. These attorneys are pursuing an appeal based on a Title IX issue that Judge Wilken already disposed of correctly, quickly and multiple times. 'Judge Wilken noted that these attorneys cited 'no authority that Title IX applies to damages awards distributions or that damages distributions made by a claims administrator are subject to Title IX.'' 'This is an antitrust case about competition, it is not a Title IX case, and now hundreds of thousands of athletes will have to wait to recover for past wrongs that were addressed in this lawsuit in order for these attorneys to take on this unrelated issue,' added Hagens Berman co-founder and managing partner, Steve Berman, who serves as court-appointed co-lead counsel. 'If these lawyers believe that a Title IX case will succeed, they should bring it and not hijack payments to college athletes that could be lifechanging.' Straight from the Bench In Judge Wilken's June 6, 2025, opinion on the order granting final approval to the settlement, the court clearly states that it overrules objections, noting, 'There is nothing in the SA [settlement agreement] that would prevent or prohibit schools from distributing benefits and compensation pursuant to the Injunctive Relief Settlement in a manner that complies with Title IX.' Berman added, 'Judge Wilken had made that same ruling earlier in the case, theoretically allowing objectors ample time to find authority to back up their objection, and they failed. It's a shame given this utter failure they will be holding up payments to athletes. I say shame on them.' Hagens Berman represents a class of nearly 400,000 college athletes in the lawsuit in which the total value under the new revenue-sharing model is expected to exceed $20 billion over the next 10 years. The settlement resolves three pending antitrust lawsuits, House v. NCAA, Hubbard v. NCAA, and Carter v. NCAA. Class members in the three affected cases may find out more about the claim process by visiting the settlement website at . Hagens Berman is a global plaintiffs' rights complex litigation law firm with a tenacious drive for achieving real results for those harmed by corporate negligence and fraud. Since its founding in 1993, the firm's determination has earned it numerous national accolades, awards and titles of 'Most Feared Plaintiff's Firm,' MVPs and Trailblazers of class-action law. More about the law firm and its successes can be found at Follow the firm for updates and news at @ClassActionLaw.


Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' Advertisement The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. Advertisement 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.