Latest news with #Playoff
New York Times
a day ago
- Business
- New York Times
Why does the Big Ten want four automatic CFP bids? The league's case has a long history
Five months after winning its second consecutive College Football Playoff national championship, the Big Ten has emerged bruised and battered from the process of proposing automatic qualifiers for an expanded CFP beginning with the 2026 season. The Big Ten has for months recommended a CFP plan that would give four automatic bids to itself and the SEC, two each to the ACC and Big 12 and one for the top conference champion from the other six leagues (4+4+2+2+1). If the size of the postseason expands from 12 to 16, as almost all stakeholders expect, the format allows for three at-large selections to make the field. Advertisement Other conferences have come out against it, strongly so in some cases. The ACC and Big 12 are in lockstep with a '5+11' plan, which would give the five highest-ranked conference champions and 11 highest-ranked at-large teams entry into the Playoff. The SEC appears to be trending in that direction, too, after commissioner Greg Sankey supplied media with a multi-page breakdown of his league's strength-of-schedule prowess last week. No longer wounded by their 1-5 record against the Big Ten during the 2024-25 postseason, Sankey and SEC officials have successfully flipped the narrative. The Big Ten now looks like the arrogant bad actor hell-bent on enriching itself at the expense of its competition and the sport. Despite the Big Ten's prolonged silence on this topic and others, people in and around the league have expressed that's not the case. The Big Ten is willing to budge on guaranteed CFP qualifiers, but the uneven number of conference games among the power leagues gives the Big Ten pause on allowing a selection committee to wield the power of placing 11 at-large teams in the CFP field. The Big Ten and Big 12 play nine league games; the SEC and ACC play eight. Thirteen of the Big Ten's 18 teams compete against at least 10 power-conference opponents in 2025; 13 of the SEC's 16 teams face only nine power-conference teams. Unless the SEC moves to nine league games, don't expect the Big Ten to move on wanting guaranteed CFP slots. There's too much scheduling variance. The Big Ten has historical grounds to distrust a system that was supposed to reward strength of schedule and other concrete metrics and instead leaned into subjectivity to make prior selections. In July 2015, former Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany brought out slides and unveiled his '1910' scheduling plan, designed to make his conference champion competitive for the four-team CFP. The numbers represented one title game, nine league games, one intersectional power-conference opponent and no contests against Football Championship Subdivision competition. Delany believed his strategy would position the Big Ten well for its best team to earn a CFP spot and for non-champions to make New Year's Six bowl games. Advertisement 'I think that's responsive to what the College Football Playoff committee is looking for,' Delany said at the time. 'We think it's what our fans want. We think it's what our players want. And we think it's what the College Football Playoff committee wants.' Delany found out he was wrong, and he was furious. In 2017 and 2018, Big Ten champion Ohio State missed the CFP. It played nonconference games against Oklahoma in '17 and TCU in '18. The 2017 Buckeyes beat No. 6 Wisconsin, No. 9 Penn State and No. 16 Michigan State, but they finished fifth, behind Alabama, which beat only two teams that made the final rankings (No. 17 LSU, No. 23 Mississippi State) and didn't win its division. Considering Alabama won the national title that year, that was more of a disappointment than a snub to Delany. But in 2018, the committee disregarded the strategy with stakes one rung below the Playoff. In the final CFP rankings, Florida came in at No. 10 with LSU at No. 11 and Penn State at No. 12. All three teams were 9-3, but the SEC teams moved up to New Year's Six bowls. Again, the strength of schedule disparity chapped Delany most. Florida played four nonconference games: two FCS opponents, Colorado State (3-9) and Florida State (5-7). The Gators' three losses came by an average of 17 points. Penn State played three nonconference games, including one against ACC Coastal Division champion Pittsburgh and 11-2 Appalachian State. Penn State's losses came to 13-1 Ohio State, 10-3 Michigan and 7-6 Michigan State. Yet Delany felt the committee ignored nonconference scheduling when stacking those teams. 'The actual language in the founding document says, 'When comparing teams with similar records and similar resumes, should look at strength of schedule as well as winning conference championships,'' Delany said in 2019. 'I'm not sure that the strength of schedule or the conference championship has been adequately rewarded, in my personal view.' Advertisement The recent disagreements over selection criteria for the 12-team CFP date to what transpired in 2017 and 2018. Last year, Indiana finished 11-1 in the regular season, but a trio of 9-3 SEC teams barked about scheduling when the Hoosiers earned a CFP spot over them. Indiana's overall strength of schedule metrics were weak, but by the end of the postseason, it was the only team in the nation to play both the 2023 (Michigan, Washington) and 2024 CFP finalists (Ohio State, Notre Dame). The Hoosiers were one of just two Big Ten squads to face only nine power-conference opponents last year, but the trio of SEC teams had also played just nine power-conference teams. The nine-game schedule matters to the Big Ten because of the risks involved — it creates one extra loss for half the league compared to the SEC. Ohio State's lone conference losses in each of the 2017 and 2018 seasons came at West Division schools. Had the Big Ten played only eight league contests those years, Ohio State might not have traveled to those venues. Although the push for four guaranteed slots appears self-serving, out of the Power 4 leagues, only the Big Ten would have seen its number of CFP participants drop in the last four years with that plan compared to the 5+11 model, based on each power conference's current composition. With the 5+11 plan, the Big Ten would have qualified 20 teams, one more than the SEC (19), while the Big 12 and ACC would have 10 and nine, respectively. In a 4-4-2-2-1 model, the SEC and ACC numbers would stay the same, while the Big Ten's would drop by two and the Big 12's would rise by two. In a 5+11 plan, the SEC would have had three qualifiers in 2021 and '22 but seven in '23 and six in '24. Without uniform scheduling, Big Ten officials are concerned that an open 5+11 plan would cause more schools to ease up on their nonconference slates rather than play other power-conference schools; one recently called it a 'race to the bottom.' With guaranteed spots, nonconference games would have little impact on CFP qualification. Without guaranteed spots, teams may protect their records and not risk playing high-level nonconference games. Lastly, without divisional play in a larger conference, Big Ten officials believe guaranteed slots provide more teams with a major goal, especially if the Big Ten (and possibly the SEC) added two play-in games to decide some of its spots in a 16-team CFP. Had that format taken place last year, Indiana would have played Iowa and Illinois would have played Ohio State in December with CFP berths at stake. 'I love that,' Illinois coach Bret Bielema told The Athletic this spring. 'It makes all the games meaningful.' Advertisement The Big Ten and SEC have control over the next CFP era, so it's up to them, with consultation from other conferences, to find the best path forward. But until the Big Ten's scheduling concerns are met, don't expect it to fold anytime soon on its desire for guaranteed CFP bids. (Photo of Ohio State's 2017 Big Ten title game win: Joe Robbins / Getty Images)
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Kenny Dillingham Makes Bold Claim About Arizona State's 'Blue-Blood' Potential
Kenny Dillingham Makes Bold Claim About Arizona State's 'Blue-Blood' Potential originally appeared on Athlon Sports. Arizona head coach Kenny Dillingham is entering new territory after leading his alma mater to a Big 12 title and a College Football Playoff berth last season. Advertisement The former Memphis, Auburn, Florida State and Oregon offensive coordinator had never held a head coaching role before taking the helm of the Sun Devils ahead of the 2023 season. And that first season was a tough pill to swallow, as Arizona State won just three games. But things looked completely different in Year 2. Dillingham's Sun Devils went on to post an 11-3 record (the first 11-win season since 1996), captured the Big 12 championship in their first season in the conference and made the playoff for the first time in school history. The rise to success, if sustained in 2025, will likely made Dillingham a coveted name in the coaching carousel. He signed a contract extension through 2029 after the 2024 season. Advertisement However, Dillingham claimed that the Sun Devils have what it takes to be a "blue-blood" and appears to be committed to building his alma mater into a consistent contender. Arizona State Sun Devils head coach Kenny Heitman-Imagn Images 'You can build something very, very unique,' he said via On3's Steve Wiltfong. 'Every 10 years, a team shows up on the map, and they're a blue-blood to the next generation. They're not a blue-blood to the people my age, but they're a blue-blood to the 10-year-olds, the 11-year-olds and the 12-year-olds who you're eventually going to recruit." Dillingham went on to name Oregon and Clemson – perennial powers that rose to the top of college football in a short time frame – as examples of what Arizona State football wants to become. Advertisement 'You have Clemson this last cycle, from 2010 to 2020," he said. "They just showed up. People think they've been around forever. You have Oregon from 2000 to 2010. You can go back in history and figure out which teams have shown up in which era. There hasn't been a team in this era, in the 2020s." The question remains of how the Sun Devils can sustain the winning trend. Major contenders, like Oregon and Clemson, recruit with the best in the country. Arizona State did make improvements in that area in the 2025 cycle (No. 19 nationally from No. 45 in 2024). The Sun Devils won't return star tailback Cam Skattebo in 2025, but they do return star quarterback Sam Leavitt and the most production in the nation other than Clemson. The 2025 season will open against Northern Arizona on Aug. 30. Advertisement Related: Miami Receives Disappointing News On Elite 4-Star In-State Target Related: Nation's No. 1 QB Reacts To 5-Star Wide Receiver's Visit To Georgia This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on May 31, 2025, where it first appeared.
New York Times
5 days ago
- Business
- New York Times
SEC needs to do the right thing and send Big Ten and its automatic bids packing
DESTIN, Fla. — It's been fun this week to wonder, speculate and argue about the next iteration of the College Football Playoff model, sort of like it would be fun to reimagine your family room after a house fire turned everything to ash. Really, though the arguing is enjoyable, and it's what people in and around college football have been doing since the days of leather helmets and presidential commissions that had purpose (see: Teddy Roosevelt, 1905, forward pass). 'Who did you play?' and 'Your coach cheats!' and 'We have academic standards' hold this bizarre tapestry together as much as marching bands and tailgating and absurdly high coaching contract buyouts. Advertisement Which is one more reason to reject the 4-4-2-2-1 playoff model (also known as FFTTO, which stands for Football Fans, Turn To Opera) that Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti is trying to ram through with support from the SEC. I'm not sure we need more reasons. It's contrary to the idea of competition, it rewards status over achievement, and it's embarrassing to say out loud. Are those enough? Here's one more anyway: We must save the College Football Playoff selection committee. We must keep our Tuesday nights in the fall. We must preserve the opportunity to speculate about what those 13 lucky souls will do. We must retain the right to get angry at them when they inevitably do the wrong thing. We must keep that cherished college football tradition — arguing — alive and robust. Could the SEC be getting led astray by the Big 10? @joerexrode worries that may be the case… — Paul Finebaum (@finebaum) May 27, 2025 I know some of you recoiled at first mention of the selection committee, and I realize framing a CFP format made up mostly of at-large selections as a way to maintain the power of that committee is a good way to get people to dislike that format. But everything in college sports these days is lesser-of-two-evils, so let's play out the greater of two evils known as the FFTTO. That's four automatic bids for the Big Ten and the SEC, two apiece for the ACC and Big 12 and one for the highest-ranked conference champion outside the Power 4. In a 14-team format, that leaves one bid for either Notre Dame if it's ranked in the top 14, or for an at-large selection. In a 16-team format, you would have two or three at-large selections, depending on Notre Dame. (And don't ask why we must move on from the 12-team format that worked quite well last season and will complete an era of two years after the 2025 season. Just chalk everything up in this industry to greed, arrogance and incompetence, and you're probably in the neighborhood.) Advertisement The selection committee in the FFTTO model picks a team or two at the bottom of the field and seeds them at the end. This is not enough to make Tuesday evenings interesting, and 'Laverne & Shirley' isn't walking through that door. Of much more importance, this means conference standings will dictate the field. That makes sense in the NFL, with a limited number of teams, with parity, with all games against comparable teams and with divisional foes playing each other twice a year. In college football, with 18 teams in the Big Ten, 17 in the ACC and 16 in the Big 12 and SEC — with teams in the same leagues often playing schedules that are vastly different in overall rigor — it's a joke. So is the concept of 'play-in' games during championship weekend, the Big Ten and SEC having 3 versus 6 and 4 versus 5 games for automatic bids. So is the idea that the SEC needs this format or compares with the Big Ten in terms of depth of quality programs. Yes, the Big Ten has won the last two national titles. And yes, these leagues have a tremendous rivalry when it comes to fan bases and resources. But the SEC can fill those four automatic bids with quality and go way past, and it would suffer in some years under this format. Georgia, Texas, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Oklahoma, LSU, Texas A&M, Auburn … the ingredients are there for championship football, and most of those schools have it in their recent history. The Big Ten has Michigan, Ohio State, Oregon and Penn State, and then other programs have had surges, but nothing suggesting the ability to win a national championship. Indiana was a great story last season, but I'm struggling to get excited for Indiana-Minnesota and Iowa-Illinois on 'Play-In-Game Weekend Brought To You By Zalinsky's Auto Parts.' Keep the five automatic bids and fill the rest of the field out with nine or 11 at-large selections, depending on whether it goes to 14 or 16. Keep playing conference championship games, with Playoff byes as the primary rewards. That's not exciting, but that's why it's not advisable to go full bloat on your leagues and Playoff field while killing the Pac-12. There are consequences. Advertisement Keep playing major nonleague games, because otherwise, the selection committee is going to be light on data to compare the conferences. And take those nonleague games seriously, because the field is mostly at-large selections and winning those games will mean a lot. In the world of automatic bids, in the world of league standings meaning everything, some coaches might view and approach those games like NFL preseason games. It would be nice to see the SEC go to nine conference games, too, but if that's going to happen only with four automatic bids? Stay at eight. Shoot, go to seven if we can avoid FFTTO. It would be better for the Power 4 leagues to play the same number of league games, but again, that does not get us to apples for apples. And then let's make sure the selection committee understands the importance of schedule strength and is armed with the best and most transparent way possible to value it. That the SEC would even consider propping up the Big Ten with the automatic bids is an overreaction to last season, when Indiana and SMU got in over Alabama, Ole Miss and South Carolina. As seen and heard this week at the SEC spring meetings, the whining over that has not ceased. I think the committee got it right. You might not. We should all be able to agree that it was very close and that both sides had arguments. That's how we should like it. Florida athletic director Scott Stricklin told reporters this week that a committee 'is not ideal to choose a postseason,' but he didn't have a better idea. That's because there isn't one, not with this many teams of such varying quality and circumstance. The SEC can make this right. Commissioner Greg Sankey, sensitive to 'good for the game' jabs from other commissioners and questions from media, can lead the way on something that would warrant those four words. Advertisement It was good to learn this week that SEC coaches favor sticking with five automatic bids and going at-large for the rest. They should feel that way. It's better for them. They might complain a lot for millionaires and might overstate the quality of the SEC a bit — you're not playing the Kansas City Chiefs every week, guys — but they're not dumb. As for their bosses, this is a stickier issue. I've talked to athletic directors in the Big Ten and SEC about the FFTTO, and I can paraphrase the view of the AD as such: 'Yes, I'd prefer competition to earn bids, but knowing that Playoff money will be in the budget every year no matter what is a big deal.' That's understandable. These jobs are not easy. Every dollar matters. Revenue sharing is coming. Nonrevenue sports are up for review. But that doesn't mean you make your main revenue driver look like pro wrestling. As the SEC spring meetings wrap up, those of us who still think college football has a lot to offer and has not been burned to the ground have more hope than a few days ago. Sankey handed out info packets to reporters Thursday detailing the SEC's schedule strength superiority over the past decade. This is a bit obnoxious. But the data is relevant. We should keep it in mind. And Sankey and his athletic directors should leave in the Gulf of Mexico the especially flammable pile of kindling that Petitti has been trying to sell them. (Photo of Greg Sankey: Todd Kirkland / Getty Images)
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Do Anthony Edwards, Timberwolves have another level to offer in fantasy and reality next NBA season?
The playoffs are where stars rise and weaknesses get exposed. For every team sent packing, we'll analyze the standout players primed for growth and a major question mark that could impact the team's fantasy value ahead of the 2025-26 season. Up next, the Minnesota Timberwolves ... Making consecutive trips to the Western Conference finals is an accomplishment, not a disappointment. The Wolves were one of the best teams during the final quarter of the NBA regular season and won a couple of rounds in decisive fashion. The unexpected run ended on Wednesday night, as the Oklahoma City Thunder completed the gentlemen's sweep over Minnesota, closing them out in a 124-94 blowout in OKC. That's no knock on the Wolves, as they inevitably had to face off against the NBA's best who were an unstoppable force on both ends all season long. Still, there's a lot to like about the Timberwolves moving forward. Anthony Edwards trending toward first-round status I'm not engaging in the exhaustive debate on whether he should or shouldn't be the face of the league. What I do know is that Ant-Man has taken major strides year-over-year and is quickly establishing himself as a star in real life and fantasy. Advertisement He led the league in 3s made and put up career-highs in points and shooting efficiency (59.5 TS%). He sported a 30-plus percent usage rate again, only adding to his versatility as a secondary playmaker. The high turnover rate is baked into his floor price, and its worth noting that he received a few votes for the NBA's All-Defensive Team. I have Edwards as a top-15 option in most points and 9-category formats when factoring his durability —playing 79 games in three consecutive seasons and never less than 72 games per year in his career. Edwards' offensive growth, highlighted by improvements in assist rate and shot selection, signals continued upside in both scoring and secondary stat contributions. Jaden McDaniels making a name for himself McDaniels was a hidden gem in fantasy this season, returning a seventh-round value after going undrafted in 68% of Yahoo leagues. Since he's not a volume scorer who carries a sub-20% usage rate, his skillset caters more to category over points leagues. That aside, his postseason play showed he can turn up offensively when given the chance. McDaniels doesn't hurt you anywhere — he's efficient, gets stocks and has a low turnover rate. He's a core member of the Wolves' future and any bump in production would have him replicating a top-80 type of season. I'm in on him being an option in the seventh round. Julius Randle: $30.9 million question mark Then there's Julius Randle — the wildcard. With a $30.9 million player option looming, his decision to stay or test the waters will be another situation to monitor this offseason. Advertisement The Thunder managed to revert Randle back to Playoff Julius of the Knicks in this series, holding him to two of his worst scoring performances of his postseason career. Those down moments shouldn't minimize his overall impact in the postseason, though. He was arguably the Wolves' most consistent player prior to the OKC series. When it comes to fantasy, however, he vastly underperformed, finishing six rounds lower than his average draft position (ADP) of 62. The production dropoff is understandable given the change in role and environment, but fantasy managers missed on a guy who typically has 20-10-5 upside. The usage rate remains strong, so a bounce back is more likely than not if he stays in the Twin Cities. I'm more inclined to draft Randle around the sixth round in points leagues. Category formats? I'd avoid paying that cost. Advertisement Wolves are ascending, but can they take next step? It's a pivotal offseason for Minnesota, especially following another Western Conference finals exit, where it's clear that tweaks are necessary to become a champion. The rotation could undergo some significant changes with Naz Reid's imminent extension, Nickeil Alexander-Walker's impending free agency, and, of course, Randle's player option. Still, the Timberwolves had four players inside the top 100, proving they're a solid place to glean fantasy value.
New York Times
6 days ago
- Business
- New York Times
Why the Big 12 is touting a ‘5+11' CFP expansion model to combat the Big Ten's auto-bid push
ORLANDO, Fla. — Finally, college football's leaders are having their playoff debate in public — at least in the state of Florida this week. Up in Destin, the SEC appears to be on its way to adjourning spring meetings on Thursday without a clear consensus on the right College Football Playoff format for 2026 and beyond. The Big Ten-backed model that gives four automatic bids to their two leagues and fewer to everyone else has some SEC support but also some concerns. It's a format that would be more financially lucrative for the top two conferences, but it has drawn public backlash. Advertisement Down in Orlando, the Big 12 brought a more united front to spring meetings with an easier public message: fairness. Should the Playoff field expand to 16 teams, as is widely expected, the Big 12 (and the ACC) prefer a '5+11' model that simply expands the current CFP, with automatic bids for the five highest-ranked conference champions and 11 at-large bids. Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark and ACC commissioner Jim Phillips made the pitch in person to Sankey and Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti at a recent meeting in Charlotte, one of several among the Power 4 leaders. Will it convince the SEC and Big Ten, which hold majority power over the CFP format starting in 2026, to move away from uneven auto-bids? 'I don't think 4-4-2-2 is fair,' Yormark told The Athletic on Wednesday. 'I just don't think that model speaks to who we are as a conference and what we mean to college football.' The Big Ten's proposed '4-4-2-2' auto-bid heavy model (with one bid for the top-ranked non-Power 4 conference champion and three at-large bids to round out the 16 spots) would give the Big 12 and ACC bids they might not always get otherwise. That's the sell. But it would codify second-class status for the Big 12 and ACC. In Orlando this week, Yormark and several Big 12 athletic directors told The Athletic the risk of earning a single bid for themselves in a 5+11 model is worth keeping an open field. 'And that's OK, because we've got to earn it on the field,' Yormark said. 'I often tell my room, you're rewarded when you perform at the highest levels. We are investing at a high level in this conference, and we'll continue to invest. … I'm willing to earn it on the field, and so are my coaches, and so are my ADs.' Big 12 athletic directors spent all of Wednesday in meetings, including one on the CFP. The coaches will have their meetings on Thursday, but their feeling was similar to the message coming from SEC coaches, who showed some trepidation over automatic bids and play-in games. Advertisement 'It's hard for me to just say, because you have a certain patch on your uniform, you get more than somebody else's patch,' Texas Tech head coach Joey McGuire said. The SEC and Big Ten hold the power to determine the CFP format from 2026 to '31 thanks to an agreement all 10 conferences and Notre Dame signed last year that guarantees more than half the revenue for those two. The Big Ten's position has been staked out: It wants more guaranteed spots, and it would use them to set up a play-in tournament on conference championship weekend. But Petitti and his constituents have not ruled out considering other models with a large number of at-large selections — especially if the SEC and ACC agree to match the Big Ten and play nine conference games each year. Which could present a problem: While the SEC wants to put the CFP format ahead of its long-awaited conference schedule decision, the Big Ten would prefer to know what the SEC is doing with its conference schedule before it commits to a CFP format. 'They've been at nine and we've been at eight, so there hasn't been a whole lot of influence from them on our decision,' Sankey said. 'They've made their decision.' What happens if the Big Ten and the SEC can't agree on a new format before a December deadline set by ESPN? That is unclear, but perhaps the status quo — 12 teams with five conference champions and seven at-large spots — could be back in play for 2026, with the SEC still playing an eight-game league schedule. 'Sure, I can see a scenario, but is that the most likely scenario?' Sankey said. 'Come back for more.' The Big 12 has made its preference and message clear. A model with unequal auto-bids is unfair and would catalogue the league as lesser-than. The question has been this: Can the Big 12 and ACC convince Sankey and the SEC of something else? The opening might be those at-large spots. They are one reason the CFP expansion conversation moved from 14 teams to 16. Sankey admitted this week that four automatic bids might sell his league short. Advertisement Utah athletic director Mark Harlan, a former CFP selection committee member, said he doesn't believe a majority of fans want the auto-bid model, which would be unlike anything else in major American sports. The 5+11 model could put even more SEC or Big Ten teams in the field without helping the Big 12, depending on the rankings in a given year. But the Big 12 has decided it's better to roll that dice and try to get better, rather than accept an official second-tier status. 'Then Big 12, let's win more games,' Harlan said. 'Let's get after it.' — The Athletic's Ralph D. Russo contributed reporting.
