Ideally, the people running the College Football Playoff wouldn't discuss expanding the soon-to-be-expanded College Football Playoff before the soon-to-be-expanded College Football Playoff has even been officially expanded.
Then again, this is college football. Nothing seems to happen on time – neither fast nor slow.
On Tuesday, the format for the expanded 12-team playoffs that will determine the champions in 2024 and 2025 was finally announced – just six months before the start of the season.
By Wednesday, officials (which increasingly include just the Big Ten and SEC) laid out options for expanding to 14 teams in 2026 and beyond. The proposals include additional automatic qualifiers, disproportionate revenue sharing, and all sorts of other ideas that would benefit… the Big Ten and the SEC.
A better idea would be to let the fundamental change in the 12-team model play out for a year or two – perhaps testing what works and what doesn't, what needs to change and what doesn't.
The jump from four to twelve teams is already a shock to the system. It's almost certainly for the better, but a test drive wouldn't be bad.
However, the Big Ten and SEC are not ready to figure out things like how the selection process will work, what impact it will have on the regular season, how home playoff games will work and whether the college football calendar will be in depth is extended The New Year is a good idea. Next season's title game will be played on January 20th.
There is power to be seized and money to be guaranteed. Why wait?
Let's start with what's coming over the next two seasons – a 12-team model that includes an automatic bid for the five highest-ranked conference champions. It's almost mathematically certain that the top four will be the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC. The first four receive a bye in the first round.
The fifth auto bid goes to the best champion in a so-called Group of Five league. It's a chance to nationalize the event, introduce a Cinderella element and, above all, avoid lawsuits for exclusion. It's good business for the sport as a whole – give a high-profile 12-1 Mountain West champion a shot.
SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey, along with Big Ten Commissioner Tony Petitti, is now the driving force behind the future of the College Football Playoff. (AP Photo/Vasha Hunt)
For the rest of the field, there are seven overall candidates, which any non-champion (including independents like Notre Dame) can earn. Seeds 5-8 will host Seeds 9-12 on campus in mid-December. The winners play the seeds 1-4. The next three rounds will take place at neutral sites – generally traditional bowl locations.
It was supposed to be rocket fuel for the sport.
However, there is no current playoff agreement for the 2026 season and beyond. A new contract must be concluded both between the conferences and with a broadcast partner.
There is already talk of an expansion to 14 teams.
This would include up to four automatic bids for both the Big Ten and SEC, providing both revenue certainty, more teams in the category and other competitive advantages such as a perception of superiority over the ACC and Big 12, among others the recruitment path.
It's the next step in the Big Ten and SEC's journey to becoming the true Big Two of college athletics.
It feels unnecessary, especially right now.
Yes, two more playoff games should bring in more television money. But how much? ESPN reportedly offers $1.3 billion annually for the 11 games of the 12-team format, an average of about $118 million per contest.
What are two more first-round duels worth? Maybe $100 million a year? That's certainly good money, but not when it's divided into so many slices.
Do the SEC and Big Ten really need additional automatic bidding? Are they worried that their second and third place teams won't secure a spot in the standings based on their performance? Historically they would – no one disputes the strength and depth of these leagues, especially post-expansion.
Are they trying to eliminate the subjectivity of the playoff selection committee by subjectively declaring that they always have three or four of the best teams? Perhaps.
Or are they just making it increasingly clear that everyone else must bow to their wishes or risk the consequences, e.g. B. a “playoff” involving only the Big Ten and the SEC?
One of the only positives would be if more automatic bids resulted in the elimination of conference championship games, which are largely irrelevant and would allow the playoffs to end in early January rather than compete with the NFL postseason. But that would require the Big Ten and SEC to step away from money-making events.
A little patience would be desirable.
The problem is that there may not be much time for this. The original sin returned in 2021 when the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12 formed what they called “The Alliance.” It was a political response to the SEC adding Oklahoma and Texas to expand the roster to 16. The alliance was so threatened and angered that it banded together to fight virtually everything that SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey supported. That included a 12-team playoff with six automatic bids that would have started with the 2023 season. The alliance voted against it.
Then the Big Ten invaded the Pac-12 (which doesn't actually exist anymore) and the alliance was over.
So instead of having at least one season of experience to base decisions on – 2023 – or a long-term agreement for the 12-team playoffs, we get this strange stopgap solution with very different power dynamics.
There are no longer dueling superpowers controlling each other. The Big Ten and SEC are bigger, richer and stronger than ever and focused on doing what is best for them.
However, that may not be the best thing for the entire sport, as the expansion's expansion ahead of the first expansion suggests.