How the Big Ten rallied around a CFP plan the rest of college football isn’t sold on

MisterGopher

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
420
Reaction score
240
Points
43
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6518162/2025/07/28/big-ten-college-football-playoff-format/

Petitti continued meeting with his football coaches, athletic directors and others to devise a system that would reward the Big Ten for its success but would apply fairly throughout the sport. He targeted a guaranteed number of spots for each conference, which then could choose their own participants (allowing for a few at-large berths) rather than leave their fortunes up to the selection committee. From there, the math led him to this conclusion.

Based on end-of-season CFP rankings over the system’s 11-year history, schools currently playing in the Big Ten would have secured 54 CFP spots if the field consisted of five conference champions and 11 at-large teams (5+11). Fifty-one teams would have qualified from the current SEC, with 27 each from both the ACC and Big 12. Among the other conferences and Notre Dame, 20 teams would have earned CFP spots.

The Big Ten would have sent at least four teams to the CFP each year, with a high of six in three different seasons. The SEC would have sent seven teams to the CFP twice but four times would have sent only three teams. Over that span, the ACC would have topped out with four teams once, with three one-bid seasons. The Big 12 would have sent five teams twice and one team four times.

In a 5+11 format, the Big Ten would have averaged 4.9 spots, with the SEC close behind (4.6) and the Big 12 and ACC tied at 2.5 spots apiece from 2014 to ’24. To ensure the system could accommodate additional teams plus Notre Dame, Petitti targeted four berths each for the Big Ten and SEC and two apiece for the ACC and Big 12, plus the highest-ranked champion outside of those four leagues and three at-large choices available for the selection committee.
 


It’s crazy stupid how the media that keeps writing the same article hasn’t figured out the reason the big ten wants 4 auto bids isn’t because they feel 8-4 Illinois should be in the playoff game with the current format. It’s because the big ten wants more money by going to a 10 or 11 game conference schedule with no FCS games to increase the TV payout and the don’t want to do it if it’s going to screw their playoff chances


Haven’t seen any media write that article but it’s clearly the reason
 

"Based on end-of-season CFP rankings over the system’s 11-year history,"

These types of analysis are folly, because surely the committees would have voted differently than they did. Both because the Big Ten and SEC have more teams, and because they would know the number of teams and format was completely different.
 

It’s crazy stupid how the media that keeps writing the same article hasn’t figured out the reason the big ten wants 4 auto bids isn’t because they feel 8-4 Illinois should be in the playoff game with the current format. It’s because the big ten wants more money by going to a 10 or 11 game conference schedule with no FCS games to increase the TV payout and the don’t want to do it if it’s going to screw their playoff chances


Haven’t seen any media write that article but it’s clearly the reason
Probably because, behind closed doors in meetings between TV partners and Big Ten leadership you're exactly correct, but they can't come out and say that.

So instead, the public narrative will be trying to shame/drive the SEC into playing an equal number of conference games.
 





Top Bottom