The Illusion of Inclusion: Why the College Football Playoff Still Needs a Major Overhaul

Read Time:2 Minute, 40 Second

The 12-team College Football Playoff (CFP) format, designed to eliminate controversy and embrace a wider swath of teams, has, in its second year, simply shifted the frustration from the top four teams to the bubble teams ranked nine through fourteen. The recent selection drama, which saw a 10-2 Notre Dame team left out in favor of lower-ranked conference champions and two-loss at-large teams, exposed the deep, structural flaws that still plague the sport’s postseason. The problem is no longer the size of the field, but the rules and politics that govern entry.

The core issue lies in the mandated automatic bids for the five highest-ranked conference champions. While intended to reward regular-season dominance and give hope to the Group of Five, this rule creates chaos when a Power Four conference cannibalizes itself. This season, the ACC’s implosion, culminating in a conference champion with five losses, meant the league had to advocate aggressively for a second at-large team, Miami, to save face. Notre Dame, an independent without a conference to protect it, became the political sacrificial lamb, pushed out despite a strong body of work and a 10-game winning streak. The selection became less about judging the twelve best teams and more about corporate appeasement, where alienating one school—even one with Notre Dame’s stature—was preferable to embarrassing an entire Power Four league.

Furthermore, the very nature of the CFP Selection Committee’s weekly rankings, mandated by its TV deal, has been exposed as counterproductive. These rolling rankings create “false hope” and set public expectations that the committee often contradicts in the final reveal, as was the case with Notre Dame being ranked above Miami every week only to be leapfrogged on Selection Sunday. The necessity of retroactively scrutinizing film from Week 1 to justify a final ranking demonstrates that a full season of games, along with the conference championship weekend, is not sufficient for the committee to make consistent, transparent decisions.

The value proposition of the remaining bowl season has also plummeted, becoming an all-or-nothing proposition where teams outside the CFP field are increasingly opting out. The decisions by bowl-eligible teams like Iowa State and Kansas State, along with several 5-7 teams, to decline invitations are a direct response to the transfer portal opening before the bowl games. Coaches prioritize immediate roster retention and recruiting for the following year over preparing for a bowl game that no longer holds its once-revered status. This leaves a gutted postseason landscape and raises questions about player motivation and the integrity of the exhibition games that remain.

To truly fix the playoff, the focus must move beyond the number of teams. Many argue for a 16-team field to dilute the influence of the five automatic bids, or for eliminating the guaranteed bids altogether in favor of the sixteen genuinely best-ranked teams, regardless of conference affiliation. Until the structural rules are revised to prioritize on-field performance and consistent, objective criteria over political maneuvering and conference self-preservation, the annual College Football Playoff debate will continue to rage, undermining the very clarity the expanded format was supposed to provide.