Could the SEC actually benefit more from a playoff format that doesn’t guarantee the conference at least four playoff berths per season?
SEC commissioner Greg Sankey said Monday at the league’s spring meetings that a proposed 16-team playoff that would guarantee the SEC and Big Ten four spots each with other conferences receiving fewer automatic bids “could cost us positions.”
Advertisement
“So if you actually go back and do the research, that kind of format could cost us positions,” Sankey said. “Depending on the number of teams. I don’t see the critics really digging in to understand that reality. I don’t see the critics actually analyzing like I’ve just described, how schedules are evaluated. So the critics can run to the microphone and share their opinions. We’re trying to find a format to determine — whatever number it is — the best teams in college football. And I think where we are right now is we have used a political process inside a room to come to decisions about football. We should be using football information to come to football decisions.”
The 16-team proposal to give the SEC and Big Ten the most playoff berths has been met with immediate public pushback as it would continue to give the two richest conferences in college sports more football advantages. In that playoff idea supported by the two behemoths, the Big 12 and ACC would each get two automatic berths, the highest-ranked champion outside of the four conferences would get one and there would be three at-large berths.
Another idea — one that theoretically could get the SEC more teams in the playoff — is a 5+11 model where each of the power conferences get an automatic berth along with the highest-ranked conference champion from the group of five. The other 11 spots would then be spread out among the 11 highest teams in the College Football Playoff rankings.
Advertisement
Six SEC teams were in the top 16 of the rankings a year ago. Georgia, Texas and Tennessee made the 12-team playoff and Alabama was the first team out at No. 11. The Crimson Tide would have grabbed an at-large berth in a 16-team format along with Ole Miss and South Carolina.
In 2023 — the final year of the four-team format — five SEC teams were in the top 13 of the rankings and would have made a 16-team playoff.
So while Sankey can say with a straight face that his conference would routinely be well-positioned in a 5+11 format, it would also be protected in the 4-4-2-2-1+3 idea. If the SEC had a down year, it would have no fewer than four teams in the postseason. And if the conference had a great season relative to the rest of the college football landscape, it could feasibly snag one or two of the three at-large berths.
After all, the Big Ten wouldn’t have gotten an at-large berth in either format a year ago. The conference got four teams in the playoff but its fifth-highest team, Illinois, was at No. 20 in the final playoff rankings.
Advertisement
Sankey has said that multiple formats are being discussed by his league’s athletic directors — he made a point of saying that the league wasn’t “committed” but merely “interested” in a specific format.
The conference is also looking at adding a ninth league game to its teams’ schedules. ESPN is reportedly ready to pay the league more money if the conference adds an additional week of regular-season games. But the SEC’s schools will assuredly want concessions to make sure they aren’t penalized in the playoff rankings for losing a league game that was played at the expense of an easy home win against a lesser opponent.
The future existence of a ninth-league game and the continued existence of marquee non-conference games like Texas and Michigan in Week 1 of the upcoming season could hinge on a change on how the playoff picks its teams.
“I don’t know that I’d say surprised,” Sankey said when asked if he was surprised that a 9-3 Alabama team missed the playoff a season ago. “I think that’s one of the realities. But I spoke in July of media days how will a 9-3 team — and I used Georgia as a really good example given their three really difficult road games [in 2024]. How do you evaluate that against other teams that don’t come anywhere close to that? And I said, we learned something the first time through and that raises the need for deeper analysis and understanding. If we’re just going to incentivize wins, playing fewer winning teams can get you to more wins. I don’t think that’s great for football.”
This post was originally published on this site be sure to check out more of their content.
