This is the first year of college football’s new 12-team playoffs, and it has caused a multitude of chaotic results. Teams that previously had no chance to get into the 4-team playoffs now have an opportunity. This makes every game crucial because teams don’t have to be perfect to still have a chance of winning the championship. These reasons are why the 12-team playoffs are much better for college football. Despite this, the college football playoff committee may have done something to ruin the game forever.

First, let’s look at how the new 12-team playoffs works. It is a basic bracket system with teams 1-4 getting a 1st round bye and teams 5-12 having to play in round 1. Seeds 1-4 are the 4 highest-ranked conference champions and the 12th seed is the 5th highest-ranked conference champion. Teams 5-11 are the remaining teams ranked in the order they would be in the college football rankings. This differs from last year’s playoffs where there were only four teams. Going on that system, the 12 teams playing are ranked in this order:

This weekend were the conference championship games, which included the final games of the regular season. The five big-time games were: Georgia vs. Texas in the SEC, Oregon vs. Penn. St. in the Big 10, Boise St. vs. UNLV in the Mountain West, Arizona St. vs. Iowa St. in the Big 12, and Clemson vs. SMU in the ACC. Of these games, the most important was SMU vs. Clemson. For all the other teams it was an easy decision. For UNLV, Boise St., Arizona St., and Iowa St., and Clemson their only way to the playoffs was a win. For Oregon, Penn. St., Georgia, and Texas they were getting either way. Where the problem arises is SMU.
The Alabama Crimson Tide (9-3) also had a chance to make the playoffs and were just holding on at no. 11 in the rankings, but they were not playing in a championship game. SMU was ranked at number eight last week with a record of 11-1 and was playing in the ACC championship game. Now this would all be fine if SMU won their championship game, but they didn’t, they lost to Clemson. SMU had the 60th hardest schedule in college football and didn’t beat a top-25 team all season. On the other hand, Alabama was 3-1 versus top-25 ranked opponents and had the 16th hardest schedule. So the committee had a problem: do they diminish the strength of the schedule or do they diminish the championship game?

As we know the committee decided to put SMU over Alabama and this decision is what might have broken college football. Through this decision, the college football playoff committee showed that teams don’t necessarily need to have a hard schedule to make the playoffs. Now, big-time teams that have deals to play other big-time teams very well may decide that it is not worth it because it diminishes their chance of making the playoffs. As a fan, this is terrible because it means that next year there might not be nearly as many big-time games, and who wants that? This problem could have been avoided too. If the committee had just ranked SMU lower the week before, due to their lack of wins against top 25 teams, then it wouldn’t have been a problem.

Even with this decision by the college football playoff committee, I am still excited to see the new playoffs. Many fans are worried that there might not be as many good games next season, but this is most likely not true. Despite what the committee has shown this year in their rankings, what is deemed important can still change. The fact that there will be 11 awesome football games one after another is great. It is much better for college football, and I’m sure next year there will still be a plethora of good games in the regular season.