The first round of the newly expanded 12-team College Football Playoff didn’t exactly deliver the fireworks fans were hoping for. From lopsided scores to a noticeable dip in television ratings, it was a debut round that left more questions than answers. But before we start rewriting the entire CFP blueprint, let’s take a closer look at what really happened-and why simply swapping out teams based on brand name isn’t the silver bullet some are claiming it is.
Let’s start with the obvious: No. 11 Tulane was overwhelmed by No.
6 Ole Miss in a 41-10 loss in Oxford, and No. 12 James Madison fell 51-33 to No.
5 Oregon at Autzen Stadium. Those are tough results, no doubt.
But to call these matchups a failure of the system ignores the bigger picture.
There’s been a growing chorus calling for a CFP selection process that leans more heavily on established power programs-teams like Notre Dame and Texas, who didn’t make the cut this year. The argument goes something like this: if you want better games and higher ratings, just plug in the big names and let them go at it. That line of thinking suggests that the Group of Five teams-like Tulane and James Madison-were simply out of their depth and didn’t belong in the playoff to begin with.
But here’s the catch: the CFP isn’t supposed to be an invitational for college football’s blue bloods. It’s supposed to be a playoff. And the whole point of a playoff is to reward teams that earned their way in, not just the ones with the biggest TV audiences or most recognizable logos.
If we’re being honest, the real issue wasn’t Tulane or James Madison. It was Alabama.
Yes, Alabama-the perennial powerhouse, the brand that needs no introduction-was the team that arguably didn’t belong. The Tide’s inclusion raised more eyebrows than the Group of Five entries, but somehow they’ve escaped the brunt of the criticism. Instead, the focus has been on the two teams that had to claw their way into the spotlight, only to be dismissed the moment the scoreboard turned against them.
Let’s not forget: this is the first year of the 12-team format. There are going to be growing pains.
Blowouts happen in every playoff system-just ask the NFL or NCAA basketball. But that doesn’t mean the system is broken.
It means it’s evolving.
And while some are pushing for a selection process that removes automatic bids and leans solely on at-large selections-essentially turning the CFP into a beauty contest judged by former coaches and media members-it’s worth asking what kind of message that sends. Are we saying that Group of Five football doesn’t matter? That unless you’re one of the sport’s financial giants, your wins don’t carry the same weight?
That’s a dangerous path to go down.
What makes college football special is its depth. It’s not just about the Alabamas and Ohio States of the world.
It’s about the Boises, the UCFs, the Cincinnati teams that crash the party and force the sport to take notice. If we strip away their access to the playoff, we’re not just narrowing the field-we’re narrowing the soul of the sport.
Sure, Notre Dame and Texas would’ve brought in more eyeballs. But this isn’t about ratings.
It’s about merit. And if we’re going to build a playoff that truly reflects the best of college football, we need to be willing to accept that sometimes the best stories-and yes, even the best teams-come from outside the power conferences.
So let’s not overreact to one round of blowouts. Let’s give the new format time to breathe. Because if we’re judging the success of the playoff solely by how many viewers tuned in or how many jerseys flew off the shelves, we’re missing the point entirely.