The B1G rig ran out of gas. The SEC drained its fuel.
The Big Ten waged an all-out pursuit to rig the College Football Playoff with a stacked deck of automatic bids. Its plan for playoff evolution stalled after facing resistance from rival conferences.
The Big Ten lacked support from the SEC, a necessary ally, to advance a 16-team playoff that would preassign half the bids to the Big Ten and SEC.
SEC commissioner Greg Sankey extinguished what little life remained for the Big Ten’s auto-bid-laden plan when he put his foot down last week at his conference’s media days. If the SEC doesn’t secure one of the expanded playoff plans it desires, Sankey said, then it’s comfortable sticking with the current 12-team playoff format. And the SEC doesn’t want the Big Ten’s plan.
Well, that’s that then.
Big Ten’s College Football Playoff plan stalls without SEC support
The 12-team playoff will be in place for 2025. The format for 2026 and beyond remains under debate. To expand the playoff, the SEC and Big Ten would need to align behind a plan by a Dec. 1 deadline.
Sankey referenced multiple playoff plans the SEC remains willing to consider. Notable by its omission: The Big Ten’s plan that would earmark 13 of 16 spots as automatic bids preassigned to conferences.
“We’re going to have 5+7, 5+9, (or) 5+11,” Sankey said.
The Big 12 and ACC support the 5+11 plan. The SEC retains interest in it, too.
In the math equations Sankey mentioned, the “5” means five automatic bids – one each going to the five-best conference champions. The second number in the equation means the number of at-large bids.
“We’ll continue to debate whether expansion beyond 12 is appropriate,” Sankey said.
That debate won’t, apparently, include the Big Ten’s favored 4+4+2+2+1+3 plan, which would have awarded four automatic bids to the Big Ten, four more to the SEC, two apiece to the ACC and Big 12, and one to the next-best conference champion, leaving three at-large bids.
The SEC soured on this auto-bid plan in the spring, and, in Sankey’s annual state-of-the-conference address, he offered no sign of retreating toward the Big Ten’s plan.
No individual conference wields the authority to unilaterally push through an expanded playoff. College Football Playoff executive director Rich Clark told reporters last month that playoff expansion would require the SEC and Big Ten to agree upon a plan. What if they can’t agree? That’s a win for the status quo.
“We have a 12-team playoff, (including) five conference champions,” Sankey said. “That could stay if we can’t agree.”
Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti will get the next word in this debate when his conference’s media days begin this week. But, really, what can he say?
Sankey insists the SEC is comfortable staying at 12 if it can’t achieve one of its preferred playoff expansion plans. If that’s the case, then the Big Ten’s pursuit of a 4+4+2+2+1+3 playoff has died on the vine.
To which I say, good riddance.
The 12-team playoff relies on a committee of subjective and imperfect humans to select most of the field, but subjectivity and imperfection are insufficient grounds to scrap this system in favor of a playoff that would pre-emptively reward conferences based on their history, brand and clout, instead of letting on-field results determine bid allocation.
Big Ten, SEC alliance fizzles amid competing interests
Early last year, the SEC and Big Ten announced a pact to work together to chart college sports’ future. Stakeholders from the two super conferences met multiple times and discussed playoff expansion possibilities. Much like the Big Ten’s previous alliance with the ACC and Pac-12, the bromance between the Big Ten and the SEC fizzled in the face of competing interests.
There’s ‘no rift’ between Sankey and Petitti, the SEC commissioner said on his conference’s television network last week, but they have ‘different views.’
The Big Ten, according to multiple reports, might be willing to compromise in favor of a 5+11 playoff if the SEC and ACC add another conference game and join the Big Ten and Big 12 in playing nine conference games.
That’s a fine wish, but the Big Ten lacks the muscle to force another conference to change its schedule. Sankey would like the SEC add a ninth conference game, but his membership has resisted his preference.
The Big Ten played its playoff hand, but it lacked the cards to win the bet.
“You always want to have a really good set of cards,’ Sankey said. ‘You want to have a good hand to play, right? I think we have the best hand.”
The Big Ten is running out of moves.
Blake Toppmeyer is the USA TODAY Network’s national college football columnist. Email him at BToppmeyer@gannett.com and follow him on X @btoppmeyer.
