College Football Playoffs, as it should be (2025 edition)

The college football season is officially complete, with the playoff field selected and the final rankings released. For two decades, I have publicly advocated for a 16-team format, and I am doing so again this year. The premise remains simple and equitable: every conference champion automatically qualifies, and a committee fills the remaining slots until the field reaches 16.

I believe had the NCAA adopted this structure back then, we could have avoided or at least greatly reduced the turmoil that has plagued the sport. This turmoil includes the near collapse of the Big 12, the dissolution of the Big East, and the continuous erosion of the mid-major landscape. Even the Pac-12 conference, which managed to reconstitute itself, was forced into a crisis that should never have occurred.

By establishing a clear, guaranteed path to a national championship for every league winner, the incentive for ceaseless conference expansion and abandonment would have been severely curtailed. This model provides the stability and integrity the sport desperately needed. What a playoff bracket looks like, however, depends entirely on philosophy. Today, we will explore the two ways to seed such a bracket: the Pro Style Seed, which champions the conference winners, and the Poll Style Seed, which prioritizes the highest-ranked teams.

The Current 12-Team CFP Bracket (Official Seeding)

The 2025 College Football Playoff field includes the five highest-ranked conference champions and seven at-large selections. The bracket is seeded strictly by the final CFP rankings, with the top four ranked teams receiving a first-round bye.

  1. Indiana (13-0, Big Ten, CFP 1) - Bye
  2. Ohio State (12-1, Big Ten, CFP 2) - Bye
  3. Georgia (12-1, SEC, CFP 3) - Bye
  4. Texas Tech (12-1, Big 12, CFP 4) - Bye
  5. Oregon (11-1, Big Ten, CFP 5) - Host
  6. Ole Miss (11-1, SEC, CFP 6) - Host
  7. Texas A&M (11-1, SEC, CFP 7) - Host
  8. Oklahoma (10-2, SEC, CFP 8) - Host
  9. Alabama (10-3, SEC, CFP 9) - Traveler
  10. Miami (10-2, ACC, CFP 10) - Traveler
  11. Tulane (11-2, AAC, CFP 20) - Traveler
  12. James Madison (12-1, Sun Belt, CFP 24) - Traveler

First Teams Left Out (CFP Final Rankings)

  • Notre Dame (10-2, Independent, CFP 11): The First Team Out
  • BYU (11-2, Big 12, CFP 12): The Second Team Out

You Want In? Win Your Conference. You Aren't In A Conference? Then Be Really Really Good.

So, how would a 16 team field look? It would include all 9 conference champions plus the 7 highest ranked teams that are not conference champs. (The Pac-12 champion spot remains vacant as the conference did not declare a champion this season, resulting in only nine automatic bids.) But how do we seed them? Pro Style? Poll Style? Why not both? Then we can see how it could look either way.

The Pro Style Seed list (sorted by CC priority)

  1. Indiana (13-0, Big Ten, CFP 1)
  2. Georgia (12-1, SEC, CFP 3)
  3. Texas Tech (12-1, Big 12, CFP 4)
  4. Tulane (11-2, AAC, CFP 20)
  5. James Madison (12-1, Sun Belt, CFP 24)
  6. Duke (8-5, ACC, CFP UR)
  7. Boise State (9-4, MWC, CFP UR)
  8. Kennesaw State (10-3, C-USA, CFP UR)
  9. Western Michigan (9-4, MAC, CFP UR)
  10. Ohio State (12-1, Big Ten, CFP 2)
  11. Oregon (11-1, Big Ten, CFP 5)
  12. Ole Miss (11-1, SEC, CFP 6)
  13. Texas A&M (11-1, SEC, CFP 7)
  14. Oklahoma (10-2, SEC, CFP 8)
  15. Alabama (10-3, SEC, CFP 9)
  16. Miami (10-2, ACC, CFP 10)

The Poll Style Seed list (sorted by rank priority)

  1. Indiana (13-0, Big Ten, CFP 1)
  2. Ohio State (12-1, Big Ten, CFP 2)
  3. Georgia (12-1, SEC, CFP 3)
  4. Texas Tech (12-1, Big 12, CFP 4)
  5. Oregon (11-1, Big Ten, CFP 5)
  6. Ole Miss (11-1, SEC, CFP 6)
  7. Texas A&M (11-1, SEC, CFP 7)
  8. Oklahoma (10-2, SEC, CFP 8)
  9. Alabama (10-3, SEC, CFP 9)
  10. Miami (10-2, ACC, CFP 10)
  11. Tulane (11-2, AAC, CFP 20)
  12. James Madison (12-1, Sun Belt, CFP 24)
  13. Duke (8-5, ACC, CFP UR)
  14. Boise State (9-4, MWC, CFP UR)
  15. Kennesaw State (10-3, C-USA, CFP UR)
  16. Western Michigan (9-4, MAC, CFP UR)

Did you notice that Notre Dame and BYU still didn't make the field? BYU would have if they had beaten Texas Tech. Notre Dame would have if they hadn't lost to Miami or Ole Miss. While I truly believe a 16-team tournament with all the conference champions is a better way to go, some teams will always be left out.

While the top 4 are the same in both styles, the Pro Style puts emphasis on winning the conference, while the Poll Style de-emphasizes conference championships. Which is better? Let's talk about that.

The Philosophical Debate: Champion Priority vs. Rank Priority

The core difference between the styles is simple: what is the most important accomplishment in college football? Is it the body of work compiled over a season as measured by the pollsters, or is it the concrete achievement of winning a conference championship?

The Pro Style Seed (Champion Priority)

The Pro Style Seed is predicated on the simple principle that winning your league title is the most valuable accomplishment a team can achieve.

In this model, the seeds are determined in two distinct phases:

  1. Phase 1: Conference Champions (Seeds 1-9). All nine conference champions are automatically seeded 1 through 9. This is done not because the Sun Belt champion is necessarily better than an At-Large team from the Big Ten, but because the system must incentivize and reward the most difficult and conclusive on-field victory: winning a conference championship. By elevating all champions, the system preserves the integrity of the regular season and the importance of the conference championship game.
  2. Phase 2: At-Large Teams (Seeds 10-16). The seven highest-ranked teams remaining are seeded strictly by their final ranking, placing them directly behind the lowest-ranked champion. This system rewards the best teams overall while still honoring the champion priority.

The Poll Style Seed (Rank Priority)

The Poll Style Seed aligns with the current, committee-driven philosophy where the "best" 16 teams are determined by subjective evaluation, regardless of whether they won a league title.

In this model, the 16 qualified teams are seeded strictly 1 through 16 according to their final ranking (CFP Rank/Poll Points). The Conference Champions are guaranteed a berth, but their seeding is subject entirely to the committee's final ranking.

This results in the higher-ranked At-Large teams (like Ohio State, Oregon, and Ole Miss) receiving a significant seeding boost, placing them ahead of lower-ranked champions (like Tulane, James Madison, and Duke). This model favors the strength of schedule and the overall perception of the team, mirroring the current CFP methodology while simply extending the field to 16 teams.

The Brackets: How Seeding Changes Everything

The primary impact of the two different seeding philosophies is evident in the first round. In both models, the higher-ranked team hosts the game. While the 16 teams are identical in both scenarios, the Pro Style bracket maximizes competitive tension by forcing strong teams to travel, whereas the Poll Style bracket favors maximizing ranking strength, leading to early, highly-ranked matchups.

The Pro Style Pairings

This bracket rewards Conference Champions by placing them against lower-ranked At-Large teams, creating compelling matchups in the middle of the bracket, but also guaranteeing that the top four seeds will host the lowest-ranked At-Large teams. The most intriguing matchups are in the mid-seed range, forcing top programs to travel (e.g., Ohio State traveling to Boise State).

  1. (1) Indiana vs. (16) Miami
  2. (2) Georgia vs. (15) Alabama
  3. (3) Texas Tech vs. (14) Oklahoma
  4. (4) Tulane vs. (13) Texas A&M
  5. (5) James Madison vs. (12) Ole Miss
  6. (6) Duke vs. (11) Oregon
  7. (7) Boise State vs. (10) Ohio State
  8. (8) Kennesaw State vs. (9) Western Michigan

The Poll Style Pairings

This bracket organizes teams solely by their overall poll ranking, resulting in minimal travel shock for the major programs. Notably, it places two of the highest-ranked At-Large teams against each other immediately, and gives the top four host seeds the weakest Conference Champions as their opening opponents.

  1. (1) Indiana vs. (16) Western Michigan
  2. (2) Ohio State vs. (15) Kennesaw State
  3. (3) Georgia vs. (14) Boise State
  4. (4) Texas Tech vs. (13) Duke
  5. (5) Oregon vs. (12) James Madison
  6. (6) Ole Miss vs. (11) Tulane
  7. (7) Texas A&M vs. (10) Miami
  8. (8) Oklahoma vs. (9) Alabama

The Pros and Cons of Each

The Pro Style Seed creates the highest potential for upsets by forcing strong At-Large teams (Ohio State, Oregon) to travel deep into hostile environments to play a champion, giving those champions a true home-field advantage. The biggest minus is the early, high-stakes rematch in the 2/15 game (Georgia vs. Alabama), which many fans feel should be reserved for a later round.

Those two just played in the SEC Championship game a week ago, making this a third meeting this season and second in two weeks. While the committee would privately, behind closed doors, likely change the seeding of Alabama (perhaps swapping them with Miami or Oklahoma), we are working strictly with the official final rankings, thus giving us UGA-Bama III. However, the system is designed to reward the conference win above all else.

The Poll Style Seed minimizes the upset potential by guaranteeing the highest-ranked teams play the lowest-ranked teams, often leading to lopsided first-round games. Its biggest flaw, by my view, is the 8 vs 9 matchup (Oklahoma vs. Alabama). Pitting two top-ten ranked teams against each other in the first round ensures that one excellent team is eliminated immediately, which goes against the idea of rewarding a strong overall season. This bracket also minimizes the incentive of winning a championship for the mid-majors, as they gain little seeding advantage.

Crucially, in both the Pro Style and Poll Style models, the eight first-round games will narrow the field to the same number of quarterfinalists as the current 12-team format: eight teams.

The complexity of designing a fair playoff system hinges entirely on setting clear, justifiable rules and sticking to them, whether you favor the conference champion or the overall ranking. Regardless of the bracket, December is college football viewing season. My Streaming Life focuses on college football during this time of year, and while I'm looking forward to the playoffs, I'd rather see a proper tournament than what they have today.

Email Post

Comments

Post a Comment

Your comments are welcome. Abusive or off-topic comments will be removed.