2025 College Football Playoffs

[Wild Bill]

Bama is more likely to win the SEC than they are to get knocked out of the playoffs for losing the SEC title game.

You could be right. Losing that game has knocked the SEC runner-up out before, albeit in the 4-team playoffs. One scenario that would make it interesting is if the committee has to decide between 3 loss SEC runner up bama, or a 2 loss BIG team.

If Michigan runs the table and beats OSU, I don’t think they can crack that 1–10 log jam without some chaos, so it’s entirely possible they’d be sitting at 11th, right behind Bama, going into championship weekend. And if Bama lost to A&M by double digits, I think Michigan would take bama's place at the table.

USC could be in a similar spot if they run the table. The only difference there is that USC running the talbe means Oregon may be gone, which leaves room for a 3 loss bama.

 

[stlnd01]

You could be right. Losing that game has knocked the SEC runner-up out before, albeit in the 4-team playoffs. One scenario that would make it interesting is if the committee has to decide between 3 loss SEC runner up bama, or a 2 loss BIG team.

If Michigan runs the table and beats OSU, I don’t think they can crack that 1–10 log jam without some chaos, so it’s entirely possible they’d be sitting at 11th, right behind Bama, going into championship weekend. And if Bama lost to A&M by double digits, I think Michigan would take bama's place at the table.

USC could be in a similar spot if they run the table. The only difference there is that USC running the talbe means Oregon may be gone, which leaves room for a 3 loss bama.

We only really have one year of sample size to go on, but last year the losers of the B1G and SEC championships were barely penalized for it at all.

Maybe it would be different with a three-loss Bama team. Maybe it would be different if Bama got blown off the field by A&M and people didn't think they would be competitive in the playoffs. But that seems unlikely.

If a B1G or SEC team is in the field going into the CCG, I suspect it's going to take more than losing to a top-three team on a weekend when most of the bottom half of the bracket is sitting at home to knock them out of it.

 

[jprue24]

We only really have one year of sample size to go on, but last year the losers of the B1G and SEC championships were barely penalized for it at all.

Maybe it would be different with a three-loss Bama team. Maybe it would be different if Bama got blown off the field by A&M and people didn't think they would be competitive in the playoffs. But that seems unlikely.

If a B1G or SEC team is in the field going into the CCG, I suspect it's going to take more than losing to a top-three team on a weekend when most of the bottom half of the bracket is sitting at home to knock them out of it.

SMU didn't get dropped out of the playoff, as well and why Texas Tech are locked into the playoff if they win out and make their ccg.

 

[Bane]

SMU didn't get dropped out of the playoff, as well and why Texas Tech are locked into the playoff if they win out and make their ccg.

Wasn't there reporting earlier that the committee had revised how they're looking at CCGs this year and the reason being they didn't want a repeat of the SMU situation? I thought I had read where they're going to allow a loss in a conference title game to carry a lot more weight this year than last year. Could be wrong though.

 

[Bane]

The OSU fan shade at Mendoza aside (top 5 QB in the B1G lmao), I agree, he sounds likes reading a prepared speech.

 

[jprue24]

Wasn't there reporting earlier that the committee had revised how they're looking at CCGs this year and the reason being they didn't want a repeat of the SMU situation? I thought I had read where they're going to allow a loss in a conference title game to carry a lot more weight this year than last year. Could be wrong though.

The change I'm aware of is that the top 4 seeds are now the top 4 ranked teams, not the 4 highest ranked conference champions.

What's new to CFP format this year? Explaining playoff bracket changes

What changes have been made to the CFP format this season? Here's what to know about the 2025-26 College Football Playoff format.

www.usatoday.com

 

[jprue24]

@Bane These appear to be all of the stated changes. For a ccg loser dropping out of the playoff, I read it as an intentional decision to let the committee decide. I could see a ccg loser dropping to 11 or 12 and getting "bumped" out.

"Changes for the upcoming season include enhancements to the tools that the selection committee uses to assess schedule strength and how teams perform against their schedule. The current schedule strength metric has been adjusted to apply greater weight to games against strong opponents. An additional metric, record strength, has been added to the selection committee's analysis to go beyond a team's schedule strength to assess how a team performed against that schedule. This metric rewards teams defeating high-quality opponents while minimizing the penalty for losing to such a team. Conversely, these changes will provide minimal reward for defeating a lower-quality opponent while imposing a greater penalty for losing to such a team...

At the direction of the CFP management committee, the membership panel also reviewed the movement of idle teams from the penultimate to final ranking. The selection committee reaffirmed that movement in the final week should be evidence-based and did not recommend creating a formal policy prohibiting such movement.

These changes follow the CFP management committee's spring decision to modify the seeding and bye policies of the 12-team Playoff. The new policy will guarantee the five highest-ranked conference champions a place in the Playoff but will no longer include a bye for the four highest-ranked champions. Seeding will now be based directly on the final ranking of the CFP selection committee, with the four highest-ranked teams receiving a first-round bye.

All of these modifications will help the selection committee as they rank the top 25 teams," said Rich Clark, executive director of the College Football Playoff. "We feel these changes will help construct a postseason bracket that recognizes the best performances and teams on the field during the regular season, and I want to thank our veteran selection committee members and data analytics groups for helping implement these changes."

College Football Playoff Selection Committee Prepares for 2025-26 Season - College Football Playoff

The College Football Playoff (CFP) selection committee met recently in preparation for the upcoming season. Following the first year of the 12-team Playoff, the

collegefootballplayoff.com

 

[rtrn2glory]

We really fucked the committee by losing those first two games.. Were easily better than Miami right now and would've made their job a lot easier if we would've won at least one of those

 

[DCDomer]

Are the TV game slots random or based on seeding?

 

[bumpdaddy]

@Bane These appear to be all of the stated changes. For a ccg loser dropping out of the playoff, I read it as an intentional decision to let the committee decide. I could see a ccg loser dropping to 11 or 12 and getting "bumped" out.

"Changes for the upcoming season include enhancements to the tools that the selection committee uses to assess schedule strength and how teams perform against their schedule. The current schedule strength metric has been adjusted to apply greater weight to games against strong opponents. An additional metric, record strength, has been added to the selection committee's analysis to go beyond a team's schedule strength to assess how a team performed against that schedule. This metric rewards teams defeating high-quality opponents while minimizing the penalty for losing to such a team. Conversely, these changes will provide minimal reward for defeating a lower-quality opponent while imposing a greater penalty for losing to such a team...

At the direction of the CFP management committee, the membership panel also reviewed the movement of idle teams from the penultimate to final ranking. The selection committee reaffirmed that movement in the final week should be evidence-based and did not recommend creating a formal policy prohibiting such movement.

These changes follow the CFP management committee's spring decision to modify the seeding and bye policies of the 12-team Playoff. The new policy will guarantee the five highest-ranked conference champions a place in the Playoff but will no longer include a bye for the four highest-ranked champions. Seeding will now be based directly on the final ranking of the CFP selection committee, with the four highest-ranked teams receiving a first-round bye.

All of these modifications will help the selection committee as they rank the top 25 teams," said Rich Clark, executive director of the College Football Playoff. "We feel these changes will help construct a postseason bracket that recognizes the best performances and teams on the field during the regular season, and I want to thank our veteran selection committee members and data analytics groups for helping implement these changes."

College Football Playoff Selection Committee Prepares for 2025-26 Season - College Football Playoff

The College Football Playoff (CFP) selection committee met recently in preparation for the upcoming season. Following the first year of the 12-team Playoff, the

collegefootballplayoff.com

Good find. I referenced earlier in this thread that last week, John Brice recently spent time with the committee and mentioned that the process for evaluating and ranking teams has changed. You can find that post here

 

[IrishLax]

We really fucked the committee by losing those first two games.. Were easily better than Miami right now and would've made their job a lot easier if we would've won at least one of those

The SEC refs really fucked the committee by not calling the most obvious holding of all time on 4th and 11.

If we are 11-1 with a win over A&M we are either ranked 4th or 3rd right now. The only debate would be between Bama and BYU... which is an easy debate at the moment... and the entire process would've been comically simplified just changing that one call.

 

[Bane]

The Committee has actually made some significant changes this year, and it appears that "penalizing teams for performance during CCGs" won't be as much of a factor this year, meaning, if you lose in your CCG, the committee will have to look at your overall resume, and if it doesn't match up with a bubble team that didn't play in a CCG, you might not get in.

In yesterday's II pod, John Brice talked about his time recently with the CFP Committee, in which they basically put him and other writers through a selection committee bootcamp to rank the final top 25 2024 teams right before the playoffs, but using the new 2025 selection criteria. You can hear him talk about it here:



Here are some takeaways:

• The ranking criteria are laid out in extensive detail in a binder. Committee members are required to use that criteria to evaluate and rank teams accordingly. It isn't just a group of people thrown in a room with a vague idea of what to do and then arguing it out from there. Their conclusions are usually somewhat predictable based on the detailed metrics and resume criteria.
• After ranking the 2024 teams using this year's criteria, SMU would have been left out and Bama would have been in, which means the new criteria puts less value on simply appearing in a CCG.
• The new criteria are so black and white that Brice knew ND was going to be ranked 10th even before this year's Committee came up with their initial ranking, because he knew the process they would have to follow and the result of following that process.

Good find. I referenced earlier in this thread that last week, John Brice recently spent time with the committee and mentioned that the process for evaluating and ranking teams has changed. You can find that post here

Thank you, that is the exact post I was thinking of.

 

[jprue24]

The Committee has actually made some significant changes this year, and it appears that "penalizing teams for performance during CCGs" won't be as much of a factor this year, meaning, if you lose in your CCG, the committee will have to look at your overall resume, and if it doesn't match up with a bubble team that didn't play in a CCG, you might not get in.

In yesterday's II pod, John Brice talked about his time recently with the CFP Committee, in which they basically put him and other writers through a selection committee bootcamp to rank the final top 25 2024 teams right before the playoffs, but using the new 2025 selection criteria. You can hear him talk about it here:


Here are some takeaways:

• The ranking criteria are laid out in extensive detail in a binder. Committee members are required to use that criteria to evaluate and rank teams accordingly. It isn't just a group of people thrown in a room with a vague idea of what to do and then arguing it out from there. Their conclusions are usually somewhat predictable based on the detailed metrics and resume criteria.
• After ranking the 2024 teams using this year's criteria, SMU would have been left out and Bama would have been in, which means the new criteria puts less value on simply appearing in a CCG.
• The new criteria are so black and white that Brice knew ND was going to be ranked 10th even before this year's Committee came up with their initial ranking, because he knew the process they would have to follow and the result of following that process.

Interesting that Bama losing a 3rd SEC game to .500 OU by 3 TDs wasn't as impactful as SMU losing a 2nd in their ccg by a fg to the 17th ranked team. Yes, I know scores don't always accurately reflect the competitiveness of a game, but SMU did mount a big comeback.

 

[stlnd01]

Wasn't there reporting earlier that the committee had revised how they're looking at CCGs this year and the reason being they didn't want a repeat of the SMU situation? I thought I had read where they're going to allow a loss in a conference title game to carry a lot more weight this year than last year. Could be wrong though.

I suspect there will be a difference between losing an SEC/B1G championship game and losing an ACC/Big 12 championship game. As there probably should be, if we're being honest here.

 

[DomeFieldAdvantage]

I wonder how this Kiffin news would effect how the committee chooses. If Ole Miss holds him to the Egg Bowl deadline and he chooses to go elsewhere (which seems likely with his family visiting Florida and LSU the last two days), how much do they drop for not having their Head Coach and play caller for the playoffs? Do they even make it? Would players who want to follow Kiffin even play?

Maybe us and the committee get lucky and all this drama causes Ole Miss to lose the Egg Bowl so badly the committee can justify dropping them out without acknowledging any HC uncertainty.

 

[mrmcgrail]

I mean the committee has done something similar to this before with fsu. If kiffin leaves and they get trounced in the egg bowl isn't that kind of similar to the fsu scenario

 

[IrishTusker]

The other issue is scheduling your two toughest games as the first two games of the year. Did any other playoff contender do that?

 

[KMac151993]

The other issue is scheduling your two toughest games as the first two games of the year. Did any other playoff contender do that?

Ohio State played two tough games all season...opener and closer.

 

[ND88]

What a clown...

"2) They just faced two teams who chose NOT to compete at 100% (Navy and Pitt)."

Leftists, Liberals, Democrats, MAGA, Conservatives, Republicans, Libertarians, Independents. We finally found something we can all agree on.

This guy fu*kin' sucks.

 

[SDIrishFan]

Ohio State played two tough games all season...opener and closer.

Not sure that should be considered a "tough game". Rivalry, sure. But not tough.

 

[vicknd1982]

Irish will be #8 ahead of Ou and Bama tom is the hope, I guess we will see

 

[sfk324]

Leftists, Liberals, Democrats, MAGA, Conservatives, Republicans, Libertarians, Independents. We finally found something we can all agree on.

This guy fu*kin' sucks.

Pretty sure he was in the Catholics vs Convicts documentary. He's a known Miami fan, ergo his opinion on the topic is both completely biased and generally worthless.

 

[FOTY977]

Pretty sure he was in the Catholics vs Convicts documentary. He's a known Miami fan, ergo his opinion on the topic is both completely biased and generally worthless.

Cuck Todd is not a ball knower. Waste zero time on anything he says.

 

[Bane]

It’s sort of amazing how all dozen of the Miami fans are the loudest and most annoying contingent of online CFB discourse. I get they feel slighted but Jesus Christ I couldn’t find it in me to cry so fucking much about it every single hour of every single day.

“Did you know Miami beat ND 3 months ago??? Did you know that they have the HEAD TO HEAD?!?!?”

God have some fucking dignity. You’re shouting into the void. The committee is not going to be swayed by the blithering moronic commentary of Bear Fellatio, Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd, or Dan LeTARD. Miami is not just one more weeping tweet from Ari Washerman away from getting into the playoffs.

 

[DONTH8]

I’m starting to think they lose @Miss St

Please let Kiffin tell them he's leaving, they tell him to pack up and go, name Charlie Jr. as interim HC for the playoffs, and we get them round 1. PLEASE.

 

[greyhammer90]

Please let Kiffin tell them he's leaving, they tell him to pack up and go, name Charlie Jr. as interim HC for the playoffs, and we get them round 1. PLEASE.

I had the same thought except as a Catholic I assumed some divine punishment was coming in the form of an ironic loss due to Ole Miss having a schematic advantage.

 

[DONTH8]

What a clown...

"2) They just faced two teams who chose NOT to compete at 100% (Navy and Pitt)."

I'm sure this has been said on this board, but the thing that irks me with Miami, and their constant whining, as well as some saying to cancel the game next year because it means nothing, is that without their win against us, they would be literally outside the top 25. They have to talk about ND because they have nothing else to hang their hat on. So, dont play ND next year, lose your annual 2 wtf games, and miss the playoff again if you want. But this is totally on them. The quicker they take ownership of their own problems, the faster they can get to fixing them.

The committee can see that teams change over the course of the season. ND keeps growing and getting better. Miami has stayed the same or deteriorated. Not sure which.

 

[DONTH8]

I had the same thought except as a Catholic I assumed some divine punishment was coming in the form of an ironic loss due to Ole Miss having a schematic advantage.

Could definitely see an Interim OC Charlie Sr. in the booth for the game...

 

[Bane]

I'm sure this has been said on this board, but the thing that irks me with Miami, and their constant whining, as well as some saying to cancel the game next year because it means nothing, is that without their win against us, they would be literally outside the top 25. They have to talk about ND because they have nothing else to hang their hat on. So, dont play ND next year, lose your annual 2 wtf games, and miss the playoff again if you want. But this is totally on them. The quicker they take ownership of their own problems, the faster they can get to fixing them.

The committee can see that teams change over the course of the season. ND keeps growing and getting better. Miami has stayed the same or deteriorated. Not sure which.

Exactly. Substitute us for some other team, even a P4 team and at 8-2 they’re either unranked or just clinging. What those morons don’t realize is the CFP committee has made it clear for like 5 years in a row that outside of good Clemson teams they don’t give a fuck about the ACC. Miami thinks they should be the in the playoffs, the committee begrudgingly thinks they deserve to be ranked at all.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

Good Lord, my entire X timeline is Miami accounts crying about ND.