As the College Football Playoff format continues to evolve, Big Ten coaches Ryan Day and Curt Cignetti are making one thing clear: the nine-game Big Ten conference schedule should carry more weight—and should result in the league receiving four automatic qualifiers (AQs) in the new playoff structure.
“I’ve said this before, that I feel like until there’s continuity between the conferences, if you’re in the Big Ten, it would make no sense to have anything other than a case to have four (automatic) qualifiers and have an expanded pool of teams, 14 or 16,” Ohio State head coach Ryan Day said this week. “When you play nine conference games, it’s not the same as someone who plays eight conference games. We’ve said this before. And so if you’re going to be compared against that, then it’s just not the same.”
Day’s comments reflect a growing frustration among Big Ten coaches and administrators, who believe their teams face a tougher path to the postseason than their SEC counterparts, who play one fewer conference game. They argue that the added difficulty should be reflected in how the new 16-team playoff is constructed.
Indiana head coach Curt Cignetti echoed those sentiments after the Hoosiers paid $500,000 to cancel a future home-and-home series with Virginia, opting to secure another home game and shift toward what he called an “SEC scheduling philosophy.”
“The two best conferences in college football, any football guy that’s objective will tell you, is the Big Ten and the SEC,” Cignetti said. “Twelve of the 16 SEC teams play three (Group of Five) or FCS games… and one less conference game. So we figured we’d just adopt SEC scheduling philosophy.”
Cignetti didn’t stop there. He offered a pointed example from last season to back the Big Ten’s case.
“Why shouldn’t the Big Ten have four AQs?” he asked. “Ohio State actually finished fourth in the conference at the end of the season… Ohio State won the national championship. You want to put the best teams in the playoffs? Give the best teams the AQs, but make them earn it with play-in games.”
Both coaches also signaled that unless the CFP adopts the Big Ten’s proposed 4-4-2-2-1 model—four AQs each for the Big Ten and SEC, two each for the Big 12 and ACC, one Group of Five champion, and three at-large spots—future marquee non-conference matchups could disappear.
“If we’re going to be in a situation where we get four automatic qualifiers, then I think it’d be great to have a 10th game against a Power Four team,” Day said. “If we’re not going to do that, then I don’t think it makes sense.”
As the CFP decision-makers consider the path forward, one thing is certain: the Big Ten’s coaches aren’t backing down from their call for fairness—and four playoff bids.
So, nine conference games, one FCS and two weak teams from non P4 is worthy of 4 playoff spots?
Who in the hell figured up that formula? What do those nine conference games mean if you’re just going to let teams with three losses into the field?
All those in favor of nine conference games, there is the death of the regular season in college football.
You can’t actually believe that playing the games the Big 10 has lined up validates any of this?
It’s better the SEC 8 game model with 2 or 3 G5 games and a FCS game. Occasionally or if they have a ooc rival they might play a power team out of conference. While I believe no conference should have 4 AQ spots but I believe a 9 game schedule for conference are the basic need. It’s the easiest way to make comparisons. How can the SEC be ranked higher if they play 1 less conference game. Big Ten or any other conference at 9 are at a disadvantage by playing each other
Why would a season ticket holder renew to watch Auburn play Ball State, South Alabama and Mercer? Georgia’s OOC home games are Marshall, Austin Peay and Charlotte; yawn.
Yeah, that’s something to get excited about, let’s add a 13th game so we can add Kennesaw State or Akron.
I don’t see the Big 12 schedule is all that much more riveting when you have Indiana playing Old Dominion, Kennesaw and Indiana State and Maryland squaring off against Florida Atlantic, Northern Illinois and Towson.
Nine game conference schedule in SEC is very important so they can have fairness to play everybody in that conference.
IIs that supposed to make us feel like you’re someone of authority, selling us on the lie that you are making the game better. You don’t have enough games to play everyone in the conference, but you still want to add more and water it down even further.
Ditching divisions have improve scheduling for power four conferences.
9 game schedules are insane. I’ll never understand them:
1. They are inherently not balanced due to playing 5 road games every other year.
2. They assume all conferences are equal, which they aren’t. The bottom of the ACC, Big 12, and Big Ten are garbage compared to the SEC.
3. We need more non-con games, not less!
Moreover, the Big Ten proposal is offensive. Having play-ins and NOT at-large would:
1. Render the non-con meaningless, which is an important part of college football.
2. A 7-5 team could make the playoff. For instance, say a team goes 1-3 in the non-con But then they go 6-2 in conference. That team would finish in the Top 6, easily, and thus be able to play-in to the playoff. In a 5+11 model, that team isn’t getting in.
The compromise should be:
1. Expand the regular season to 13 games. Given they’re talking about doing the play-ins, allow everyone to play 13 – not just a special bunch.
2. Require that 10/13 games be against P4 schools. Conferences can choose whether to do 8 or 9 conference games, as long as teams play 10 overall. A school who plays less than 10 would not allowed to be picked over a P4 team with the same record who played 10.
3. The 8 CG model would allow for non-con rivalries to be protected while also allowing for additional non-con games. Florida could play Florida State and Miami, for instance.
4. No FCS games after September.
5. Go with the 5+11 model.
CFB Needs more conference games not less.
Lmao, don’t even. The bottom of the SEC was garbage last year too. Kentucky was AWFUL, and Mississippi State lost to TOLEDO, from the mighty MAC by 24!!! Those Bulldogs will only win 1 game in the SEC this year… but no, apparently the bottom of the SEC isn’t garbage
Screw the B10 and AQs. The B10 just wants the possibility of getting 6 teams into the CFP. With it’s play in games and 4 AQs, if #6 beats #3 and #5 beats #4 then surely #3 & #4 are worthy of an at large bid to the CFP right? Ugh!
Indiana played the softest conference schedule ever last year and undeservedly sneaked into the playoffs.
Notre Dame destroyed them.
There you go again.
I don’t care for the schedules of a lot of Big 10 teams, but there are a lot of Big 12, ACC and SEC teams that have questionable opponents.
Notre Dame beat Indiana 27-17, destroyed is hardly the correct adjective.
You should really check your facts.
Of the 11 playoff games in 2024, only Notre Dame’s victory of Penn State (27 to 24 by 3 points) and Texas’ double overtime victory of Arizona State (39 to 31 by 8 points) were closer than the Indiana loss to Notre Dame (27-17 by 10 points). You might want to reevaluate your assessments of Indiana’s season and playoff performance.
It was 27-3 with 1:27 left in the fourth quarter.
Then Indiana scored two meaningless garbage TDs.
Did you clowns even watch the game?
Spencer,
Indiana only beat TWO teams and played four teams all year with a winning record.
Their OOC schedule was a farce and their Big 10 slate was a joke outside of Michigan and Ohio State.
Their head coach needs to gain some self-awareness.
Indiana’s only losses were to the top 2 teams in the nation. Who did you lose to?
I’m not an Indiana fan, or really a FBS follower for that matter, but I find that the people on her talking about Indiana badly never seem to say where their heroes hail from. My team is Montana
The college football playoffs is a beauty contest. (That is why a ‘subjective’ committee is needed to select its participants.) Only if the playoff is expanded to 16 schools does the money for its broadcast rights increase – so it is going to 16 participants.
To begin, reduce the subjectivity by first having all the Power-4 conferences go to a 9-game conference schedule and then have every Power-4 member play at least 1 OOC Power-4 opponent.
Next, after compiling the regular season power conferences OOC winning percentage – highest to lowest, against only other power-4 opponents – give the highest ranked conference 4 additional CFP representative, give the next highest 3 additional CFP representatives, give the third highest 2 additional CFP representatives and the lowest only 1 additional CFP representatives. That with each Power-4 conference’s champion is a total of 14 participants. The remining two spots go to the two highest ranked Group-of-5 conference champions. Notre Dames’s inclusion, if denoted worthy, would come out of the ACC’s allotment of CFP participants.
The regular season would remain very important, Group-of-5 participation would increase and the committee’s only job would be whether Notre Dame should or should not be included in the CFP post-season.
So based on what you’re saying, using last year’s standings, the teams that play Florida State, Oklahoma State, Purdue and Mississippi State get the same credit for teams that play Southern Methodist Arizona State, Oregon and Georgia. Win or lose, equal weight because they’re all P4.
No
Since you were so detailed in your breakdown, here’s my detailed answer.
Hell no!
JM, it is clear that you are not well versed in the study of Collective Statistics. One is examining the patterns of the conference as a whole, not the behavior of an individual member.
You, cannot possibly, create a formula, calculating and determining, who makes the playoffs. Gamblers have been trying to do this since the first wager that was placed on a game.
If you are able to do that, there is no need to play the games, we will already know who will wins.
I am fully confident that last year there was a 12 team field selected that determined the deserving national champion, even though I do not care for Ohio State, they won it on the field just as it has been done in FCS and Div-IAA since 1978 and D-II and D-III since 1973. Regardless of who you felt was snubbed and left out, Ohio State won and that would not have been different if the rest of the field was made up out of all the teams from your favorite conference.
I have prescribed a clear recipe for playoff precipitation, not a predictive analytic projection. The basic principle underwriting my recipe is: the better the conference performance – the more participants from that conference.
We have this already. It is called the Sagarin Poll.
Again, you aren’t reinventing the wheel or suggesting something that hasn’t been attempted before.
Aside from that, what is the regular season worth if all of the teams make it into the post season?
Stay focused JM… …No body is reinventing a wheel or retreading an old idea. To recap for the 2026 season, only 16 teams make the playoff, not all 136. That’s just under 12% of the field not everyone.
To begin, (1) definitively decerning, from on-field performance, the ranking of the Power-4 conference first to fourth and allot the number of at-large bids from each conference on this basis. Then, (2) definitively determine, from on-field performance, the ranking of the Group-of-6 (beginning next season there will be 6 in the group) and allot the two determined highest ranked, one bid apiece. That’s 16 bids, et voila!
No rhetorically subjective CFP committee: no byzantine or clandestine process clouding the selection outcome and all the while retaining a meaningful regular season with Notre Dame retaining its eligibility by being included with the ACC conference. You can even have Sargin do all determinations!
It is apparent that you don’t like using strict formalism or collective analytics or the probability surrounding exhaustive outcomes. That’s OK. Surprise yourself and think of it as magic.
we all loved this sport because there were less games they meant more….who is actually asking for this??
Heaven only knows Urban Breyers.
remember the good ol days when they would just pick the champ out of a hat on new years day? its about saturdays Greg and Tony not Thursday night showdowns in January
This just happened to be why FSU and Clemson want out of the ACC, and you will likely see it soon as the Spots in the playoffs are not being distributed equally
Easy solutions..
1. All P4 conferences go to 9 games
2. Since some SEC/ACC teams have in state rivalries Fl/Flst. Clemson/SC Ga/Gtech Uk/UL require all other teams to schedule another p4 team
3. Make the SEC-Big 10 challenge a reality.. do the same thing for the ACC-Big 12.. get the conferences to equal numbers so every team has to play it.
4. Add a 13th game to the schedule so you can play 2 bunnies
If that schedule is so hrd that you cant go 11-2 or 10-3 then youdidnt deserve to make the playoffs anyway
Agreeable thweedged adding a 13th regular season game would be excellent for P4 conferences.
The B1G should take this to its logical extension: play 12 non-conference games. Any team that can win four games gets an auto-bid into the playoff!
No interest in it sorry about that Jesper.
Nine game conference schedule is very important to Big Ten.