- The existing 12-team playoff format works neatly for the Big Ten.
- The Big Ten shot for the moon with some CFP bracket ideas that failed to gain traction. Maybe, that’s the point: Stall, and prolong 12 team format.
- SEC, ACC and Big 12 aligned behind a 16-team plan. Tony Petitti’s conference stood alone in objection.
Short of any evidence proving Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti masterminded this whole thing, let’s call it accidental genius or unintentional brilliance.
Petitti persistently gumming up the works of College Football Playoff expansion has him falling buttocks backward into the perfect playoff format for the Big Ten: the status quo.
The existing 12-team playoff format works neatly for Petitti’s conference.
If the past two seasons prove a reliable guide, the Big Ten would not substantially benefit from the addition of four more at-large playoff bids that increase the bracket to 16 teams.
The first four teams out last year were Alabama, Miami, Mississippi and South Carolina. This year’s sore four were Notre Dame, Brigham Young, Texas and Vanderbilt.
Notice what’s missing from those quartets? Big Ten teams.
No evidence a 16-team playoff would help Big Ten
The SEC, ACC and Big 12 each got on board with a 5+11 playoff model this past offseason that, if approved, would expand the bracket for the 2026 season. The Big Ten stood alone in opposition to the 5+11 plan, with Petitti refusing to add four extra at-large bids or award the CFP selection committee more clout in determining the field.
Petitti countered with other ideas that failed to gain widespread traction, such as play-in games or pre-assigning multiple automatic bids for each of the Power Four conferences. When the Big Ten’s preferred 4+4+2+2+1+3AL format — say that three times quickly — failed to garner necessary support, the conference moved on to blue-sky ideas involving 24 or more teams, bloated with automatic bids.
As Petitti mused aloud at Big Ten media days whether an 8-4 Big Ten making the playoff might be just what this sport needs — a belief to which he alone subscribes — I thought to myself: This man is not serious about CFP expansion. He’s just wasting time.
Perhaps that’s the point. Cook up some never-going-to-happen expansion ideas to create a smokescreen, while the 12-team playoff that works well for the Big Ten marches on in perpetuity.
The Big Ten qualified the most teams, four, in the inaugural 12-team playoff, and Ohio State won the national championship. In this year’s encore, it qualified its top three teams: Indiana, Ohio State and Oregon. The Hoosiers and Buckeyes earned first-round byes, while the Ducks are seeded No. 5.
Yes, this format works for the Big Ten.
Is Big Ten ideating or simply stalling CFP expansion?
The playoff cannot expand or evolve its format without the Big Ten’s agreement, because Petitti’s conference and the SEC remain the two power brokers with the strongest grip on the wheel.
As CFP executive director Rich Clark put it before the season, the Big Ten and SEC failing to align behind a playoff expansion plan would push forward the status quo of 12 teams.
If Petitti’s next proposal involves a 200-team bracket with 19 automatic bids for the Big Ten and nine rounds of play-in games, then we’ll know for certain he’s just running interference to realistic expansion to prolong the current format.
A 5+11 playoff could help the ACC and Big 12 qualify multiple teams with more frequency.
BYU President C. Shane Reese told me in October, “I think the best setup is 16 teams.”
His mood is shared by many.
“The move to 16 should be a priority,” SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey said last month.
Along with creating more avenues for the ACC and Big 12, extra at-large bids would help hatch more access for the SEC’s secondary and tertiary tiers.
What would it do for the Big Ten? Zilch, the past two seasons, anyway.
The Big Ten’s crème de la crème is as good or better as that of any conference, including Sankey’s SEC. Move beyond the Big Ten’s top tier, though, and into the messy middle, and the conference lacks the depth of playoff contenders housed in the SEC.
So, Petitti shot for the moon with his auto-bid-focused plan that would pre-assign the same number of automatic bids for the Big Ten as the SEC.
When SEC coaches balked at that idea, the Big Ten pivoted to other far-fetched plans, while refusing to take up the 5+11 proposal.
Perhaps, Petitti’s plans started as a way to try to gain playoff access for 8-4 Iowa or to simply create more TV inventory. But, by now, you can see how maybe the Big Ten’s strategy circuitously morphed into keeping 9-3 Texas out, stalling expansion and preserving the field at 12 teams, a size and shape that works best for the Big Ten.
Blake Toppmeyer is the USA TODAY Network’s senior national college football columnist. Email him at BToppmeyer@gannett.com and follow him on X @btoppmeyer.
(This story was updated to add a video.)
Other Articles
