College Football Playoff: What we're hearing about changes

On Sunday, the eve of the College Football Playoff national championship game between the Ohio State Buckeyes and Notre Dame Fighting Irish, the decision-makers who have the ultimate authority over the playoff's format will hold their annual business meeting.

Only a portion of the 90 minutes is expected to be spent reviewing the inaugural 12-team model -- its pros and cons, and the plethora of questions it raised about the sport's postseason.

Included in the topics that have already generated buzz among the FBS commissioners: Do the top four seeds need to be conference champions? Does the extra time off from a first-round bye put the higher seeds at a disadvantage? Is there a better way to measure strength of schedule for supersized conferences without divisions? What matters most to the 13 selection committee members, who serve three-year terms? Is a 14-team field better than 12 teams?

ESPN spoke with more than a dozen influential sources in and around the playoff to convey their feedback as we near the end of the sport's first run through the 12-team College Football Playoff.

Can change happen next season?

To make any changes for next season -- including something seemingly as simple as seeding -- every conference and Notre Dame must unanimously agree to it, leaving serious doubt among multiple sources with knowledge of the process that the 2025 playoff will look much different from what we've seen the past month.

But because the January meeting is so compressed, the FBS commissioners could schedule a separate virtual conversation next month for a more comprehensive review.

If the commissioners agree to revise something, it probably wouldn't happen until the annual CFP spring meetings in April, but leaders also recognize that even bigger decisions loom, as the next iteration of the playoff begins in 2026, and any modifications to the format -- including its size -- need to be determined in the coming months. 

"It's not impossible to change something for this season, but I don't see it happening in January, and if you wait until April, I don't know how you do that for this calendar year," one high-ranking CFP source told ESPN. "And I don't know that there's unanimous support to do something substantively different. I would say highly unlikely -- could -- but highly unlikely we see a significant change for this upcoming season."

CFP executive director Rich Clark told ESPN this week that commissioners have the power to make modifications for next year but that the limited time to implement them could be an obstacle.

"I don't know where the changes might be," he said. "We just have our first meeting, where we get everything out on the table at the championship game, then we'll start fleshing out the things that we need to decide on later in the winter and into the spring. There could be several issues that we're going to look at, but they are going to look at everything -- selection committee, format, just all of it -- and determine what they want us to put on the table and prepare for them.

"We wanted to play this out and make it as good as we can possibly make it," he said, "and then make the adjustments to make it even better."

Could seeding change?

Multiple sources indicated the most likely adjustment for 2025 could be the seeding, though even that could be divisive.

In the current structure, the five highest-ranked conference champions are guaranteed spots in the bracket, and the four highest-ranked champions earn the top four seeds and first-round byes. This year, that meant No. 12-ranked Arizona State earned a first-round bye as the No. 4 seed. Ninth-ranked Boise State, which was the Mountain West Conference champion, earned the No. 3 seed and a first-round bye.

While reseeding after the first round is likely to be debated, another potential proposal is continuing to guarantee spots for the five highest-ranked conference champions but rewarding byes to the four highest-ranked teams. That means the 12-team bracket would look more like the selection committee's top-12 ranking. Arizona State, for example, would still have qualified for the playoff, but the Big 12 champion would not have earned a first-round bye.

Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione, a former CFP selection committee member, said the seeding needs to change for next season. Castiglione said the five highest-ranked conference champions should still be rewarded automatic bids but should receive a first-round bye only if they are one of the committee's top four teams.

"That to me is a big flaw," he said. "The seeding has to be based on the ranking -- whatever metrics, whatever evaluation the committee sees in those teams, they have to rank and seed them accordingly. That's the only fair way to do it, because once you start tinkering with exceptions, you compromise the seeding."

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey, who was one of the authors of the original 12-team model, told The Athletic earlier this month that having schools ranked in the double digits getting byes was never the intent but that the format was created before sweeping conference realignment forced the Pac-12 to piece itself back together with schools that mostly competed at the Group of 5 level. The Big Ten and SEC have separated themselves through size, power and wealth, and the ACC and Big 12 are in a never-ending cycle of trying to close the gap.

The question is whether anyone who benefited from the current system can set their personal interests aside to reach unanimity -- something this group has struggled mightily to do for more than a decade.

"I do think seeding could be a conversation where it's very clean," one FBS commissioner said.

It could also get messy. Changing the seeding to give byes to the top four teams as ranked by the committee would open the door for independent Notre Dame to earn a first-round bye without playing in a conference title game. It would also require the Group of 5 commissioners to agree to a change that would have prevented Boise State from earning the No. 3 seed and a first-round bye -- and allowed the top four seeds to be filled by the Big Ten and SEC. (This year's final CFP ranking: No. 1 Oregon, No. 2 Georgia, No. 3 Texas and No. 4 Penn State.)

"Ultimately, they may change the system on us because of us getting a bye, but I feel we earned it," Boise State athletic director Jeramiah Dickey said. "And just like everyone else, we had to win each week and compete. I think it's awesome, and I hope it does stay the same."

Mountain West commissioner Gloria Nevarez told ESPN nothing needs to change now.

"Let's continue to live in this and maybe tweak it here and there and see how it fits," she said. "But let's not overhaul the system just because of one year of selection. I think the data size is too small."

How do the bowls and CFP continue to coexist?

There are some who would like to see two rounds of CFP home games, especially after the success of the first-round home games this fall.

Bowl Season executive director Nick Carparelli said his organization -- as one would expect -- is in favor of more playoff games in bowl games.

"I think one of the biggest misconceptions in the construct of this new playoff was that the home games would alleviate some of the travel burden on fans," Carparelli said. "The average fan who goes to a game in South Bend, Indiana, or State College, Pennsylvania, does not live there, right? They're travelling to their home game. I've heard a lot of anecdotal stories of people who have said, 'I'd rather go see my team play in a warmer environment than have to go there.'"

While the former New Year's Six bowls (Cotton, Fiesta, Peach, Rose, Sugar and Orange) have agreed in principle and desperately want to maintain their relationship with the CFP in 2026 and beyond, multiple sources have said the contracts haven't been signed yet. In this system, the top four seeds start the quarterfinals at the former New Year's Six bowl sites. Sankey told The Athletic he tends to "favor bowl involvement."

Carparelli told ESPN he'd like to see more flexibility in the bowl selection process after the 12 teams are announced on Selection Day and less of a restriction to the historical conference bowl tie-ins -- something those in the room are also trending toward.

"If you go back to the old days, there were no bowl conference tie-ins," Carparelli said. "The best matchups were created in the best bowls, and every team was like a free agent. We've evolved to every bowl having strict relationships with two conferences. It's time to turn back around and say, 'Let's put the best matchups together regardless of conference and make it as compelling as we can for fans.'"

What about conference title games? Committee criteria?

Nevarez is part of the CFP's management committee, which is composed of the FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua. The CFP board of managers, which is composed of the FBS presidents and chancellors and Notre Dame president Robert Dowd, is the organization's governing body. Both groups are expected to meet Sunday in Atlanta, the site of this year's national championship game.

Typically, the presidents and chancellors push the work to the commissioners to figure out the playoff format and then they vote on it.

But the commissioners are questioning the system they created.

ACC commissioner Jim Phillips, who said he's "not slamming it at all because my fingerprints are on it," still has questions about how the selection committee will treat teams that participate in their conference championship games moving forward. Both of the ACC's title game teams -- No. 10 SMU and No. 16 Clemson -- made the playoff.

"Will the teams that play in a championship game have some kind of protection?" he asked. "I don't want to read into that. I'd like to hear from the committee after it's over about what some of those conversations were, and I think I'm not the only one."

Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark said the starting point of conversations for him is the selection committee's slate of criteria.

"What is the criteria, and what is the metric or metrics that ultimately guides the selection committee?" he said. "I just want it articulated so we all know going in, that's all."

What does 2026 and beyond look like?

Last March, the CFP and ESPN announced a new six-year, $7.8 billion contract that runs through the 2031-32 season. ESPN secured a six-year agreement that will cost $1.3 billion annually beginning in the 2026-27 season.

The contract is built as either 11 or 13 games -- all of which are playoff games -- in a 12- or 14-team field. There are protections in place for the ACC, Big Ten, SEC and Big 12 conference champions, Notre Dame, and the highest-ranked Group of 5 champion in the new contract.

To secure some guarantees, though, the other FBS conferences and Notre Dame surrendered the bulk of control over the future format to the SEC and Big Ten. While any changes for next year need to be unanimous, that's not the case for 2026 and beyond.

"Nothing's going to change next year," one Big Ten source said. "It's going to be, 'Let's see one more year of it.' That's because if you look at the contract, that's what is agreed to. It's the following year that everything will change."

The CFP leaders still have to determine their future governing model and how each league's votes will be weighed. The "elephant in the room" remains automatic qualifiers, and a push from the athletic directors and head coaches within the Big Ten and SEC for their respective commissioners to lobby for as many guaranteed postseason spots as they can get. Last September, sources in both leagues told ESPN they would prefer to have four automatic bids each -- something one source said would be a "travesty" for the sport.

While these conversations have been bubbling for more than a year, the reality is that they are still in their infancy because the bulk of the focus recently has been the execution of this season. One possible model that has been floated, though, is a 14-team format that could have three SEC teams, three Big Ten teams, two ACC teams, two Big 12 teams, one Group of 5 team and three at-large spots (which could include Notre Dame). While a 14-team bracket seems to have more support, a 16-team model has also previously been broached and could also garner consideration.

"I think any conversation about AQs is going to force us all into a conversation about expanding the playoff," one source said.

That conversation leads to more questions, such as whether the season needs to start a week earlier, whether college football can better avoid competing with NFL viewers, and how it all fits with the Army-Navy game. One CFP source with voting power surmised that in a 14-team bracket, with only two teams getting first-round byes, they could operate on essentially the same schedule as the 12-team bracket. That kind of change couldn't be implemented in time for the 2025 season, but it still needs to be determined soon.

The commissioners' immediate meetings -- starting Sunday -- will focus on the near future, but there is also an ESPN deadline to let the network know if the bracket will expand to 14 or 16 teams. At the latest, it would need to be decided by December, but some within the room think it could happen as soon as September.

Dickey, who will usher his athletic department into the Pac-12 in 2026 along with Colorado State, Fresno State and San Diego State, said he would eventually like to see the bracket grow.

"I think it adds a different level of intrigue to go with what I think is the most powerful sport in the country," he said. "Anytime you provide opportunities like that, and what it does to the fan bases -- it gives them hope, and hope is powerful, and ADs can monetize hope, and that's our formula. It's something that's worked for us, and we've been able to sell that vision and dream."

Phillips said: "Let's let it play out, and then let's have a chance to really scrub hard on what we witnessed -- the good, bad and indifferent."