Even after Ryan Day won the championship, the Ohio State coach criticized the College Football Playoffs’ issues.
The 2025 college football season ended in glory for Ryan Day and his Ohio State Buckeyes, as they capped off a thrilling campaign by securing the National Championship. The victory solidified Day’s place among the premier coaches in college football, with his leadership and strategic brilliance earning him the honor of Coach of the Tournament. Jack Sawyer, his star defensive lineman, had been named Player of the Tournament, cementing Ohio State’s status as the most dominant team of the season.
Despite the championship celebrations and the numerous accolades, Ryan Day’s satisfaction was tempered by one issue that continued to weigh heavily on his mind: the structure and fairness of the College Football Playoff (CFP) system. Even as his team basked in the glory of their well-earned title, Day remained outspoken in his criticism of the CFP, voicing his concerns about the system’s inherent flaws. For the Ohio State coach, winning the national title was a triumph, but the road to that victory highlighted critical issues with the playoff format that needed urgent reform.
The Rise of the College Football Playoff System
The College Football Playoff was introduced in 2014 as a replacement for the controversial BCS (Bowl Championship Series) system. The goal of the CFP was to create a more transparent and fair way to crown a national champion in college football, moving away from computer rankings and subjective polls in favor of a four-team playoff, which would ultimately determine the best team in the country.
For years, the CFP has generated heated debate and discussion among coaches, players, and fans. While the playoff system has undeniably produced thrilling games and memorable moments, its critics—Day included—have pointed out several structural issues that persist. As someone who has personally experienced the highs and lows of the system, including narrow playoff berths and the intense scrutiny placed on the Buckeyes, Day’s perspective on the College Football Playoff is not just that of a coach, but of someone deeply invested in the well-being of the sport and its future.
The Flaws of the Current System
Day’s critique of the College Football Playoff system is multifaceted. Despite Ohio State’s championship victory, his concerns extend beyond his own team and encompass the broader issues with how the playoff operates. The following are some of the key criticisms Day has leveled against the CFP, both in his public remarks and private musings.
1. The Limitation of Teams in the Playoff
One of the primary issues Day has raised about the CFP is the limitation of only four teams in the playoff. Over the years, there have been numerous arguments from coaches, analysts, and fans alike that a four-team playoff does not adequately reflect the true landscape of college football. The reality is that in a sport with over 130 FBS teams, narrowing the playoff field to just four teams is inherently flawed. The selection committee often faces tough decisions when choosing the final four teams, and the results are not always an accurate reflection of who deserves a shot at the championship.
Day has pointed to the inherent injustice of leaving out deserving teams that had strong seasons but were left on the outside looking in. In 2025, Ohio State entered the playoff as a top contender, but Day could not ignore the teams that had strong records but were not given the same opportunity to compete for the title. Even as his team emerged victorious, he was acutely aware that other programs, even with one or two losses, had been denied a fair shot at the championship due to the narrow field.
The current system, in Day’s view, severely limits the chance for teams from conferences outside the Power Five or from lower-ranked teams to have a fair shot at a national title. He has been a vocal advocate for expanding the playoff to allow more teams into the mix, arguing that a more inclusive system would result in a truer championship picture, where the best teams—regardless of their conference affiliation or perceived strength—are given a chance to prove themselves on the field.
2. The Disproportionate Influence of Conference Championships
Another criticism Day has leveled against the current College Football Playoff format is the disproportionate influence that conference championships have on the selection process. The CFP selection committee is tasked with choosing the four best teams in the country, but one of the key criteria they use is whether a team wins its conference. While conference championships are certainly important, Day has argued that they shouldn’t be the sole determining factor in whether a team makes the playoff.
Take the 2025 season, for instance: while Ohio State was a national title contender, the Big Ten championship was not as clear-cut as in years past. Some teams in the conference had successful seasons but did not win their respective championships. In Day’s eyes, conference championships should be an important factor but not the sole determining criterion when selecting playoff teams. In some years, the most talented team in a given conference might not win the conference championship, whether due to injury, a fluke loss, or other factors. In those instances, Day believes the committee should place more emphasis on overall team strength and performance rather than using conference titles as a catch-all measure of success.
Day’s call for a more nuanced selection process reflects a belief that the current system doesn’t always reward teams that are consistently dominant over the course of a season, especially those who play in highly competitive conferences where multiple teams are strong contenders. Ohio State, for example, may not have always been the conference champion but has consistently been one of the top teams in the country. The emphasis on conference titles, Day believes, detracts from the holistic evaluation of a team’s true potential.
3. The Committee’s Subjective Nature
Day has also expressed frustration with the subjective nature of the CFP selection committee. Although the committee is made up of respected football minds, including former coaches, athletic directors, and administrators, the process by which teams are selected can sometimes feel arbitrary and inconsistent. For example, there have been years where undefeated teams from Group of Five conferences have been passed over in favor of one-loss Power Five teams, often based on perceived strength of schedule or conference affiliation.
This subjectivity, in Day’s view, undermines the integrity of the system. He believes that teams should be selected based on measurable factors such as overall performance, strength of schedule, and head-to-head results, rather than factors that rely too heavily on opinion or conference prestige. Day’s concerns reflect a desire for transparency in the selection process—one that relies on clear and consistent criteria, rather than subjective interpretation of a team’s worth.
4. The Disadvantage of Scheduling Constraints
Day’s frustration extends to the constraints placed on scheduling, which can impact a team’s ability to secure a spot in the playoff. College football is often criticized for the uneven scheduling of non-conference games, with some teams facing weaker opponents in order to boost their win totals. Meanwhile, other programs—such as Ohio State—schedule a more difficult slate of games, often taking on ranked opponents in non-conference play, which can be a double-edged sword. While challenging opponents may help a team’s resume, they also increase the risk of losses that could hurt a team’s chances of making the playoff.
The current system doesn’t always reward teams for challenging themselves with difficult schedules. Day has pointed out that, in some cases, teams that avoid tough non-conference games or play in weaker conferences are given a path to the playoff with fewer challenges. He has argued that the CFP should consider strength of schedule more explicitly when making selection decisions, acknowledging the challenges faced by teams that don’t shy away from playing top-tier programs.
Calls for Expansion
Ryan Day has been a vocal advocate for expanding the College Football Playoff, particularly in light of his experiences as a coach in the current system. While the 2025 season ended in glory for Ohio State, Day’s view on the future of the playoff remains unchanged: the system must evolve to be fairer, more inclusive, and more reflective of the true competitive balance in college football.
Day has been outspoken about the need for a more expansive playoff field. An expansion to eight teams, he argues, would allow for a more accurate representation of the best teams in the country, while also allowing teams from the Group of Five conferences a legitimate shot at competing for a national title. The current four-team field, in his eyes, is too small to account for the complexity and depth of college football, particularly when it comes to conferences with multiple high-caliber teams.
Day’s calls for expansion are rooted in the belief that college football’s postseason should be more inclusive, equitable, and representative of the sport as a whole. A larger playoff, he suggests, would allow for a more diverse range of teams to showcase their talent on a national stage, while also offering more fan engagement, excitement, and opportunity.
A Champion’s Desire for Change
Ryan Day’s critique of the College Football Playoff system does not diminish the joy of winning the 2025 National Championship with Ohio State. The Buckeyes’ triumph was the culmination of years of hard work, preparation, and perseverance. However, as a coach who has navigated the complexities of the playoff system and witnessed its limitations firsthand, Day’s call for reform is both measured and necessary.
In his view, college football deserves a system that truly reflects the talent and hard work of all its teams—one that rewards the best teams and players, regardless of conference affiliation, and provides a fair and transparent process for determining the national champion. Day’s criticism, grounded in his experiences and the realities of the current system, calls for a more equitable and inclusive future for college football. And while the 2025 season was a crowning achievement for Day and his team, his eyes are already set on improving the game and ensuring that future champions, including Ohio State, can rise through a system that truly reflects their greatness.
