‘It’s not right,’ says Ryan Day of the College Football Playoff system.

“It’s Not Right,” Says Ryan Day of the College Football Playoff System

The College Football Playoff (CFP) has sparked significant debate since its inception in 2014. While it has been heralded as a step forward in determining a true national champion, it has also faced criticism from coaches, players, and fans alike. One of the most vocal critics of the system in recent years has been Ohio State head coach Ryan Day. A former player and assistant coach with an extensive background in football, Day has seen firsthand how the playoff system impacts teams, players, and the college football landscape as a whole.

In a particularly candid moment, Ryan Day voiced his frustration with the current CFP format, stating, “It’s not right.” These words echo the concerns many have expressed over the years about the limitations and shortcomings of the playoff system. For Day, the issue is more than just a matter of fairness—it’s about ensuring that the best teams are given the opportunity to compete for a national championship, and that the playoff system is structured in a way that fairly reflects the realities of college football today.

This article will explore Ryan Day’s criticisms of the College Football Playoff system, his arguments for why it needs reform, and how these concerns fit into the larger conversation about the future of college football. We will delve into the structure of the current system, the flaws Day has pointed out, and how changes to the playoff format might benefit the sport.

The College Football Playoff: A Brief Overview

Before delving into Ryan Day’s criticisms, it’s essential to understand the structure and purpose of the College Football Playoff system. The CFP was established in 2014 to replace the previous Bowl Championship Series (BCS) system, which was criticized for its reliance on polls and computers to determine the national champion. Under the BCS, only two teams had the chance to compete for the championship, which many felt was unfair given the number of deserving programs each season.

The CFP expanded that opportunity by creating a four-team playoff, with the selection committee choosing the top four teams based on various factors, including win-loss records, strength of schedule, and conference championships. The teams are seeded and matched up in two semifinal games, and the winners advance to the championship game. The CFP was a step toward creating a more legitimate method for determining the national champion, but its flaws have been evident in the years since its implementation.

The CFP has been expanded in recent years, with plans for a 12-team playoff format slated to begin in 2024, but the system remains a subject of controversy. Critics, including Ryan Day, argue that the current system, even with its planned expansion, doesn’t address the root issues of fairness, access, and recognition of the best teams.

Ryan Day’s Criticisms: “It’s Not Right”

Ryan Day’s frustration with the College Football Playoff system is rooted in a number of factors, but the most significant of his concerns is the perceived lack of fairness in the current system. As a coach of one of the most successful college football programs in the country, Day has witnessed the limitations of the playoff system firsthand. Ohio State is often a top contender in the CFP rankings, but even with their success, Day has noted how the system fails to account for the complexities of college football, particularly in regard to conference championships and strength of schedule.

1. The Problem with Conference Championships

One of Day’s biggest points of contention is the emphasis the selection committee places on conference championships. College football conferences such as the SEC and Big Ten have historically been stronger than others, which leads to discrepancies in how teams from different conferences are evaluated. Day, as the head coach of Ohio State, has seen this firsthand. In some years, the Buckeyes have been kept out of the playoff despite winning the Big Ten Championship or boasting a strong overall resume.

The argument here is that the system doesn’t always reward teams for winning their conferences, especially when they compete in a league that is perceived as weaker or doesn’t feature as many top-tier teams. For example, in 2018, Ohio State won the Big Ten Championship but was left out of the CFP in favor of teams from other conferences, such as the SEC, which was seen as having a higher overall strength. Day believes that teams like Ohio State should be given more respect and recognition for dominating their conference, regardless of the strength of that conference compared to others.

2. Strength of Schedule: A Double-Edged Sword

Another frustration for Ryan Day is the weight given to strength of schedule in the CFP rankings. While it is certainly important for teams to face tough opponents, the system often penalizes programs that face weaker schedules due to the structure of the conferences they play in. In many cases, teams from Power Five conferences like Ohio State will face a higher number of ranked opponents than teams from Group of Five conferences. As a result, teams that have strong records but don’t face the same level of competition can find themselves on the outside looking in.

Day argues that the system is flawed when it comes to strength of schedule, because it fails to account for the fact that teams in more competitive conferences often end up with tougher matchups week in and week out. The strength of schedule metric has proven to be both a blessing and a curse for teams in major conferences, and it has caused frustration for coaches like Day who believe their teams deserve a shot at the playoff based on their overall performance, not just the perceived quality of their opponents.

3. The Flawed Selection Process

The selection process itself is another area where Ryan Day feels the system is “not right.” The College Football Playoff selection committee, which is responsible for ranking the top teams and ultimately selecting the four teams for the playoff, is made up of individuals with varied backgrounds and expertise. While the committee is tasked with evaluating teams based on objective criteria, critics argue that subjective elements still play a role in the decision-making process. Day has pointed out how the committee has at times made decisions that don’t always reflect the best teams or the most deserving teams based on the established criteria.

In particular, Day has expressed concern about how rankings can be swayed by the reputation of certain programs or conferences. Teams like Alabama or Clemson, for example, often receive the benefit of the doubt even if their resumes are not as strong as others. While it is understandable that historically successful programs will be highly regarded, Day feels that this bias undermines the fairness of the system.

4. Exclusion of Deserving Teams

Another frustration that Day has voiced about the current CFP system is the exclusion of deserving teams, particularly when there are notable disparities in how teams are ranked. Each year, there are programs that have strong seasons but are left out of the playoff due to the limited number of spots. For instance, in 2020, Texas A&M finished the regular season with a 9-1 record but was left out of the playoff, while Notre Dame, with a similar record, was included despite losing to Clemson in the ACC Championship.

Day has highlighted how this exclusion harms programs that have done everything in their power to earn a spot in the postseason. He argues that the current system penalizes teams that play in competitive conferences or have a single loss that doesn’t diminish their overall body of work. By focusing on only four teams, the system leaves little room for debate and forces worthy teams to watch the playoff from the sidelines.

The Call for Change: Expanding the Playoff

Ryan Day’s frustrations with the College Football Playoff system are part of a larger conversation about the future of college football. With the announcement that the playoff will be expanded to 12 teams starting in 2024, Day has expressed cautious optimism. He believes that the expanded format will help correct some of the issues that have plagued the current system, particularly the exclusion of deserving teams. With 12 spots up for grabs, teams that might have been left out in previous years will now have a legitimate chance to compete for a national championship.

Day has also suggested that the expanded playoff will make college football more exciting and inclusive, allowing teams from different conferences and backgrounds to compete on a larger stage. By including more teams, the playoff will provide a better reflection of the overall talent across college football and ensure that more deserving programs have the opportunity to prove themselves on the national stage.

However, Day still believes there is room for further improvement in the system. He has advocated for changes that would give more weight to conference championships and ensure that the best teams are rewarded for their success. In his mind, the goal should be to create a playoff system that is as fair and transparent as possible, giving every program a legitimate chance to compete for the title based on their performance throughout the season.