Paul Finebaum Picks Side Between B1G & SEC as Greg Sankey Calls for Drastic College Football Playoff Change

Who is going to win this round of spring meetings? The most contentious debate on the agenda is a revision of the playoff format, which invited a lot of controversy in the first edition of its revamp. Two groups of major conferences are at loggerheads with their demands and are yet to arrive at a unanimous decision. Fans always argue that fairness leads the discussions of the playoff format. However, Paul Finebaum suggests chucking the concept out the window altogether. College football has changed so drastically that old ideals no longer apply. The program continually revolves around influential figures who ultimately shape it. Finebaum has picked his side of the format debate, which is seeing Greg Sankey as its forerunner.

Last year’s playoffs missed the presence of Alabama, Ole Miss, and BYU–all of whom fought through gallantly in their schedules. Instead, the expanded bracket and the seeding method allowed Indiana and SMU to make the cut-off mark, prompting widespread surprise and a chorus of complaints. Now, fans are asking the playing field for the playoffs to open up even more. That has CFB giants SEC and the Big 10 at odds with the Big 12 and ACC, who are fighting for their survival. Both are putting forward their own opinions about fair grounds for playoff contention. The first pair is pushing for a 4-4-2-2-1 format, while the latter duo is batting for a 5-11 format.  On a June 2 episode of McElroy and Cubelic In The Morning, Finebaum shared his thoughts about which of the two is better.

The analyst said, “The SEC has finally decided it’s sick and tired of waiting and worrying, and trying to deal with the rest of college sports. And I was really impressed when Greg Sankey told us on our final day there that everything we have to do doesn’t have to be unanimous. We all know what that meant. And I’m not suggesting a secession, but I am suggesting that it’s time that the Big Ten and the SEC, who apparently are aligned very well, do what they want to do. And if the rest of college sports doesn’t like it, too bad.” Now, if the SEC’s bid is ruled as the winner, here’s how the system works. The SEC and the Big 10 get 4 automatic bids each. The Big 12 and the ACC get two AQ bids. The last would go to the top-ranked Group of Six champions.

There are also 3 at-large bids, with one of them going to Notre Dame if they finish in the top 16 of the rankings. But Finebaum stirred the pot more with his thoughts about fairness in the playoffs. “[They’re] getting more than they probably deserve. So get a piece. Try to get along. Don’t try to tick off everybody by playing good-in-the-game, nonsensical, coordinated statements. And make sure you represent your league as best you can,” he said. Before that, he admonished the dissenters by making their claim to be that of Little League Baseball, where “everybody gets a third-place ribbon.” Brett Yormark, ACC commissioner, batted for the 5-11 format, despite the Big 12 getting just one bid. “It’s good for college football, and it’s what’s fair. And we don’t want any gimmes. We want to earn it on the field,” he said.

The real question beneath all the models is: Should big-name programs that influence the sport be allowed to make the rules? If that were the case, Alabama should’ve made it into the playoffs. The concept of fairness in the sport remains murky. “It was a frustrating couple of days talking to every commissioner and football coaches at the best league in this country, and at a high point, try to act like we have to make sure that SMU gets an equal opportunity,” Finebaum said. Greg Sankey, however, has another contested idea for his version of the playoffs.

Greg Sankey wants to show no mercy with his idea of the ideal playoffs

Sankey reportedly wants automatic bids off the table, completely. “I’d give no allocation (AQs). When we get into rooms, we make political compromises,” he said on The Dan Patrick Show. Essentially, he wants just 12 teams in the playoffs, simply based on rankings. By the way, this comment was made amongst growing allegations of the CFP Committee favoring the SEC more when it comes to the playoffs. But last year, only 3 programs from the conference made it to the bracket. 4 came from the Big 10, 2 from the ACC. ASU from the Big 12, Boise State from the Mountain West, and Notre Dame made it as the sole representatives of their conferences.

Yormark acknowledged that the bigger duo is running the show in these meetings. But he also had a message for them. “Yes, the Big Ten and the SEC are leading the discussions, but with leading those discussions, they have a great responsibility that goes with it: to do what’s right for college football and not to do anything that just benefits two conferences,” he said. The commissioner’s 5-11 model was supported by BYU HC Kalani Sitake, who was brutally snubbed from the playoffs last year. The model would allocate 1 AQ each to the Big 5 conference champions and 11 at-large bids.

The commissioners will meet on Tuesday to take a formal step ahead in these discussions. Hopefully, there will be more transparency in justifying whose idea of fairness is correct and why. While Finebaum finds a clear favorite, the chatter around biasedness towards the SEC in the playoffs will always continue. As the conference, along with the Big 10, continues to dominate college football, is the sport now heading towards a huge, irreversible change? Time, as always, will write the final score.

The post Paul Finebaum Picks Side Between B1G & SEC as Greg Sankey Calls for Drastic College Football Playoff Change appeared first on EssentiallySports.