Everyone Was Wrong About The College Football Playoffs (Week 1 CFP Analysis)

That's right. All that time spent debating if G5 schools belong in the CFP. All the talk around who the non-conference champion bids should go to. All that advocating for play-in games to determine bids. After week 1 one the College Football Playoffs, we've got our answer on how we should be structuring the tournament: It. Doesn't. Matter.

A more anti-climatic answer to the complex arguments. Nevertheless, it doesn't matter who gets the last 4 bids in the CFP. The teams we've been arguing about have proven to be long shots at actually winning the National Championship.

We all know someone who claims the G5 schools should be in because we should give everyone an equal chance at winning no matter their size or revenue. We all have that buddy who says the 12 best teams means the 12 best teams, and we should be giving the opportunity to win it all to schools who actually have the talent to win it all. While this has been a fun discussion, it doesn't matter and the first week of the CFP proved it.

Let's start with the argument for G5 schools to be in. Tulane lost to Ole Miss 41 - 10. A score that looks better than the actual game for Tulane. JMU lost to Oregon 34 - 51. A game that was able to give Oregon's backups the chance to play. I mean... was anyone shocked? Although the argument for G5 was heartwarming, it was never valid. The G5 is as I said it was: a farm system for the Power 4 schools to poach from. Whether or not that is good for the sport is a conversation for another day. We have confirmed however that at best, we should structure a G5 championship to determine a single G5 participant. Even that might be a stretch based on how things have gone for these schools so far.

Now for the argument that the 12 best teams means the 12 best teams. Sure. Since this is now a sport that is contingent on how much money is made and spent, you can have this take. I'm looking at the bigger picture here. I'm looking at how it does not matter who the last 4 to 6 teams in are. Yes, I know Ohio State was an 8 seed last year and won it all. It'll vary year by year how deep the CFP is. 2025 was probably an outlier, but we'll see. In a general POV, the last 4 seeds (9-12) do not matter. Alabama was down 17 - 0 in the second quarter and ended up winning. On paper you could say that's just bama being bama. The reality is thats Oklahoma proving to be incompetent. This is a classic "someone had to win" game. Ty Simpson played well, but did nothing to convince me they can beat Indiana and then Oregon / Texas Tech and then Georgia / Ohio State.

The same goes for Miami and Texas A&M: someone had to win the game. Miami's defense was nice. But when your quarterback goes 14 for 20 and barely throws for over 100 yards, I don't think you can argue you have a legit chance to run the gauntlet.

Carson Beck after winning a playoff game with 103 yards

We've seen it before and we'll see it again. The last 4 seeds in the College Football Playoffs is one of the heaviest debated topics in all of sports. And it doesn't matter. The G5 isn't built like it was when there were teams who could actually compete for a National Championship. Teams like 2006 Boise State, 2017 UCF, and 2021 Cincinnati don't existed. The transfer portal and coach poaching have made the gap between the G5 and P4 too big. And for those 2 and 3 loss teams hoping to have one last shot, I'm happy you guys are getting extra reps and revenue. Realistically, if they had a chance to win it all, they wouldn't be in the position they're in.

So moving forward, when we find ourselves in the exact same position in late November to early December, remind your College Football obsessed friends that they're wasting their time on teams that will get rocked. If they were legit, they wouldn't have to argue to get in.