The championship trophies sit on the stage during the Ohio State Buckeyes College Football Playoff National Championship celebration at Ohio Stadium in Columbus on Jan. 26, 2025. Adam Cairns/Columbus Dispatch / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images

SEC vs. Big Ten: Will differing opinions on the CFP lead to an off-the field war?

Originally posted on Mississippi State Bulldogs on SI
By Taylor Hodges | Last updated Jun 4, 2025 5:30 PM ET

Paul Finebaum is the biggest SEC media personality, talk show host or whatever he wants to call himself. That’s what he is and he’s earned it.

He’s good at it and he’s been around long enough that he’s seen almost every major evolution of college sports, particularly college football. So, when he speaks, people listen, which is why I hope his recent comments are wrong.

In fact, they are wrong. Or at least part of them anyways.

In a guest appearance on WJOX Radio, Finebaum is quoted as saying the following:

“What I took away from three days in Destin was that 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... 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.”

Putting aside the laughable assertion he’s “not suggesting a succession” comment (because he was), Finebaum is wrong about the Big Ten and SEC.

Yes, they’re going to be partners in shaping the next college football playoff. But they’re not aligned, at least not based on recent reporting.

More info is being socialized with other conferences about the discussions Thursday from SEC ADs & presidents.

The league is indicating that it is *not* supporting a multi-AQ format (4-4-2-2-1), preferring instead more at-large bids + a selection committee criteria change.
— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) May 31, 2025

The Big Ten and SEC, who hold the ultimate power in determining the next college football playoff, have started to favor different playoff models. The Big Ten favors the 4-4-2-2-1-3 playoff model (which absolutely needs a shorter name), but the SEC is beginning to lean towards the 5+11 model.

It’s a change in what was the perceived favored format before the SEC Spring Meetings. That’s when the SEC began to shift towards favoring a different playoff format.

The Big Ten sees a way for adding a conference play-in game for two of its automatic bids in the 4-4-2-2-1-3 model. The SEC does too and would likely add a ninth conference game. We all know why they’d want that right? Money.

The ACC and Big 12 likely see that model as unfair and the 5+11 model levels the playing field for the non-SEC and Big Ten conferences. Everybody is guaranteed the same number of automatic bids and the rest is left up to the selection committee to decide (which is a topic worthy of an entirely different column).

What will complicate matters exponentially if the SEC and Big Ten can’t come to a consensus on which model to move forward with, is that memorandum of understanding the conferences signed that gives the SEC and Big Ten ultimate power to shape the next college football playoff.

If the biggest conferences in college football can’t agree on what to do, we’ll see a war. What that war will look like? Nobody knows.

Taylor’s Opinion Time

Frankly, I’m still firmly on the side that the 4-4-2-2-1-3 model is dumb. The idea of the Big Ten and SEC having play-in games for the final two bids is dumb because it makes the conference championship game meaningless. If I was coaching a team in the SEC title game, knowing we’d be in a playoff game soon, I’d be tempted not to play any starters.

The 5+11 model is a better model. A large reason I think that is because it's fair. But I know people like Finebaum and others like him don’t put much weight into fairness in these talks. After all, this isn’t little league baseball.

“If the rest of college sports doesn’t like it, too bad. You can join us or not. But I’m so sick of hearing all these proposals to make sure that everybody in the room gets something. This is not little league baseball,” Finebaum said on WJOX. “This is the absolute zenith of college football, and it should be treated that way, as opposed to making sure everybody gets a third place ribbon.”

Using fairness as an argument won’t get anywhere when important people are talking like that. Let’s put forth this idea:

The 5+11 model is better because that’s the only model that could see the SEC do in football what it did in men and women basketball, baseball and softball: send the most teams to the playoff.

The SEC just sent 13 teams to the NCAA baseball tournament, 14 in the men’s basketball tournament, 10 in the women’s basketball tournament and 14 teams made the softball tournament.

In the first 12-team college football playoff, three teams made the field and making up 25 percent of the field isn’t bad, unless the Big Ten sent more teams (it did).

Under the 4-4-2-2-1-3 model, the most teams the SEC could send is seven. Under the 5+11 model, the SEC could have 12 teams in the tournament. Isn’t that the level of dominance the SEC wants to show?

Why would the SEC not want the chance to send three-quarters of its conference to the playoffs?

Oh, that’s right. It won’t make as much money.