The first round of the college football playoffs is in the books. The most valuable lesson we’ve learned is, unfortunately, that G5 schools might not have a place in a 12-team playoff if we go strictly by meritocracy. After watching Tulane get clapped 41-10 by Ole Miss and Oregon handle business 51-34 against JMU, the majority of folks who said they deserved to get in have gone quiet. According to college football insiders, this has to change.

“With all due respect to the G5, but it’s levels to this CFP stuff. The committee has to find a way to get the BEST 12 teams in the playoffs,” former Ohio State QB Cardale Jones tweeted right after Tulane and JMU got blown out.

To many fans, today’s one-sided affairs are proof that these teams aren’t on the same level as the top-tier Power Four programs. People are now rightfully asking why the playoff rules basically forced these teams into the bracket when it was obvious they weren’t ready for the big leagues by any means.

Obviously, the biggest issue here is clearly the talent gap between G5s and Power 4s. When G5 schools with mostly two- and three-star recruits run into teams loaded with four- and five-star superstars, honestly, it’s pretty boring TV when the game is over by halftime. Fun fact: The JMU has only 6-7 four-stars in its squad. Meanwhile, the Oregon Ducks have about 40 four-stars on the roster.

Then, you have to look at the schedules these teams played to get there. Sure, finishing 12-1 or 11-2 looks great on paper, but doing it against mid-level competition isn’t the same as grinding through a Power Four schedule.

It’s pretty obvious that a three-loss Texas team from a powerhouse conference would obliterate an undefeated G5 team any day of the week. By letting the G5 teams in just because they won their specific league, we’re essentially leaving out better, tougher teams that actually have a shot at winning it all.

The real fix everyone is screaming for is a “best 12” model. Instead of having these “pity spots” for certain conference winners, the playoffs should just contain the twelve best teams in the country. The current system feels a bit like giving out participation trophies to the G5 just to be inclusive.

It might be a bit nice to give everyone a path to the title, but these 30-point blowouts prove that the current “auto-bid” system is in shambles. So, if we want a playoff that actually keeps people on the edge of their seats, it’s maybe about time that we stop worrying about conference fairness and maybe put the best twelve out there. This is what Urban Meyer was trying to say.

Urban Meyer on G5 in the playoffs

Urban Meyer weighed in on the College Football Playoff debate after James Madison Dukes and Tulane Green Wave earned playoff spots over several Power Four programs. Speaking on the December 17 episode of The Triple Option podcast, Meyer made it pretty clear he believes Group of Five teams should face tougher schedules before being considered for the CFP.

“I would mandate that a James Madison or a non-power four, you have to play three programs in the top 50 programs, or you can’t be,” Meyer said, emphasizing that strength of schedule should matter just as much as winning games.

Meyer explained that simply winning a conference isn’t enough if those wins come against weaker competition. “You win your conference and win whatever, but you can’t be considered,” he said.

His simple argument wasn’t about disrespecting smaller programs, but it was about fairness in evaluating teams. According to Meyer, playoff teams should be judged primarily on how they perform against solid Power Four opponents.

His view is that if James Madison truly beat Notre Dame, then the committee made the right call. The expanded playoff was meant to be more inclusive, but unusual results in the ACC helped open the door for two G5 teams. Although the system may be adjusted in the future, Meyer’s main point still stands: playoff spots should reflect the strength of schedule, not just conference titles.