The expanded College Football Playoff in 2024 sparked mixed reactions. Teams with good finishes and numbers still missed out on a spot. Instead of 4 teams, 12 teams were given a shot to compete for the National Championship. But beyond that, the nitty-gritty that went into deciding those deserving 12 teams remains obscure. While the playoff bracket was celebrated for inclusivity, criticism and confusion quickly followed. Many were questioning the seeding process, and others were frustrated with the ambiguity of team selection. Lane Kiffin’s Ole Miss was one of these programs that couldn’t make it to the playoffs, despite a 10-3 record. Now, SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey is stepping into the spotlight, backing Kiffin, and demanding answers.

One key issue that many playoff critics still argue about is the inconsistent application of strength of schedule. They believe that the difference in schedule across a variety of programs was not taken into consideration. An example that popped up frequently was Alabama, which finished just behind SMU, in the CFP committee’s final rankings. The Mustangs, by way of this ranking, took the last remaining at-large spot. Ole Miss finished at No. 14, behind Miami and Arizona State. The Sun Devils finished 11-3 and played their best season under Kenny Dillingham. But their heroics couldn’t get them a playoff berth.

Ole Miss’s most important opponents from 2024 include Georgia, LSU, Oklahoma, and Florida. Kiffin’s Rebels lost to the Tigers and the Gators, and more shockingly, to the Kentucky Wildcats. They otherwise had a pretty smooth-sailing season, but those losses led the committee to deem Ole Miss unworthy of a playoff spot. Greg Sankey said, “It’s clear that not losing becomes in many ways more important than beating the University of Georgia, which two of our teams that were left out did.” The two teams in question are Alabama and Ole Miss.

It’s a grey area, to be honest. The strength of the schedule debate remains murky. Alabama won against Georgia. But who can forget the upset loss against Vanderbilt, which was regarded to be an easy game? Ole Miss’s loss against Kentucky is the most glaring of their 3 losses in the conference. It was also Kentucky’s only SEC win that year. Indiana defeated Nebraska and Michigan but lost to OSU and Notre Dame. Still, the Hoosiers clinched a playoff berth with a relatively easier schedule.

To level the playing field, many coaches are calling for balance in the number of games in the schedule. Shane Beamer shared his thoughts about a particular change in operations.

Shane Beamer is all in for an extra SEC game

Another argument that is gaining support in the SEC is the addition of one more conference game to the schedule. Coaches are willing to play 9 games instead of the already difficult 8 conference games, for a chance to up their wins. Shane Beamer told CBS Sports, “Certainly I’m for it.” “But before we say we’re all in on nine, I think I speak for every coach in the league when we just say, what exactly are the playoffs going to look like in future years,” he added.

Beamer is correct. The plan for a revision in the schedule will be incumbent on the CFP committee, changing the size of the playoff bracket. There are already growing calls for 14 and 16-team playoffs. Nebraska’s Matt Rhule added more fuel to the fire by casually stating that he wanted a 40-team playoff. He reasoned that programs like his get more time to better their stocks, compared to CFB blue-bloods who stand a larger chance of making it to the playoffs.

But South Carolina, in particular, also faces another hurdle. They are among the few SEC schools that play non-conference games in-state. And the Gamecocks’ opponent is ACC juggernaut Clemson. “I just want it to be balanced for everyone in the conference because everyone does not play a non-conference rival like we do,” Beamer told CBS Sports. This is also a factor that comes into play for him if the Committee decides to widen the playoff bracket, and if Greg Sankey’s SEC adds one more conference game.

Calls for a revision of the playoff have always been in the background. From expanding the brackets to allowing a new seeding method, more such suggestions are gaining support. Is the CFP Committee eager to take up more of these suggestions that allow for more transparency and fairness in the sport?