Below is my response to the mediocre first round of the 2024-25 College Football Playoffs. 

Read further to see my takeaways, critques, and solutions.

Online there has begun to be a justification for the first round blowouts in the 2025 CFP saying that blowouts are normal for the playoffs. While there may be historical precedent for playoff blowouts, this justification is simply viewers settling for a mediocre product that should have been solved with a new format. As a viewer, I refuse to settle for a bad product, and since this is the 12 team playoff's first year of existence, I believe it is entirely reasonable to critique the format. One of my least favorite things though, is when viewers simply acknowledge something is broken, without providing proper feedback or an alternative. So while others will debate which teams should have made it into this year's playoff, let me critique the system that allowed unqualified teams to play meaningful football in December in the first place.

I do not know how many people would get on board with going back to a system like the BCS, but I am for it. If the formula is disclosed, the teams, audience, and media will understand the criteria to make the playoffs and there would be less discourse. The problem is that sewing discourse is what modern sports media is all about, so this solution might not be in the best interest of ESPN and media companies. Also, with a committee, the CFP can be curated so that there are money making matchups that are more easily advertisable. While it may go against the positions of power, it would be a far more objective way to decide the teams and fans could only argue against a formula rather than a subjective myserious governing body that refuses to stay concistent or disclose their invested interests.