James Franklin makes case for college football commissioner to resolve CFP debate

With Friday’s final resolution of the House v. NCAA settlement, the focus for college football coaches everywhere — especially at the Power Four level — returns to the field of play. And this offseason, that has revolved around what’s next for the future of the expanded College Football Playoff.

Last week, Ohio State head coach Ryan Day told ESPN that the Big Ten “deserve(s) at least four automatic qualifiers” as part of the Big Ten-backed “4-4-2-2-1” format that would grant both the Big Ten and SEC four AQ bids apiece while the ACC and Big 12 would receive just two apiece. That obviously didn’t sit well for those leagues, and that proposal seems dead in the water after the SEC put its support behind the Big 12-backed “5+11” model with 11 at-large bids and automatic bids for the five highest-ranked conference champions.

Given the clear disunity among the Power Conferences, as well as those from the FBS’ Group of Six who are also against predetermined AQs, Penn State head coach James Franklin once again extolled the impact that an independent college football commissioner could have when it comes how the CFP selection committee utlimately determines which teams are most deserving of Playoff bids.

“The challenge that we have and why I think we need a commissioner … the majority of people that have strong opinions have an agenda and are biased based on what’s good for them. Right?” Franklin said Friday. “I think the reason the Big Ten and the SEC feel like there’s an argument for more (automatic bids) is because of a lot of the things that I’ve also brought up in the past, the discrepancies or things that are not even or balanced in the sport.”

Franklin then pointed out to the wide differences between the conferences, including the Big Ten and Big 12 playing a 9-game conference schedule while the SEC and ACC still utilize an 8-game model. He also pointed to Notre Dame and other independents not being apart of a conference and thus don’t play an additional conference championship game, putting those that do at a potential disadvantage.

James Franklin: ‘Our conferences are built differently, everybody shouldn’t get the same vote’

“(The Big Ten has) more teams in our conference now and have a greater level of competition week-in and week-out, why should it be balanced? I think that’s the discussion everybody is kind of having if that makes sense,” Franklin added. “That’s the challenge, and that’s where, to me, the most important thing that can happen is all the commissioners getting together or a commissioner of college football getting everybody together and saying: ‘Look, everybody’s going to be the same. Everybody’s going to play the same number of conference games, we’re all going to play the same number of games, we’re all going to play a conference championship game or not.’ … That would help the Playoff committee at the end of the year make decisions.”

During the SEC Spring Meetings late last month, Ole Miss coach Lane Kiffin suggested the Playoff committee should simply rank the top 16 teams however they see fit and then let those teams battle it out. Of course, as evident from the controversy surrounding the seeding in last year’s inaugural 12-team field, that’s easier said than done.

That’s where an independent college football commissioner would come into play, creating a system that evens the playing field in the regular season that would, in effect, make the CFP committee’s job of determining the sport’s best 16 teams easier at the end of the regular season. And until there’s a way to structure college football in a way that makes it more balanced, it’s in each conference’s best interest to look out for itself, especially when those leagues have inherent disadvantages based on the number and quality of the teams in their conferences.

“How do you choose the best 16? How do you choose the best 16 if you’re trying to project who they are?” Franklin continued. “… I think the more important conversation is what can we do on the front end to make it easier for all these decisions on the backend. If not, it’s going to be a constant struggle. And I guess my point is, that’s why the Big Ten and the SEC are saying we should get more AQs because it’s not the same right now.

“It’s not even, so why should it be even on the backend (with) who gets in when it’s not even on the front end?” Franklin concluded. “Like our conferences are built differently. Everybody shouldn’t get the same vote. Every conference shouldn’t get the same vote. A Penn State vote shouldn’t be the same vote as School X … they’re not the same. …. What I’m saying is: I agree with it the way it sits right now, because it’s not even. But let’s spend as much time as we possibly can in trying to get it consistent across the board to help with all these issues on the back end.”