The Southeastern Conference (SEC) has long been a dominant force in college football, but its influence over the College Football Playoff (CFP) selection process has drawn criticism. In December 2024, controversy erupted when Alabama, despite having more losses, was ranked above Miami. 
This decision reignited concerns about perceived favoritism toward SEC teams and the potential for multiple-loss SEC teams to receive playoff spots over other deserving programs.
Critics argue that the CFP committee’s rankings consistently favor SEC teams, even when their records or résumés do not clearly justify higher placements.
Alabama’s ranking above Miami led to speculation that strength of schedule and conference reputation were weighted more heavily than actual performance and win-loss records. This raised broader concerns about the fairness and transparency of the selection process.
Supporters of the SEC contend that the conference’s rigorous competition level justifies its teams receiving favorable treatment.
They point out that SEC teams frequently play tougher schedules and face higher-ranked opponents, making their losses more forgivable. However, detractors argue that this perspective creates an uneven playing field, where teams from other conferences—despite strong records—struggle to gain the same level of respect and consideration.
The controversy has fueled calls for CFP expansion to ensure a more inclusive and balanced system. Some propose automatic bids for conference champions, reducing the subjective nature of committee selections. Others suggest more transparency in the ranking process to alleviate concerns of bias.
As college football continues to evolve, the SEC’s perceived influence over playoff selections remains a hot-button issue. Whether future reforms will address these concerns or further entrench the SEC’s dominance remains to be seen.