‘This Sport Is Dead,’ ‘I Believe the SEC Bias Conspiracies Now’ — CFB World Rips ‘WILD’ College Football Playoff Top 25 Rankings

It’s that time again when the first College Football Playoff rankings are revealed. To no one’s surprise, Tuesday’s unveiling ruffled some feathers in the college football community. One big takeaway is that the SEC is once again dominating the sport, at least in how the College Football Playoff committee views it.

But that’s not all. There’s plenty to unpack from the initial CFP rankings reveal, especially given how social media is reacting.

College Football Playoff Rankings Reveal Sends Social Media Into Tailspin

The first College Football Playoff rankings are as follows:

• Miami (FL)
• Georgia
• Utah
• Indiana
• Alabama
• Kentucky
• Texas
• UCLA
• BYU
• Ole Miss
• Notre Dame
• Ohio State
• Tennessee
• LSU
• Texas Tech
• Wake Forest
• Houston
• Missouri
• Iowa
• USC
• South Carolina
• Arizona
• Oregon
• Florida
• Boise State

There are certainly some interesting decisions made by the committee, and of course, not everyone agreed with how the numbers played out.

One person who took issue with the CFP rankings was former Missouri QB Chase Daniel, who immediately took to X to provide his feedback.

“The 1st CFP rankings are WILD. Alabama at #5, EIGHT spots ahead of a 2-loss Tennessee team that beat them?! Texas at #7 with the BEST resume of any 2-loss team? Notre Dame at #11 means one more loss and they’re OUT. And we already setting up a 3-loss Alabama/Texas to get IN??”

PREDICT THE CFB SEASON:PFN’s Free CFB Playoff Predictor

Yet, one commenter (‘CFB Kings‘) laid out their reasoning for why the rankings committee seems to have a bias.

The SEC placed 10 teams in the first CFP Top 25, matching its representation in the latest AP poll. However, the committee ranked several SEC contenders more favorably, including Alabama at No. 5 (up from No. 9 in the AP rankings) and Texas at No. 7 (up from No. 10).

“Everything is literally just ‘tHey’Ve pLayEd noBodY, bAd scHeDuLe!!’ All because these ridiculously stupid ‘metrics’ and ‘ratings’ and ‘models’ gift the entire SEC an advantage before ANY games are played. Think about that.

“In the transfer portal era where entire teams constantly flip each season, ONE conference consistently gets given permanent blind benefit of the doubt before any games are played. That then skews the AP voters’ opinions, which influences public perception, and that skews the CFP. Then the CFP rolls around, and to everyone’s shock, the SEC is annually massively overrated and can’t even reach the national title game anymore. And then the cycle restarts.”

DIVE IN:PFN’s Free CFB HQ — Team and Player Stats, Info, and More

The criticism highlights a longstanding debate about whether strength-of-schedule metrics give SEC programs an advantage over teams from other conferences.

With Alabama ranked eight spots above Tennessee despite losing their head-to-head matchup, questions about how the committee weighs different results are unlikely to disappear.

Even Snapback Sports CEO Jack Settleman (who’s been campaigning to coach his alma mater) chimed in with his two cents.

Another commenter laughed at the fact that there are two three-loss SEC teams in the top 25 and said, “This sport is dead.”

Others took special notice of the CFP rankings having what one commenter called an “SEC bias.”

Another reaction suggested there’s just no way to deny the fact that there’s a bias toward the SEC while suggesting these are the worst rankings yet. “How can anyone deny the committee is SEC-biased after tonight? This is probably the worst ranking they’ve ever dropped.”

DIVE IN:PFN’s NFL Draft HQ: Draft Prospect Analysis, Stats & Info

Meanwhile, one fan admitted that they’ve bought into the “SEC bias conspiracies” after seeing how the rankings played out.

“Ok yeah, I believe the SEC Bias conspiracies now.”

The initial CFP rankings have reignited criticism over the committee’s treatment of SEC teams, especially when it comes to head-to-head results and strength of schedule.

While some fans believe the rankings reflect conference favoritism, others argue that the committee is appropriately evaluating the strength of each team’s résumé, whatever that might look like.

This article originally appeared on Pro Football Network.