College Football Playoff Committee Faces New Backlash Over Week 10 Rankings

The College Football Playoff committee released its Week 10 rankings on Wednesday, triggering immediate pushback from multiple programs and analysts.

Notre Dame sits at No. 11, trailing No. 9 BYU despite holding the top spot in ESPN’s FPI metric. The Irish are 7-1 and beat Wisconsin, a victory critics view as more impressive than UCLA’s win over its opponent. However, the committee placed BYU higher because of a head-to-head win over Notre Dame. That game ended with a missed pass interference call and a clock management error in the final seconds.

Wake Forest is ranked No. 16, a position that places the Demon Deacons behind several teams with two losses. The team is also 7-1 and has won five consecutive games. In those last four victories, Wake Forest outscored opponents by a combined margin of 187 to 31. The team leads the nation in explosive play rate differential and ranks 11th in strength of record. Despite these metrics, the committee placed Wake Forest behind Georgia and Texas Tech, both of which lost to unranked teams.

UCLA holds the No. 8 spot as an undefeated 8-0 team, ranking just behind Texas, which has two losses. This placement suggests the committee prioritizes strength of schedule over an unbeaten record. In the SEC, Missouri is ranked No. 18 with a 6-2 record. Critics note that Missouri’s resume is complicated by circular conference results, but they argue its performance compares favorably to higher-ranked teams like Kentucky and LSU.

USC is ranked No. 20 with a 6-2 record, while Ohio State sits at No. 12 with the same record. USC defeated Ohio State 38-18 on October 31. The committee’s decision to keep Ohio State above USC has drawn questions about how head-to-head results are weighed against overall resumes. Other programs expressing frustration include UTSA, Louisville, and BYU.

The current system is set to expand from 12 to 24 teams in the coming year. Critics argue that this expansion may not resolve the subjectivity of the process, as more teams will cluster near the inclusion line. Coaches and programs continue to question the consistency of the evaluation criteria used by the committee.