Ohio State’s head coach Ryan Day recently sparked a firestorm in college football circles with a bold, even outrageous, claim about the Big Ten’s place in the College Football Playoff (CFP) landscape. In an interview following a dominant Buckeyes victory, Day declared that the Big Ten deserves not just one or two playoff berths—but three spots in the coveted four-team field every single season. His assertion has sent shockwaves through the college football world, igniting debates about conference strength, fairness, and the future structure of the playoff itself.
Ryan Day’s claim is rooted in the Big Ten’s recent dominance on the national stage. Over the past decade, the conference has consistently produced powerhouse programs like Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, and Wisconsin. Ohio State, under Day’s leadership, has been a perennial contender, reaching the playoff multiple times and consistently winning Big Ten titles. From Day’s perspective, the Big Ten’s depth of elite teams far surpasses other conferences, justifying the need for expanded playoff representation.
Day argued that the current four-team playoff format fails to capture the true competitive nature of college football today. “If you look at the Big Ten, we have at least three teams capable of winning it all every year,” Day said in a fiery postgame press conference. “It’s not just Ohio State. Michigan, Penn State, even Wisconsin and Michigan State have programs that can compete at the highest level. Why should only one or two of those teams get a shot at the title? The system doesn’t reflect reality.”
His claim also calls into question the entire playoff selection process, which heavily factors in conference championships, strength of schedule, and subjective committee rankings. Critics argue the Big Ten’s regular-season grind, marked by strong defenses and intense rivalries, produces more battle-tested teams than other Power Five conferences. Day’s contention is that limiting the Big Ten to one or two playoff teams ignores the quality of opponents and the sheer volume of elite talent within the conference.
However, Day’s statement hasn’t gone unchallenged. Other Power Five coaches and analysts have fired back, pointing out that conferences like the SEC and ACC also feature multiple championship-caliber teams each year. The SEC, in particular, has claimed the last seven national championships and continues to dominate recruiting and postseason success. Many believe Day’s claim, while bold, overlooks the broader national landscape where multiple conferences vie for playoff spots.
The College Football Playoff itself is currently exploring expansion to 12 teams—a proposal that many see as a direct response to the kinds of concerns Day raises. An expanded playoff would allow more teams from powerhouse conferences like the Big Ten to enter the postseason, validating Day’s argument. Yet even with expansion, the debate about fairness and conference representation will persist.
Ryan Day’s claim ultimately highlights a broader tension in college football: how to balance tradition, competition, and inclusivity in a sport growing ever more complex and lucrative. His provocative assertion serves as a rallying cry for Big Ten fans and a challenge to the CFP system to evolve. Whether or not the Big Ten truly deserves three playoff spots every year remains fiercely debated, but one thing is clear: Ryan Day has ignited a national conversation that will shape the future of college football for years to come.
