Did you honestly expect the College Football Playoff selection committee to reveal that college football is now more equitable than it has been for the last five decades? Did you think that the first year of a 12-team playoff and the chaos of this regular season would break the firm grip that the SEC and Big Ten hold over college sports?

Not a chance. Your odds would be better buying a winning lottery ticket than thinking you could challenge the powerful elite that always—always—receives the benefit of the doubt in tight situations.

And what thrilling matchups could await us: Alabama battling Notre Dame? Tennessee facing Ohio State?

Exciting, right?

But also, a bit frightening!

Warde Manuel, the committee chair, clearly stated on ESPN Tuesday night that only one result during conference championship weekend will significantly influence the playoff bracket. If Clemson triumphs over SMU for the ACC title, the Tigers will secure an automatic spot. For the Mustangs, it means a nerve-racking Saturday night, as the final playoff position will likely come down to a battle between them and the Crimson Tide.

Deep breath.

Nonetheless, the current landscape of college football is unmistakably clear. We can discuss NIL policies, scheduling disparities in 16-team leagues, and the emergence of a new competitive balance across the nation this year. For instance, it took Georgia eight overtimes and a host of questionable officiating calls to narrowly defeat the sixth-best team in the ACC last Friday.

Ultimately, the College Football Playoff bracket is set to feature four teams from the SEC, four from the Big Ten, Notre Dame, the winner of the Boise State-UNLV matchup in the Mountain West, the victor of the Arizona State-Iowa State contest in the Big 12, and SMU as the sole ACC representative if they clinch victory against Clemson.

This means there’s no Power Four; there’s only a dominant Power Two, leaving everyone else scrambling for leftovers.

Alabama being ranked No. 11 speaks volumes. Despite their 9-3 record, including losses to Vanderbilt and one of the weakest Oklahoma teams in two decades, the Crimson Tide is on track to make the playoffs, even if it seems unmerited. Again.

You can recall back to 2011 when Alabama was chosen over Oklahoma State to face LSU in the BCS title, even after losing to them in the regular season. There was also 2017, when they didn’t win the SEC West yet were selected as one of the top four teams and ended up winning it all. Last year, they overtook unbeaten Florida State for the fourth spot, largely because FSU’s starting quarterback was injured.

This pattern is evident: Alabama repeatedly receives the benefit of the doubt, even in a year like this when it’s challenging to argue they belong in the discussion, especially since their fans were ready to give up on the season following a disappointing loss in Norman.

On Tuesday, Manuel presented a rationale for why Alabama was favored over 10-2 Miami and other 9-3 contenders like Ole Miss and South Carolina. He cited Alabama’s 3-1 record against top 25 teams, the best among that group, and their 6-1 record against teams with winning records, compared to Miami’s 4-2.

These arguments hold weight, although it’s worth noting that Alabama’s poor losses were more damaging than Miami’s losses to Georgia Tech and a 9-3 Syracuse team.

I’m not insisting that the committee is in the wrong. Someone will claim that 12th spot, and it’s bound to be a flawed choice.

However, for the ACC and Big 12, Tuesday was likely both enlightening and disheartening. Yes, Miami can only blame itself for squandering a 21-0 advantage against Syracuse last weekend, and Clemson could have secured its spot by maintaining a 14-7 lead in the fourth quarter against South Carolina. Neither team can realistically argue they’re being treated unfairly.

Nonetheless, for the ACC to have four ranked teams and possibly secure just one playoff spot is a significant affront. The Big 12 seemingly isn’t regarded as a true player in college football, treated no differently than the American Athletic Conference in the rankings. BYU, with a 10-2 record and wins against SMU, a narrow defeat to Kansas, and a slightly tighter loss to Arizona State, doesn’t even warrant being in the top 18.

Meanwhile, Indiana benefits from the Big Ten brand, easily making it into the playoff at 11-1 despite lacking significant victories and suffering a heavy defeat in their only major challenge against Ohio State.

As officials in college football explore the concept of expanding the playoff beyond the current 12 teams with the next television deal.

As the new playoff format takes effect in a few years, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and Big Ten’s Tony Petitti proposed a playoff system with 14 teams, which included four automatic spots for each of their conferences.

This proposal was turned down, leading to discussions about ensuring three guaranteed spots for each of those two conferences and two each for the Big 12 and ACC. This arrangement seems unjust and unnecessary — even a bit contrary to American ideals. However, considering how the current year’s playoff bracket is shaping up, those leagues might have to seriously reconsider this proposal.

If both the ACC and Big 12 find themselves needing a stroke of luck from the selection committee just to qualify a second team, they could be facing significant difficulties. Alabama will consistently remain a powerhouse, and the reality is that expanding the playoff to 12, 14, or even 16 teams lowers the criteria required for traditional powerhouse teams to secure a playoff spot.

This year’s Alabama team has shown moments of frustration and has, at times, performed below expectations under Kalen DeBoer. Still, they are on the verge of entering the playoffs again.

If they succeed in qualifying, it will lead to exciting matchups between elite teams and attract large audiences on television. It will also challenge the notion that expanding the playoff system will make college football more equitable.