The College Football Playoff era promised clarity. Expanded access, fewer subjective debates, and a postseason that rewarded what happened on the field. It has come at the expense of balanced schedules, Conference Championship Game excitement, appreciation for matchup variance value, and competitive spirit. At issue is not the existence of conference title games, but how participants are selected in leagues that no longer use divisions. Of course, there is also Notre Dame.
When multiple teams finish tied atop the standings (or in second), conferences default to layered tiebreaker systems that can feel opaque, punitive, or simply counterproductive. Take the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), where a labyrinthine tiebreaker process thrust Duke into the title game against Virginia, only for the Blue Devils to pull off a stunning upset. The catch? Virginia had already trounced Duke 34-17 just weeks earlier. Rematches like this one sparked outrage, diluting the drama of championship weekend and fueling calls for reform.
Participants in a championship game, knowing they are already playoff locks, as was essentially the case with Ohio State and Indiana in the Big Ten, risk diminishing the game. As a knock-on effect, historic underdog achievements can be overshadowed. The solution isn't eliminating these games but making them more meaningful. Fresh matchups between teams that haven't already settled their business in the regular season would inject renewed excitement into championship weekend.
NCAA needs new rule
Enter a simple yet transformative hypothetical: What if NCAA rules prioritized avoiding regular-season rematches in conference championship games? Under this proposed tweak, when multiple teams tie for the top spots, selection would favor matchups between squads that have not already faced off. No more convoluted tiebreakers based on obscure metrics. Instead, the focus shifts to fresh rivalries, injecting novelty and fairness into the process.
The “no-rematch” rule would not be perfect, as there would be years when the two best teams have already played, and they should still meet for the championship. Nothing is sweeter than deserved shots at revenge after all. However, as the 2025 season demonstrated, the rule would frequently create better matchups, fairer opportunities for deserving teams, and more compelling football when it matters most.
This isn't just about aesthetics. It's a fix for deeper NCAA ailments. Rematches often feel like reruns, sapping excitement and viewer interest in an era when TV ratings drive the sport's billion-dollar ecosystem. They can also skew the expanded 12-team College Football Playoff (CFP), where automatic bids for conference champs reward the “best” team but sometimes punish deserving at-large candidates.
By dissecting how this rule would have reshaped the 2025 CCG landscape, we uncover how it could streamline tiebreakers, enhance competition, and open doors for underdogs while preserving the integrity of the postseason. Let's break it down conference by conference, starting with those that would see seismic shifts, including Notre Dame.
ACC sees seismic shift
No conference epitomized this issue better than the ACC. Under this rule, Duke’s regular-season loss to Virginia (7-1) eliminates them from consideration. With the Cavaliers locked in as the top seed, the bid goes to the next eligible team they did not play. Virginia had not faced Miami, SMU, Georgia Tech, or Pitt (all 6-2). Using standard tie-breaking procedures among that subset, SMU emerges using a basic head-to-head transitive property process.
SMU beat Miami, but did not face Georgia Tech or Pitt. Miami beat Pitt, but did not play Georgia Tech. Pitt beat Georgia Tech. Within that matrix, SMU emerged as the cleanest alternative opponent for Virginia to preserve competitive fairness while avoiding redundancy. Duke’s Cinderella ACC title, born of a convoluted tie-breaker, never happens. Instead, the rematch eliminated meaningful possibilities and reduced the championship weekend's significance.
SEC helps Notre Dame
The SEC Championship Game revealed another dimension of the problem. Four teams finished with identical 7-1 conference records: Texas A&M, Alabama, Georgia, and Ole Miss. The actual championship pitted Alabama against Georgia, a rematch of a regular-season game Alabama had already won. Meanwhile, Texas A&M sat on the sidelines despite not having faced any of the other three 7-1 teams during the regular season.
Georgia had beaten Ole Miss, who played no one else in the top four. Alabama had beaten Georgia. The head-to-head results created a clean hierarchy, but one that left the most intriguing matchup off the table. Texas A&M versus Alabama would have been the new SEC Championship Game under a no-rematch policy, finally answering a question the regular season had left unresolved.
Winner is in with a SEC trophy; loser goes home to watch Georgia in the at-large game against James Madison. Ole Miss still hosts Tulane. Critics might argue this sidelines proven winners like the Bulldogs and cost the SEC a CFP spot, but proponents see it as a boon for equity and massive one-off stakes…which leads to more television dollars. In a conference as stacked as the SEC, why force rematches when fresh battles could highlight overlooked talent and increase revenue streams?
Mountain West's tangled web
The Mountain West was similarly knotted, with Boise State, UNLV, New Mexico, and San Diego State all finishing 6-2. The actual CCG featured Boise State and UNLV, but this was another rematch situation. Boise State had already bested UNLV and New Mexico, but lost to San Diego State. New Mexico had a win over both UNLV and San Diego State (in overtime, which is viewed as a tie).
UNLV didn’t play San Diego State. UNLV is eliminated at 0-2. New Mexico loses out on head-to-head point differential among the remaining trio. The hypothetical rule would have resulted in a rematch of Boise State versus San Diego State, resulting in very little change to the CFP standings regardless of which team won.
Simple changes, big ideas
Not every conference needed fixing in 2025. The Big 12 Championship Game between Texas Tech and BYU would have proceeded unchanged under a no-rematch policy, even though the Red Raiders had beaten the Cougars during the regular season. The reason? No other team finished with an 8-1 conference record.
Utah sat at 7-2, having lost to both championship game participants. The policy would still allow rematches when they represent the two clearly superior teams, which is exactly what fans, players, administrations, and alumni want to see.
The Sun Belt, American Athletic Conference, and Big Ten all staged true no-rematch championship games in 2025. James Madison and Troy had never met before their Sun Belt title clash. Tulane and North Texas were fresh opponents in the American. Indiana and Ohio State squared off for the first time in the Big Ten Championship. These conferences demonstrated that the current system can work; it just doesn't work consistently.
These examples prove the rule's elegance: it intervenes only when needed, preserving organic outcomes.
Finally, the Big Ten's Indiana-Ohio State finale was another clean slate. No regular-season clash, no alteration required. In a conference expanding with West Coast additions, this stability highlights how the rule could prevent future headaches as schedules grow more complex.
College Football Playoffs losing trust
Beyond individual conferences, this hypothetical tweak tackles systemic NCAA woes. Tiebreaker controversies, like the ACC's 2025 debacle, erode trust; prioritizing no-rematches simplifies decisions, reducing administrative drama and legal challenges. It boosts excitement—fresh matchups mean unpredictable outcomes, countering viewer burnout in a saturated sports market.
Playoff equity improves, too. By minimizing intra-conference eliminations via rematches, more teams vie for at-large spots, diversifying the field and amplifying Cinderella stories. Notre Dame's path eases without SEC giants self-sabotaging, but power conferences still dominate fairly. Of course, implementation isn't flawless.
Scheduling variances could favor some teams, and defining “best” without rematches requires clear criteria. Yet, in a sport evolving with NIL deals and transfer portals, this rule feels like progress. Honoring tradition while adapting to modern demands is worth its weight in alumni gold. As the 2025 season fades into history, one thing's clear: college football thrives on innovation. A no-rematch mandate for CCGs isn't just a tweak; it's a catalyst for fairness in the future. Will the NCAA listen? Only time and perhaps a few more tiebreaker-related migraines will tell.
