TAKE ONE: JUST WIN BABY

Greg Byrne grew up in Eugene – the son of former Athletic Director Bill Byrne – so I am not going to get overly personal here. What I will say is that his statement following the college football playoff committee’s decision to leave Alabama out of the 12-team field was woefully misguided. Saying that Alabama “will need to assess how many P4 non-conference games make sense in the future to put us in the best position to participate in the CFP” is beyond disingenuous.

It was not the out-of-conference schedule that doomed Alabama – it was losses to two 6-6 unranked teams – one of those losses a 24-3 blowout to Oklahoma – that doomed their bid. Win one of those two games, and the Crimson Tide make it into the playoff. The Oklahoma loss in particular was damning to their chances.

The statement from Byrne seems to imply that Alabama’s problem lies in the level of competition they choose to face in non-conference games. This is a troubling deflection from the real issue. Alabama’s resume didn’t suffer because of a punishing non-conference slate; it suffered because of poor performances in games they were expected to win. Playing fewer competitive games outside the SEC does not address the inconsistency that led to those losses. In fact, if Alabama scales back its non-conference scheduling, it could backfire by weakening the very resume they need to impress the selection committee in a system that will inevitably scrutinize strength of schedule.

This year’s committee has made one thing abundantly clear: results matter. Whether we like it or not, the new format includes a premium for winning the conference, and that can help or hurt a team’s chances. Looking across the P4 conferences, only one saw the loser of their championship game miss the playoffs. Byrne’s insinuation that non-conference scheduling is the problem ignores the obvious fact that Alabama’s losses in conference play were the real dealbreaker. It also ignores the reality that the SEC already plays one less conference game than the rest of the P4 conferences, adding to the disingenuous nature of his comments. In an expanded playoff era, conference performance will carry more weight than ever before. A team’s ability to navigate their conference schedule will be critical to securing a spot.

There is also a broader implication in Byrne’s comments that warrants scrutiny. By suggesting Alabama may shy away from tougher non-conference opponents, he’s pointing to a larger trend in college football that could diminish the regular season as a whole. If elite programs begin avoiding high-profile matchups in an effort to protect their playoff chances, the fans and the sport itself stand to lose. One of college football’s most cherished traditions is the spectacle of powerhouse programs clashing in non-conference games that transcend regional rivalries. These games help define seasons and create the kind of drama that keeps fans invested. Diluting that in favor of a risk-averse strategy would be a disservice to the sport.

Alabama’s exclusion this year serves as a reminder that even the most storied programs cannot afford to take anything for granted. The new playoff system is designed to reward teams for what they accomplish on the field, not for their historical pedigree. Byrne’s focus should not be on re-evaluating non-conference scheduling but on ensuring that Alabama’s football program is better prepared to meet the challenges posed by its conference rivals. Consistency and resilience in the face of adversity are what will ultimately secure Alabama’s place in the playoff conversation.

It’s worth noting that Alabama’s situation is not unique. Other traditional powerhouses have faced similar scrutiny under the new playoff criteria, and many have adapted by emphasizing performance over perception. Byrne’s comments suggest a resistance to this shift, which is disappointing given Alabama’s reputation for setting the standard in college football. Instead of deflecting blame onto scheduling choices, Alabama would do well to embrace the challenge of the new system and use it as an opportunity to reaffirm their dominance on the field.

The path forward for Alabama and other top programs is clear. The expanded playoff system provides a wider margin for error but also places a greater emphasis on conference success and head-to-head matchups. Teams that aspire to compete at the highest level must rise to the occasion in all facets of the game, from recruiting and player development to execution on Saturdays. Byrne’s statement, while likely born out of frustration, misses the mark by focusing on the wrong aspects of Alabama’s season.

In the end, the playoff committee made a decision based on merit, not reputation. Alabama’s losses to subpar opponents were too significant to overlook, and no amount of tweaking the non-conference schedule would have changed that – in fact, it would likely have weakened their argument. All three of their losses came in conference so his strength of schedule would have been worse and the three losses would have been further magnified. Instead of lamenting the system, Alabama’s leadership should focus on ensuring that the team’s performance aligns with the high standards that have come to define the Crimson Tide.

TAKE TWO: STILL WINNING THE DAY

The thing about last Wednesday is that Dan Lanning found a way to win that day once again. Even when Peyton Bowen picked Oregon live and then flipped, all of the talk was about Oregon.

This time around, though, Oregon closed strong on just about everyone and earned their first ever No. 1 ranked recruiting class. I know that the narrative is Oregon simply outspends everyone in NIL and that narrative is not going to change just because I say that it is not an accurate portrayal of the Oregon NIL program. What I can say is that the most coveted player who had not yet publicly committed until signing day did not get the ‘biggest offer’ from Oregon. In fact, it probably was not a top three NIL deal offered for the prospect. Oregon does not just throw a bunch of money around and I think that became clear following Wednesday's signing.

But you see, everyone needs a bogeyman; someone to blame for their failures and right now, the narrative that drives the message finds an easy target for bogeyman. That’s okay. Recruits know the truth, Oregon is not the top NIL number for most recruits, but they do use NIL wisely to work on building out an entire roster not just getting a few big-name prospects on board.

At the end of the cycle, it is really about what happens between the sidelines. Talent matters. But so does connection. And if you think that Dan Lanning is simply out there throwing money around without concern for culture, fit, and connection then you haven’t been paying attention.