Elko calls for unified leadership in college football

SANDESTIN, Fla. — Seemingly hundreds of questions were asked on Tuesday at the Southeastern Conference spring meetings.

The best inquiry was probably from Texas A&M football coach Mike Elko.

“Why do you (media) care what we (coaches) think?” Elko said in a press conference at the Sandestin Hilton Hotel. “It doesn’t matter what we think.”

As usual, Elko is probably right. The opinions of coaches often don’t matter in the billion-dollar business that is college football.

We ask questions anyway. That persistence was rewarded handsomely by Elko, who captivated his audience with brutally honest opinions on the playoff and the industry in general.

Playoff expansion is the hot topic this year. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey wants a 16-team field. Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti wants 24 teams. If no agreement is made, the 12-team format will continue.

What do coaches prefer?

Some dodged the question like Johnny Manziel in the open field.

“I’ve heard the arguments from obviously 12 [teams],” Alabama’s Kalen DeBoer said. “I know 12, 16 and 24 seem to be the most popular, right? So, I can make an argument for all of them. I know, for me, it’s really not about a number. It’s about just trying to win every football game, so you don’t have to put it in a committee’s hands, and that’s our goal as a program at Alabama.”

Brian Jones

Finishing with an 11-2 record in 2025, Mike Elko’s Aggies made the 12-team CFP for the first time in school history.

Actually, it is about a number. DeBoer will realize that if the Crimson Tide is ranked 13th and the field is 12.

Elko joked that his number would be 40.

“I want 40 (teams) because then I’ll make it and I won’t get fired,” he said.

The more he talked, it was obvious Elko isn’t on board with doubling the playoff field.

“I think when you start talking about, like, ‘Oh, well, this team didn't get in, so we have to expand it, and then this team didn't get in, so we have to expand it more’ … like, the cool thing about our sport is it has always been a challenge to get into the playoffs,” he said. “Every year, there are good teams, whether it was four (playoff teams), whether it's 12, there are good football teams who don't make it.”

Elko knows that all too well. He was A&M’s defensive coordinator in 2020 when the No. 5 Aggies were left out of the four-team playoff field.

“There were some really good teams that didn't get in,” he said. “That’s OK. We don't have to find a number that lets everybody get in because, you know, you just saw it with basketball, right? All of a sudden, now 68 isn’t enough because there’s still some teams getting left out, so we've got to go to 74. I just … it’s OK to make it hard to get into the playoffs.”

Still, the debate for 24 vs. 16 continues and likely won’t be settled any time soon.

Elko suggested that this is a symptom of a bigger issue facing college sports.

Playoff expansion is just one issue. Player “auctions” via NIL threatens the economics of college sports. Basketball teams recruit players from professional rosters. Elected hometown judges circumvent flimsy rules.

There are complaints, but seemingly no consequences.

“None of us are answering for the good of the sport,” Elko said. “We’re answering for the good of ourselves. Different conferences want what they want because it’s the best for them. Different schools in different levels in each league want what they want.

“We’ve got to figure out some kind of unified leadership over college football. It’s a billion-dollar industry that’s getting governed in a lot of different, separate pockets, not with one, unified leadership.”

Who could be the leader who looks out for what’s good for the overall game?

One reporter suggested Elko. He understands the issues. He’s passionate. He’s smart. Why not?

“I’m a football coach,” Elko said. “I’m not qualified to lead a billion-dollar business.”

He probably couldn’t get the job anyway. College football can’t agree on the number of teams in a playoff field.

Agreeing on a unified leader is likely impossible.