College football has never been more chaotic – and its fans are losing their minds because of it

Just a week ago, after a dominant win over Ole Miss to reach 4-0, it would have been difficult to find a Florida fan who felt anything other than elation over first-year coach Jon Sumrall.

But by Saturday night, the tables had turned against the Gators in a 45-17 loss at Missouri, and the online discourse around Sumrall quickly turned toxic.

Advertisement

“There better be some personnel changes on the first day of the offseason,” verified a Florida fan account with more than 1,000 followers posted on On a popular Gators message board, there were separate threads calling for the firing of defensive coordinator Brad White and mega-booster Gary Condron, as well as another calling Sumrall a “fraud.”

Although overheated social media rhetoric is a hallmark and not a bug of college football fandom, it appears the first half of the 2026 season has been defined by more emotional volatility and less patience than ever before.

Whether it was a group of TCU fans carrying paper bags last week against BYU to protest head coach Sonny Dykes, Florida State coach Mike Norvell being booed during introductions before a big win over Virginia, or Arkansas fans openly speculating whether first-year coach Ryan Silverfield might be one-and-done, a sport that is supposed to bring joy and community seems at the moment to be more of a source of frustration in many places.

While online conversation represents only the most fervent part of each fan base, the atmosphere around college football appears to be growing more intense and toxic. It’s not just about the fans. Administrators feel the stress of a bad football season that puts their jobs in jeopardy. Coaches’ capacity for patience is also diminished — just look at the sideline explosion at Colorado State last weekend between Jim Mora and defensive coordinator Tyson Summers, who left his position midgame after being removed from play-calling duties.

Advertisement

A certain level of weirdness makes college football what it is. But why does this season seem to drive everyone into a corner?

The answer lies in the broad realm of a single word: disruption.

Just think about how much college football has changed in a short period of time.

Players went from being unpaid to earning, in some cases, millions of dollars a year, spreading talent in a way that didn’t exist under the old model.

The concept of team building has evolved from developing multiple recruiting classes over several years to a plug-and-play model where relying too much on even elite prospects can be a disadvantage.

Advertisement

Fans and administrators judged coaches in part on their ability to attract talent, even if that meant overlooking shortcomings in their strategic and technical prowess. Now it seems the only meaningful metric for building a roster is money, which means schools that aren’t winning have to demand more from their fans just when their frustration with the product is highest.

The conferences have completely remade themselves, with the SEC absorbing two additional historic powers in Texas and Oklahoma and the Big Ten adding top West Coast programs, making both leagues harder to win and also more unequal from a scheduling standpoint.

The playoffs went from four teams to 12, and maybe now 24 as early as next season, which is great for college football in some ways, but has pretty much eliminated the entire paradigm that schools accomplish something significant by hosting a bowl game. Meanwhile, more players are opting out of bowls, which are slowly disappearing and could be reinvented or killed off entirely with greater expansion of the playoffs.

Advertisement

Oh, and Indiana — one of the worst power conference programs in decades — created an impossible standard for every school mired in mediocrity by winning a national championship two years after hiring Curt Cignetti.

All this has happened in the last five years. You can’t shake up a sport this much, in such a short period of time, and expect people to instantly adapt the way they’ve treated college football their entire lives. It’s just too much.

Many of these developments represent progress for a sport that once moved at a glacial pace, but everything comes with compromises. And sometimes those of us in media, especially those interested in college football, are too quick to dismiss the concerns of those who see cracks in the foundation, because TV ratings are still very good and many stadiums are full.

Advertisement

College football is resilient, but it is not immune to a market correction if the sport’s leaders go too far or move too quickly for its fans to understand. Every action will have consequences, even if they are unintended and, in some cases, unwanted.

On the one hand, the free NIL/transfer market has led to more parity between, say, a traditional power like Alabama and a historic middle-class program like Ole Miss. This is a positive development for a sport where elite talent was concentrated in a small number of schools.

Right now, there are at least 10 teams that have every reason to believe they can win a national championship this season and another 10 that might convince themselves they’re on the verge of doing so in a year or two if they meet a few players in the transfer portal. This has never been the case in college football.

But there are also disadvantages. When no one is better than anyone else and there is little continuity in a roster from year to year, inconsistency like we saw in Florida from last week to this week will become the norm. It’s an NFL-style setup for a sport that in many ways is still rooted in the BCS-era mentality that perfection is the best measure of excellence.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, fans of programs outside the Power Conferences feel the pain differently because their rosters are plundered every year by programs that can spend more to poach their players. The days when a Boise State could establish its national brand by beating Oklahoma in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl or when UCF celebrated an undefeated season likely won’t happen again.

A good example of how this plays out happened recently at Southern Miss, where head coach Blake Anderson was asked how to fix his team’s slow starts on offense. “Stop playing Auburn, UConn and Tulane,” he said. “Playing against people who look like us could help.” Predictably, this comment angered Southern Miss fans, many of whom remember a time under Jeff Bower when they regularly played hard against ranked teams and occasionally put a major conference scalp on the wall. Although Anderson apologized and tried to clarify what he meant, he was just being honest about what would happen most of the time when Southern Miss played a school that invested a lot more money into its roster.

Whether you’re Southern Miss in the Sun Belt or Arkansas in the SEC — another school whose fan base is furious because it has fallen behind its competition financially — there’s no easy way to generate hope anymore.

Is there a solution?

A decade ago, a school could buy out its unpopular coach and immediately see a return on investment when the charismatic newcomer generated enthusiasm among donors and sold a bunch of tickets. Now, as Arkansas is discovering in real time, there’s no point in hiring a new coach unless the commitment to spending more money has already been made.

Advertisement

In this environment, you can understand why many college coaches and administrators are desperate for a 24-team playoff. If schools are forced to invest $30 million to $50 million into a roster just to have a chance at success, they’re demanding more opportunities to have something to show for it. A trip to the Pop-Tarts Bowl, despite its enchanting quirkiness, is no longer enough.

But there is a problem with this theory. No matter how much schools invest and no matter how many playoff spots are available, half the teams will lose every weekend. Sometimes half the winners will be unhappy with how they won, because all adult college football fans grew up in an era when determining a national champion was almost like a beauty pageant.

In a way, it feels like just celebrating a win with the fervor of Minnesota coach PJ Fleck is a throwback to another era. When he goes viral for smearing a player’s blood on his face or drinking Little Brown Jug after beating Michigan and crowd surfing in the locker room, no one is talking about Minnesota’s NIL budget or its impact on the playoff race. Teams like Minnesota seem to participate less and less in these moments where it’s all about the joy of the sport.

Advertisement

We see these changes little by little, but in some ways too quickly for our brains to adapt to the product we observe each week.

College football was disrupted faster and more violently than any sport in modern times, and a lot of good came from it. But the transition from what it was to what it is today hasn’t been perfect. This has created a different set of winners and losers, and it produces a level of angst that fans, coaches and administrators have difficulty dealing with and the media has difficulty capturing in its overall context.

Sport is not in crisis. It’s also far from perfect. Everyone has an opinion on what college football should look like, but we all have to accept that it will evolve in some ways that we will like and others that we will hate.

The question is whether we can adapt to this reality before demanding everyone be fired.