It’s clear Indiana was favored.
In the aftermath of one of the most contentious College Football Playoff National Championship games in recent memory, Miami Hurricanes Senior Vice President of Athletic Affairs Dan Radakovich has ignited a firestorm by publicly accusing referee Michael VanderVelde of showing clear bias toward Indiana. The statement, delivered in a post-game press conference, has thrust the officiating crew into the spotlight and prompted the NCAA to launch an urgent investigation into potential misconduct during the high-stakes matchup between the Miami Hurricanes and the Indiana Hoosiers.
The game itself was a dramatic clash of contrasting styles. Indiana, entering as the top seed with an undefeated record, relied on a suffocating defense and the dynamic play of Heisman Trophy winner quarterback Fernando Mendoza to control much of the contest. Miami, under head coach Mario Cristobal, fought back with explosive plays and a resilient offense led by their signal-caller, but they ultimately fell short in a hard-fought battle that saw Indiana emerge victorious.
While the final score reflected Indiana’s dominance on both sides of the ball, the narrative quickly shifted away from the on-field action to the decisions made by the officials.
Radakovich did not mince words when addressing reporters after the defeat. “It’s clear Indiana was favored,” he stated flatly, pointing specifically to referee Michael VanderVelde, who served as the lead official for the contest. According to Radakovich, several critical calls in the final minutes tilted the momentum decisively toward the Hoosiers. He highlighted a series of penalties and non-calls that he believed demonstrated a pattern of favoritism, including questionable pass interference flags on Miami defenders and overlooked infractions by Indiana players. These late-game rulings, he argued, prevented Miami from mounting a comeback and sealed their fate.
The accusations have resonated deeply within the college football community, where debates over officiating quality have intensified in recent years amid the expanded playoff format. Fans and analysts on social media platforms quickly amplified Radakovich’s comments, with many sharing clips of the disputed plays and echoing claims of bias. Some pointed to a roughing-the-passer call that extended an Indiana drive, while others focused on uncalled hits that appeared to go against both teams but drew particular ire from Miami supporters in the closing stages.
The NCAA responded swiftly to the escalating controversy. Officials announced an immediate review of the game’s officiating, with a focus on VanderVelde’s crew and their handling of the late-game situations. The investigation aims to determine whether any procedural errors, misapplications of rules, or external influences affected the outcome. While the NCAA has not yet commented on the specifics of Radakovich’s allegations, sources indicate that video review, crew communications, and post-game reports are all under scrutiny. Such probes are rare for championship games but have precedent in cases where public outcry raises questions about integrity.
This is not the first time officiating has dominated headlines in a CFP title game, but the direct naming of a specific referee by a high-ranking athletic department official marks a significant escalation. Radakovich, who oversees Miami’s athletic affairs and has a long history in collegiate administration, carries considerable weight in these discussions. His willingness to go public suggests deep frustration within the program, particularly given the stakes of a national championship appearance.
For Indiana, the victory represents a historic milestone—the program’s first national title in the modern era. Coach Curt Cignetti, whose team overcame early challenges including uncalled personal fouls against Mendoza in the first half, praised his players’ resilience. Yet even amid celebration, the shadow of the controversy lingers. Cignetti had voiced his own frustrations during the game, notably at halftime when he criticized missed calls on hits to his quarterback. Those comments, captured on ESPN’s broadcast, highlighted how both sides felt aggrieved by the zebras at different points.
The broader implications for college football are substantial. With the playoff now featuring more teams and higher visibility, the pressure on officials has never been greater. Calls for improved training, better replay integration, and perhaps even neutral-site crews from non-conference affiliations have grown louder. The Big 12 crew assigned to this game faced immediate backlash from some quarters, fueling discussions about conference ties and perceived home-field advantages in neutral-site contests.
As the NCAA’s investigation unfolds, stakeholders across the sport await clarity. If misconduct is substantiated, it could lead to suspensions, protocol changes, or even replayed scrutiny of similar high-profile games. For Miami, the loss stings not just because of the scoreboard but due to the belief that external factors played a role. Radakovich’s bold statement has ensured the conversation will continue long after the confetti fell.
In the end, the game showcased the best of college football—talented athletes, strategic coaching, and intense competition—but it also exposed vulnerabilities in the system that governs it. Whether VanderVelde’s crew acted with bias or simply endured a night of tough calls under immense pressure remains to be seen. What is undeniable is that Dan Radakovich has forced the issue into the open, demanding accountability at the highest level. As the review proceeds, the college football world watches closely, hoping for answers that restore faith in the process and allow future championships to be decided purely on the field.
