CFP expanding to 8 teams before 2026 - CBS Sports

[Highlander]

I corrected your erroneous point of a single game comparison, when it's the average that matters.

You didn't correct anything. Kansas may not achieve a winning record on a G5 schedule. It does matter which P5 opponents a playoff contender has faced.

 

[somebody]

You didn't correct anything. Kansas may not achieve a winning record on a G5 schedule. It does matter which P5 opponents a playoff contender has faced.

Right, ON AVERAGE. That's why everyone calls it/uses strength of schedule.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

If your point really is to remove emotion, seeding the conference chanps also works.

No, it doesn't. There will be gigantic emotional **** storms when a 2-3 loss P5 team get an autobid and UCF, Boise, Utah (MWC version), etc get passed over. People can be butt hurt over their P5 conference champ not getting in, but if a composite of the computer polls says otherwise, it will be much more accurate.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

Ugh, the alleged politicking, endless arguments about who is best, the vagaries of the championship determination are what makes the CFB a Mythical National Title. If you want to pursue some notion of alleged fairness, head to head play, and render the regular season practically meaningless, go watch the NFL. There they have a Mechanical National Champion if you will.

For me, dump about a third of the bowls, dump the G5 conferences into a different division and continue as before. Nobody gives a crap about non-legacy (read legacy as P5 schools) schools that pop up on the radar once every 20 years. Yes, I am looking at you Boise, Hawaii, Memphis and UCF. Let the G5 go have a National Championship of their own.

The day CFB looks like the NFL, and it is a good part of the way there, is the day I find something else to watch.

The DII and FCS playoffs are awesome, and their seasons are anything but meaningless.

 

[somebody]

No, it doesn't. There will be gigantic emotional **** storms when a 2-3 loss P5 team get an autobid and UCF, Boise, Utah (MWC version), etc get passed over. People can be butt hurt over their P5 conference champ not getting in, but if a composite of the computer polls says otherwise, it will be much more accurate.

I get your point, but disagree. Everyone understands this money train is driven by the big conferences. There are 3 other spots to argue about. I don't disagree with your method to fill those spots.

 

[8Jah]

Cat is out of that bag. And you're wrong, there is often an undisputed best team. But no playoff system guarantees the best team wins in any sport. Sometimes they have an off day while the opponent plays lights out.

Traditionally college football is about matchups among the top teams. When college level talent is spread around, teams will usually have weaknesses that are exploitable by some other team. It’s rock-paper-scissors. It’s not like professional sports. There truly isn’t a best team...that is until recently where anticompetitive policies have lead to persistent super teams like Alabama.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

I get your point, but disagree. Everyone understands this money train is driven by the big conferences. There are 3 other spots to argue about. I don't disagree with your method to fill those spots.

That's what it all comes down to, money. I honestly think expanding the playoffs to 8 teams will accelerate G5 breaking off into their own division.

 

[TDforTD]

I’d be interested to see if (and how many) players would sit out games in an extended playoff. I think an additional 3 games is pushing it, but probably right at the level where pro prospects would still play.

Any more than that tho and I just don’t think it’d be worth it for them no matter how awesome a national championship is.

 

[Highlander]

Right, ON AVERAGE. That's why everyone calls it/uses strength of schedule.

Let me get this straight.

I suggested in a reply to a very precise post that you can't weight all P5 opponents equally in a simplified point system. You are correcting me by saying we need to use strength of schedule?

Yeah - you got me there - thanks for the correction.

 

[leftybuff]

The DII and FCS playoffs are awesome, and their seasons are anything but meaningless.

Sounds like you have found the solution. You can watch FCS and DIII and no longer waste time on DI. Enjoy the awesomeness.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

Sounds like you have found the solution. You can watch FCS and DIII and no longer waste time on DI. Enjoy the awesomeness.

I actually have started watching as much of them as is available.

 

[8Jah]

CFB fan base spread across many teams and any team can’t play too many games. The bowl idea is that every team that can make 6 wins can play in a bowl. Some ‘bowls’ are better than others, but they are categorically on par with each other.

Now you have a new, higher category...the playoff bowls and national championship. Meanwhile the viewership, attendance and coverage for ‘mere bowls’ is dropping.

Moreover, the playoffs, conference alignments and P5 networks exacerbate the creation of a few super teams. Creates a winner takes all the spoils scenario.eventually everyone else will just stop watching. This is killing CFB faster than concussions.

If you want a play-off system more like the pros then you need pro-like rules that keep things competitive...like spending caps and a high school lottery system. All of this is ick.

Good bye CFB. You were a lot of fun until you decided to grow up.

 

[onealcd]

CFB fan base spread across many teams and any team can’t play too many games. The bowl idea is that every team that can make 6 wins can play in a bowl. Some ‘bowls’ are better than others, but they are categorically on par with each other.

Now you have a new, higher category...the playoff bowls and national championship. Meanwhile the viewership, attendance and coverage for ‘mere bowls’ is dropping.

Moreover, the playoffs, conference alignments and P5 networks exacerbate the creation of a few super teams. Creates a winner takes all the spoils scenario.eventually everyone else will just stop watching. This is killing CFB faster than concussions.

If you want a play-off system more like the pros then you need pro-like rules that keep things competitive...like spending caps and a high school lottery system. All of this is ick.

Good bye CFB. You were a lot of fun until you decided to grow up.

If this was true the Bowls wouldn't be around and more bowls wouldn't be added.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

The DII and FCS playoffs are awesome, and their seasons are anything but meaningless.

I don't understand why FBS can't go to an FCS/DII style of post season. FCS has 24 teams in a playoff bracket while the teams who don't make it play in bowl games. The top 8 teams get byes and you play through there. I know people don't like this model, but I think it would be freaking awesome.

 

[Highlander]

I don't understand why FBS can't go to an FCS/DII style of post season. FCS has 24 teams in a playoff bracket while the teams who don't make it play in bowl games. The top 8 teams get byes and you play through there. I know people don't like this model, but I think it would be freaking awesome.

I believe we will get there in phases. Top 8, then Top 12, then Top 16, then Top 24. I like the idea of the 1st round bye - puts emphasis on SoS and the CCG. Not sure if we make it to 32 or not, but I can definitely see making it to a Top 24 over an expanded horizon.

Again, none of this has to do with pageantry or the history of the sport. It is all about the all mighty dollar. It is coming over time whether people like it or not.

 

[GoBuffs08]

No way, eventually cu has got to be one of the top 64 teams....

We will be the school demanding it expands from 64

 

[somebody]

Let me get this straight.

I suggested in a reply to a very precise post that you can't weight all P5 opponents equally in a simplified point system. You are correcting me by saying we need to use strength of schedule?

Yeah - you got me there - thanks for the correction.

Well I misinterpreted your original point and I'm sorry.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

I don't understand why FBS can't go to an FCS/DII style of post season. FCS has 24 teams in a playoff bracket while the teams who don't make it play in bowl games. The top 8 teams get byes and you play through there. I know people don't like this model, but I think it would be freaking awesome.

DII has a 28 team 2 bracket system with the 4 #1 seeds getting buys. They take their regular seasons very seriously, including conference championships.

 

[8Jah]

If this was true the Bowls wouldn't be around and more bowls wouldn't be added.

They won’t be around with an expanded playoff.

 

[Alfred91]

SIAP, but how is there going to be "regional balance" if the selection committee still takes 5-6 teams from the South and/or TX into an 8 team playoff?

If expanding to 8 is actually about expanding "regional balance" - ie, viewership, imo - then the only way you go about that is 5 autobids for the P5 champs and one autobid for the highest rated G5 school.

Personally, I can see arguments either way. Putting the best 8 teams in, regardless of conference affiliation, would be the most honest way of getting a "true" champion, and you'd rarely get a team with a realistic chance of winning it all left out.

OTOH, autobids would be the best way of achieving regional balance, it would take a great deal of regional bias out of the equation, and with the exception of a G5 school, a field produced by an autobid plus two at large selection process would probably look the same as a purely invitational field most years.

 

[somebody]

SIAP, but how is there going to be "regional balance" if the selection committee still takes 5-6 teams from the South and/or TX into an 8 team playoff?

If expanding to 8 is actually about expanding "regional balance" - ie, viewership, imo - then the only way you go about that is 5 autobids for the P5 champs and one autobid for the highest rated G5 school.

Personally, I can see arguments either way. Putting the best 8 teams in, regardless of conference affiliation, would be the most honest way of getting a "true" champion, and you'd rarely get a team with a realistic chance of winning it all left out.

OTOH, autobids would be the best way of achieving regional balance, it would take a great deal of regional bias out of the equation, and with the exception of a G5 school, a field produced by an autobid plus two at large selection process would probably look the same as a purely invitational field most years.

Agree except G5 autobid would have nothing to do with regional balance, and would usually only guarantee a spot to a team not in the top 8.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

I believe we will get there in phases. Top 8, then Top 12, then Top 16, then Top 24. I like the idea of the 1st round bye - puts emphasis on SoS and the CCG. Not sure if we make it to 32 or not, but I can definitely see making it to a Top 24 over an expanded horizon.

Again, none of this has to do with pageantry or the history of the sport. It is all about the all mighty dollar. It is coming over time whether people like it or not.

My last semester at CU, I actually lived down in Golden with a group of Senior football players at Mines. They won the RMAC and got to play in the D2 playoff tournament. Even though they lost in the first round, they were so pumped to have that opportunity, instead of the random bowl game they would have gone to.

 

[Alfred91]

Agree except G5 autobid would have nothing to do with regional balance, and would usually only guarantee a spot to a team not in the top 8.

True, plus this year if would have gone to UCF anyway, lol.

I just don't see how you go to 8 without including a G5 school, unless the G5 schools pull out, of course. The outcry would be too much.

You can try to avoid this by going with a purely invitational system, in which you run the risk of 4 SEC schools going in, and a P5 conference champ (Pac-12, anybody?) being left out.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

SIAP, but how is there going to be "regional balance" if the selection committee still takes 5-6 teams from the South and/or TX into an 8 team playoff?

If expanding to 8 is actually about expanding "regional balance" - ie, viewership, imo - then the only way you go about that is 5 autobids for the P5 champs and one autobid for the highest rated G5 school.

Personally, I can see arguments either way. Putting the best 8 teams in, regardless of conference affiliation, would be the most honest way of getting a "true" champion, and you'd rarely get a team with a realistic chance of winning it all left out.

OTOH, autobids would be the best way of achieving regional balance, it would take a great deal of regional bias out of the equation, and with the exception of a G5 school, a field produced by an autobid plus two at large selection process would probably look the same as a purely invitational field most years.

**** regional balance, don't like it, claw your way up.

 

[Alfred91]

**** regional balance, don't like it, claw your way up.

Sure. But they're claiming they're doing it for "regional balance", which is why I'm thinking they have to go with autobids.

Edit: I should say that this one guy is saying they're going to do it for regional balance, which is a lot different than actually doing it for any reason.

 

[Bison]

Please go back to the traditional bowl system. There is never an indisputable best team in college football...unless you build a playoff system that dumps all talent and resources into a few programs.

Agree with this. Take North Dakota State for instance...they will have played 15 games while Northern Colorado, who didn't make the playoffs, played 11 games. That is four extra games and extra weeks of practice for the younger players for the following season. How is UNC able to improve while NDSU is still playing in the playoffs? Sure you have winter conditioning but nothing beats those extra practices. In FCS ball, you can pretty much predict who will be making the playoffs because those same teams keep getting the extra reps in practice. The NCAA needs to address this imbalance.

Just think about it...if USC gets its act together on the football field, they will be able to build a dynasty. That is what Alabama is doing right now and it's only the beginning. This means some schools in P5 conferences will just quit trying to field competitive teams.

 

[BuffNut]

With 8 team playoff, Conference champs should get autobids, if worried about a team with to many loses backing in, then could require a minimum of 10 wins or something.

I always thought teams that don't make bowls should still be able to practice as many days as bowl teams.

Would not like more than 8 team playoff. Teams 9 or 10 have very little argument compared to that of teams 5-6. 8 is the perfect number given 5 conferences.

 

[InTheBuff]

This is off the cuff, so I may change my mind later, but to take a crack at this thing:

The way I see, the NFL does a better job of appealing to the American sports fan with football and CBB does a better job than CFB of competing with its pro league counterpart.

So I'm looking to take the best from both.

With the NFL, I think the "best" is the feeling fans have that they have a chance to win a championship with free agency, a hard cap, a draft, equal revenue and 12/32 teams (37.5%) making the tournament with a shot to win it all every year.

With CBB, I think the "best" is that it has a tournament that creates incredible moments and Cinderella stories while involving the whole country's regions while also getting to a championship "Final Four" round where the elite teams playing their best at that time will match up.

CFB can't emulate the total parity of the NFL from a financial standpoint, so it needs to follow its own model from CBB to create those Cinderella stories.

CFB also needs to avoid the problem of CBB where the regular season is kind of lame and it's all about the conference tourney & NCAA tourney.

How best to apply these things to CFB?

1. I'd make it so that we have 4 conferences with 16 teams playing 2-round championships. Pod scheduling to emphasize regional rivalry games that will be well attended, but no "divisions" and no consideration to a "pod championship" mattering in terms of who makes the playoff.

2. Conference semi-finals are the 4 highest ranked teams within the conference at the end of the year. 1 & 2 seeds host the semi-final games at their home stadiums.

3. Conference championship is the next round of the playoff and this is played at a neutral site within the footprint.

4. The 4 winners are then the national playoff. Many years a total underdog that started the playoffs outside the Top 10 or even the Top 20 will make it. That's a good thing (our "Cinderella Story").

5. I wouldn't even seed these teams in a traditional way. PAC and B1G champs should play each other in the Rose Bowl (Los Angeles). SEC and ACC champs should play each other in the Peach Bowl (Atlanta).

6. Then, championship game would be those winners on a rotation between the Cotton (Dallas), Orange (Miami), Fiesta (Phoenix) and Sugar (New Orleans) sites.

7. This is actually a 16-team playoff and I believe every program in the country would think it had a chance to make the tournament (only have to finish Top 4 in your conference), every region would be well represented for viewership every year, you'd have some Cinderella years, and at the end you'd crown a champion it would be hard to argue with being deserving.

8. To your earlier concern, @Jens1893 , this would actually reduce the number of games a team might potentially play. Everybody still plays 12 in the regular season. Another 8 teams would play 13 (conf semi losers), another 4 would play 14 (conf final losers), another 2 would play 15 (conf final losers) and then 2 would play 16 (championship game attendees).

9. Because this would likely kill the bowl games, I think it would justify adding a pre-season scrimmage or two against FCS level teams to further increase revenues with those extra events added to the season ticket packages -- which would save football finances at those lower levels as an additional benefit because of the big paydays for visiting. There would have to be a rule that no FCS opponents are allowed on the regular season schedules.

10. A really nice side benefit here is that there wouldn't be a reason to care about unbalanced schedules, who a team avoided during its conference slate, whether the conference played 8 or 9 conference games in the regular season, or whether a team played all P5 opponents in the non-conference or all G5 opponents or whatever. It would all be about being ranked high enough to make your conference tourney and then winning it to get into the Final Four.

 

[GoonieBuff]

I still like the same plan I came up with a couple of years ago:

8 team playoff includes:
- Conference Champion from each Power 5 conference
- Highest ranked conference champion from the Group of 5
- Top 2 at large schools (can be anyone - P5, independent, G5, etc.)

In this scenario, there can be up to 3 teams from a conference in the playoff. Seedings would be based solely off of rankings (I'd be fine with going back to computer rankings for this stuff).

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Why? The NFL plays 20 with the preseason games and then you might play another 4 games if you reach the championship. Most college football teams would still end up playing 13 games (regular season + bowl). You currently have a bunch of teams that play 14 (reg season + conf championship + bowl or playoff) with 2 teams usually playing 15 (made championship game). All we're talking about here is increasing the 15-game teams from 2 to 4 and having 2 teams play a 16th game. That's very little change in the overall scope of things.

Division II National Champion played a total of 15 games, started in September and was done before Christmas.

In order to do that these teams play a 10 game regular season (playoff games are highlighted).



FCS plays an 11 game schedule but a smaller playoff bracket (highlighted). Their season ends tomorrow.