CFP Meetings: CBS Sports Article - discussion of expansion to 14 and sample "bracket" for 2024 12 team playoff
The future structure of the CFP is a topic of conversation and a meeting was held earlier this week to discuss "the future of the 12 team structure" before it's even had its first iteration
CBS Sports posted two articles (not paywalled) - that cover: 1) what a 12 team format might look like for the 2024 season with "way too early" rankings, and 2) an update on the CFP meeting which included possible expansion to 14 or more teams after 2026 (which I believe is the term of the agreed to 12 team format).
Here's the link with an update on the conversations that took place on Wednesday - the key is - no decisions were reached - but, certain Commissioners would like a "soft" timetable for a return to discussions. https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-playoff-exploring-expansion-to-14-teams-multiple-automatic-qualifiers-for-conferences/ Personally, I believe that increasing the size of the playoff dilutes the importance of a conference championship - but, my opinion doesn't matter. And, the "duration" of a 12 team playoff would be four weekends of competition - the duration of a 16 team playoff would be the same - four weekends of competition. My guess is - the CFP will expand in time - and, it's not necessarily exciting news - but, money is driving this discussion. And - with a 14 team format there are two byes - with a 16 team format the "bye" count drops to zero, so teams that play in their respective CCGs will play an extra game - which would mean a season of 17 games if a team played in its CCG and reach the CFP Final.
Part two is the CFP "matchup". The following is a model that CBS projected based on "way too early" rankings for this season. My opinion is - if a conference has four (4) teams in the playoff, that those four teams should be seeded in four different quadrants of the bracket - SO, if a single conference actually has the four best teams - they'd meet in the semifinals and final. This would avoid "conference cannibalism" in the opening or quarterfinal round. Here's a link to that article: https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-playoff-bracket-early-predictions-under-5-7-model-as-12-team-format-begins-in-2024-season/
This is CBS' projection of the brackets as noted in the linked article. My comment is in parentheses.
(12) Liberty at (5) Oregon
Winner advances to play (4) Utah
(11) Ole Miss at (6) Texas - (this would be two SEC teams meeting in the first round)
Winner advances to play (3) Clemson
(10) Notre Dame at (7) Michigan - (this could be a potential Michigan - OSU rematch in the quarterfinals)
Winner advances to play (2) Ohio State
(9) Penn State at (8) Alabama - (this could be a potential Alabama - Georgia game in the quarterfinals)
Winner advances to play (1) Georgia
This structure makes much more sense to me - conference teams don't meet until the seminfinals - if at all possible. I realize the seeding "don't match up perfectly" - but, the overall schedule seems to make more sense. You could actually have a final four that's made up of a single conference - either the B1G or the SEC.
(8) Alabama at (5) Oregon
Winner advances to play (4) Utah
(11) Ole Miss at (7) Michigan
Winner advances to play (3) Clemson
(10) Notre Dame at (6)Texas
Winner advances to play (2) Ohio State
(12) Liberty at (9) Penn State
Winner advances to play (1) Georgia
So, what do you think? Any perspectives to share? It seems to me that the B1G and SEC are trying to get as large of a committed team / revenue share as possible and they'll be throwing their collective weight around in the coming weeks / months.
February 22nd, 2024 at 8:50 AM ^
I have no faith in Tony Petiti to look out for the B1G’s best interests.
February 22nd, 2024 at 8:57 AM ^
I have faith in Petiti to look out for OSU's best interest. So, whatever will benefit OSU the most is what Petiti will push for.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:10 AM ^
Tony P. is one thing. I'm still bothered that most of the Big Ten went along with OSU on SignGate.
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:34 AM ^
Hence, Michigan vs Everybody!!!
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:42 AM ^
Fortunately, Michigan was able to do the one thing that took all of that noise and threw it right back in their critic's faces.
They won it all.
That was Michigan's only defense. Their only shot at any semblance of revenge. It was their only way out from under all of this. And they did it. That was the ultimate, emphatic, best possible middle finger they could've ever given to OSU, MSU, Pettiti, the Ryan Walters and Bret Bielemas of the world who used the situation to stand up and virtue-signal over it.
It was the ultimate "f**k you" to every single one of them. And it makes winning that national championship all the sweeter.
February 22nd, 2024 at 8:59 AM ^
Tony Petiti politely stepped aside and gave his voice over to the new AD for The Ohio State for the best interest of the conference. /S
I kid about this, but for some reason it would not be surprising to me if this new AD or Gene Smith had some say in what the B1G is advocating for.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:16 AM ^
Going a little off topic here, but I think that w/ Rob Manfred's recent announcement, Tony Pettiti is just marking time until he can become the next MLB commissioner......he is therefore unlikely to do anything bold, controversial, or strongly advocate on behalf of the conference....
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:26 AM ^
An empty suit who hates the game he works for? Sounds like MLB commissioner to me!
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:37 AM ^
Definitely not my first choice, but since Warde doesn't stick up for Michigan, how can he represent the B1G.
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:37 AM ^
You should have no faith in him looking out for Michigan's best interest.
FIFY
This is the same guy who somehow fell for some petty, cowardly garbage from MSU's AD that Michigan's sign-stealing endangered MSU's players. This is the same guy who had the short-sightedness to say that this is the biggest scandal in Big Ten history. Wasn't even the biggest scandal THIS YEAR. That honor belongs to Northwestern, but because of Sign-Gate, that all got pushed to the rear-view mirror and is now ancient history. Much to Northwestern's delight, I'm sure.
Pettiti may be an expert at negotiating TV contracts, but beyond that, he's done nothing to deserve my respect. He's a weak man who caved to mob pressure from petty Michigan rivals and bottom-feeding leeches who add nothing to his bottom line.
February 22nd, 2024 at 8:57 AM ^
I mentioned this in a previous thread, but I think if you give the Top 4 a first round bye in the 1st round and then give the Top 4 home field advantage in the 2nd round it would keep the importance of Conference Championships. They will not do this because they are greedy, but I think it would be a good fix to make the regular season important and the Conference Championships. I look forward to our first home playoff game in the Big House. It could even happen this year. Go Blue!
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:50 AM ^
I wholeheartedly agree with this. Otherwise, a CCG win isn't really worth the extra wear and tear so soon after the last regular season game with really difficult games coming up.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:04 AM ^
Regarding "home field advantage in the second round" - that might be difficult to quantify. The second round games are scheduled to be played at major bowl sites. SO - though the SEC might "align" with the Sugar bowl - or be placed into a game there, it would not be an "on campus" game.
Along that line - for a "traditional" B1G team - does that mean the Rose Bowl? Is that an advantage for a team like Michigan?
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:01 AM ^
I think it is only hard to quantify because of the way the committee has setup the process to maximize the revenue for them and the major bowl sites. If you do a 2nd round home field advantage and then keep everything else the same as it is now for the semis and Championship game then everything should bee good right? Wrong! Expanding the playoffs just allows them to have even more of a money grab with allowing all major bowls to have a piece of the action instead of having the semis and championship games rotate between the top 4 bowls. When they move to 16 teams, my guess is they will add even more "major bowls" to take part in the money action. I am excited about the new playoff format, but having to deal with these major bowl companies is going to be annoying as it always is.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:04 AM ^
Dupe - deleted.
February 22nd, 2024 at 8:57 AM ^
Wanna see what the highest viewed ratings wise game is in the history of college football? See that ND @ Michigan first round playoff game. Super Bowl like numbers.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:01 AM ^
It cannot be said enough, but Fuck Notre Dame.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:03 AM ^
I mean yeah, fuck 'em and all that, but a playoff game between Michigan and ND in Ann Arbor would be cool as hell.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:17 AM ^
Maybe once. After that, screw them.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:57 AM ^
I think Michigan/OSU would produce higher numbers. I dont think ND has the following like they used to. Even the ND/OSU game didnt get the viewers I expected.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:24 AM ^
The Super Bowl got 123 million viewers this year. No college football game, regardless of the stakes and teams involved, is getting even a third of that.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:36 AM ^
Great graphic - thanks for posting. It's interesting that ND only had one game in the Top 25 this past season - and, that game was probably a "Game Day" site for the early season OSU @ ND matchup.
It would be interesting to me to see how ND's games ranked this season - since NBC is spending a LOT of money to broadcast them.
FWIW - Stephen A Smith had a short (two minute long session) about "How is ND even relevant anymore?" recently. He cited ND's last NC (in '88 - 35 years ago) - and the changing landscape in college football.
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:49 AM ^
They're not. They lose the majority of the big games they play regular season or postseason (they havent beaten OSU since the 1930s). They've hitched their wagon to playing ACC teams every year so sometimes they'll get Clemson or FSU but not always + Boston College, Navy and Stanford, and they dont ever play a home game after Thanksgiving so their rivalry week game is a dud a lot unless they happen to get USC that week.
There's way better places to play as far as viewers.
February 22nd, 2024 at 12:55 PM ^
When they started out exclusively on NBC of course they got watched, they were still great every year and were playing some of the biggest regular season games to date in #1 vs #2 matchups against Miami and FSU.
But they have only here and there been that good since, and now with every game on some sort of network or streaming they're not getting all the eyeballs they once did.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:09 AM ^
I think that every decision the NCAA makes, whether it is playoffs, NIL, eligibility or whatever, is driven by the greed of the people controlling the decision-making process, and not what makes sense for the sport or the players. So follow the money if you want to know where this will end up.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:01 AM ^
It will first end up with people realizing that this makes absolutely no sense as currently constructed. Several things needs to happen before this starts to be remotely coherent, and it will take a couple of really stupid seasons where people lose interest before being rectified to a product that works.
1. Regular season needs to be all conference games, with the exception of one baby seal game that may or may not actually count toward record.
2. Conference championship games need to be abolished for the power conferences unless they become real actual play in games for the Playoff.
3. Bowl games need to largely be eliminated from the Playoff, and games need to be played at home stadiums until the semis, fans cannot travel as much as they are going to be required to and tickets for the championship game are going to be bought by locals for $25. If bowl games are still going to be part of the equation, make the semis every year the Orange Bowl and Sugar Bowl with the title game at the Rose Bowl.
These three changes, or something similar, are going to have to happen.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:07 AM ^
Not sure I agree with #1. Only 16 teams make the playoffs, why should interesting regular season games be avoided by everyone? I love a good OOC game, plus it helps understand how good a conference is (so its not just all in the family, so to speak- no disrespect to the SEC lol).
TX was helped immensely by beating Alabama last year, for instance. Nice to spice it up sometimes!
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:15 AM ^
Yeah but now there are PLENTY of good teams in "conferences" to figure out who the best teams are. And it really doesn't matter to other teams who don't make the Playoff, they still play the same number of games, they are just conference games.
I get we have some cool out of conference games coming up, and understand why we would not want to lose those. But what is Arkansas State and New Mexico? Just.. why?
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:14 AM ^
I'm for whatever format gives me the most good college football playoff games to watch. Why? Because I like watching big time college football matchups. If I had my way, I wouldn't guarantee a G5 team a spot. If they have a team that earns getting in then so be it but I'm not guaranteeing them a spot just to be nice.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:29 AM ^
I’m very excited for the first school to sit their starters for rivalry week in preparation for their conference championship game.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:55 AM ^
Or sit their starters during the conference championship game after having secured a first round bye.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:08 AM ^
Conference championships will still mean quite a bit to a lot of people, players included. Look at UM team goals every year: b1g title, national title, beat osu (in no particular order). I don't think anyone will be sitting out.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:17 AM ^
I disagree. They meant something in the old conference/Playoff format, I don't think they will in the new conference/Playoff format.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:26 AM ^
Is that on the table? Every proposal I've seen still reserves the first round byes for conference champions, so I don't think it will be possible to have a first round bye secured before your conference championship.
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:08 AM ^
I should have read closer. If the conference title game is an auto-bye, that makes sense.
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:21 AM ^
And with that I don’t see what incentive a team like UGA (tech), FSU (UF), or Clemson (South Carolina) would have to play their starters in their rivalry games if they are locked into their conference championship game.
Rivalries are the soul of the sport and it pisses me off that these folks are willing to jeopardize it so that some three loss teams can make the playoff.
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:44 AM ^
Georgia dropped from 1 to 6th with a competitive loss to Alabama.
FSU dropped from 3rd to 5th in a big win over ranked Louisville.
You can mess around and sit players if you want but I wouldn't risk it.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:35 AM ^
So Glad we won the National Title in the last year before college football went full NFL.
Great to see OSU ranked in the top 2 again….
Glorious they have nothing to show for it the past 3 years…Not 1 trophy! - just a bunch of off-season champs banners
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:39 AM ^
With the level of recruiting and the roster that's been in Columbus - certainly for the last 15 years - you could argue that they have done "less with more" - than any other team.
I'm hoping for "one more win" on November 30th in the Shoe.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:36 AM ^
I “played” really just practiced for a I-AA (FCS now) back in the 80s. 16 team playoff existed then and I never understood why D I didn’t have a playoff. I have no issues with a 16 team playoff.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:39 AM ^
One of my big issues with the move to 5+7 is it's acquiescing to the drive for money at the expense of fans and student athletes, rather than pushing back against it. If we had a 16-team playoff but every conference champion was guaranteed a spot (technically 10 at the moment but soon to be 9), it would give pause to the push for superconferences, because the larger your conference is, the harder it becomes to make it to the playoff. It would also force people to think clearly about whether the G5 is really part of this division or not.
Obviously no one's ever going to push back against the search for more money, because all of these organizations are just collectives of the schools themselves that are searching for more money. But it would be nice to see some kind of force pushing back so that compromises have to be made.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:11 AM ^
But then you have 5/6 scrub teams that will just get completely pantsed, no thanks. I'd rather not have a any guaranteed conf Champs and just guarantee a number of schools from the SC2 (two super conferences) and maybe some from the other P4
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:16 AM ^
Having a bunch of scrub teams that get completely pantsed is a thing that happens in every other NCAA postseason tournament. Even March Madness historically features a first round of lopsided games involved the top 3 and bottom 3 seeds. That's what makes the upsets so much fun when they do happen (*cough* Middle Tennessee State *cough*). Yet in every other sport, the lopsided games are considered a worthy price to pay for the basic fairness of including every conference in the postseason.
February 22nd, 2024 at 1:11 PM ^
except there are 68 teams in march madness. you can have 20 that are scrub teams, and still include all the good teams (team 49 or 50 or whatever really have no say). and how often do those teams actually win more than 1-2 games? plus upsets are way more likely in basketball.
Now we are talking 16 teams, with 4-6 being teams that likely aren't even in the top 25. why allow really bad teams in at expense of a deserving team? what other ncaa post season tournament are you thinking of that do this? the other football playoffs also have seeding, to my knowledge.
the day UM gets left out when unranked mountain west champions etc get it, you may change your tune.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:40 AM ^
Just go to 16 and get rid of conference championships in the major conferences.
It seems likely to me that teams that have already locked up a spot in the playoffs are going to sit their players for the conference championship.
I would declare the conference champion the team that goes farthest in the playoff with some logical tie breakers if needed.
Think about this likely scenario, Michigan beats Oregon to win the BIG Championship, and then Oregon beats Michigan to win the National Championship. Do you really even care about that BIG TEN trophy anymore? I would just give it to Oregon. We are going to see scenarios like this over and over with all of the conference champions.
And even dumber, the games will only be a couple weeks apart.
February 22nd, 2024 at 10:15 AM ^
I hate this idea (although you are certainly just as entitled to your opinion as I am). Nobody is sitting for conference championship games, national titles are very hard to come by, and conf titles still have banners and rings.
Plus, matchups can be completely different, what if UM beat Oregon 2x to win that b1g title, Oregon wins once in the playoffs and gets the b1g trophy now? No need to make that adjustment, in my mind. I value the national championship way above conf titles, but yes, in that example, I'd still care the UM won the b1g (and so would the players, coaches and recruits).
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:50 AM ^
Georgia went from 1st to 6th with a close loss to Alabama. We can throw our sucker in the dirt if we want but nobody is messing around with a first round bye.
February 22nd, 2024 at 11:23 AM ^
Every other sport has this happen occasionally and they deal with it just fine. College football fans are acting like they have to completely reinvent the wheel here and every possible inefficiency with a large playoff model is a deal-breaker. There are pros and cons to every model. Every con brought up about a large playoff model for FBS football is one every other sport (and even every other level of college football) has considered and ultimately decided is worth it. I haven't yet heard a single argument against a large playoff model that's actually unique to FBS football and hasn't already been worked out in some other sport.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:47 AM ^
I think conference teams need to match up wherever they match up. If there is a rule they can't meet until the semis then there will always be unbalanced games that unfairly hurt/help teams that have earned the right to play a weaker opponent. IMO, Michigan got screwed out of a CFP final in 2021 (and yes, we still lose to UGA but the game would've been much closer) because Alabama got to play Cincy rather than us just because of a similar rule.
February 22nd, 2024 at 9:55 AM ^
I dislike the idea of teams getting a bye week especially in a sport of significant attrition like football.