It looks like the College Football Playoff will be expanding to 24 teams in 2027. It’s something that fans don’t want, but with it all but finalized, we put some of our thoughts together in a TNIAAM Roundtable.
Now that a 24-team CFP is happening, what’s your immediate reaction?
Kevin: Not a fan of it. Not because of 24 teams but because it’s not going to change the biggest problem- conferences are too big for football. I’d welcome a larger playoff if we went back to 9/10 team leagues where you play everyone,
but that’s not a reality. Do we really need to see four 8-4 B10 teams in a playoff?
Dom: When does it stop? In the 12-team system, the 13th and 14th teams will complain that they were snubbed. In the 24-team format, the same thing will happen. If anything, it will be worse since there will be a bunch of teams with comparable resumes thinking they should be in. I was actually okay with 12 since it balanced expansion with “we’ve got a solid collection of teams who actually *deserve to compete for the national championship.” But does anyone believe going from 24 to 30 or 32 teams is off the table a few years from now? It’s a snowball that keeps getting bigger.
Mike: There are few times that I’ll say I “hate” something. This is one of those times. Most regular season games will become meaningless, the very concept of an iconic upset will go away, and top programs are not prepared how foodlioning empty their 90k+ shrines will begin to look. At this point, if ratings really are all that matter, the P4s might as well not play any non-conference games.
Whether good or bad, what’s an underrated consequence of moving the CFP to 24 teams?
Kevin: Fan interest in the regular season. Conference championship games often suffer from low attendance and fan disinterest, so why should you invest time and money in a regular season that doesn’t carry as much weight?
Dom: If the CFP expands and therefore extends the season, the whole calendar for the transfer portal would be even more wacko than it already is. Like, really crazy.
Mike: If you think bowl games are meaningless now, they may go outright extinct if/when this takes place. Outside of the former New Year’s Six, I can’t see many surviving the loss of 12 more teams. Maybe niche ones like Hawai’i and the Sun Bowl?
Impact of a 24-team CFP for Syracuse?
Kevin: Obviously it’s a good thing for a program like Syracuse because even if the SEC/B10 dominate the field in terms of numbers, there’s more spots for programs like the Orange to be in the mix. Could that mean increased attendance/interest? I think it’s why a lot of schools will be on board with this because that’s the best way to get more revenue.
Dom: Opens the door wider for a team in the situation Syracuse is in, and if it can have that 2018- or 2024-like campaign the Orange had. Of course, the bar is way lower to make it, and I don’t know how fans will feel about that. Maybe they mind, maybe they don’t.
Mike: I’m pessimistic that this would have any positive impact for the ACC or Big 12 in general. The same stupid s.o.s. arguments that are applied to 9-3 Big Ten and SEC teams will just extend to get 8-4 ones in over other one loss programs. Yes, it means they won’t be one bid leagues, but is one to two playoff reps really that big of a jump?
What would your ideal CFP format be and why?
Kevin: I’d take the P4 leagues and split them into two divisions where you play every team in your division. In a perfect world, these 8 divisions would comprise 9 schools (so 72 P4 teams) playing 8 league games, 2 non-conference games and a FCS exhibition game. Each division winner gets an automatic CFP bid so there’s 8 teams. I’d take the top 2 G6 league winners and then you have 6 at-large bids. If you wanted to do play-in games for the final 6 spots, I’d be fine with that and in the case a play-in team made the title game, they’d max out at a 16 game season.
Dom: I’d go with 16 teams (but after that, no more expanding, please!). The breakdown: the Power 4 conference champions *and runner-ups all make it (saving conference championship games and preventing that from being a reason to omit a team). Then, I’m flexible with either two G6 spots and six at-large, or one G6 and seven at-large. No byes for the top seeds or re-seeding during the CFP.
Mike: I mostly like the 12-team format as is, but I would make one major change: Move the second round games to campus sites. It’s already becoming a problem for fans to afford more than one big road trip, and it’s somewhat of a disadvantage that the Top 4 seeds don’t currently get a home field experience. Pipe dream? Probably. But more likely than giving the P4 conference champs automatic byes.
