Football Report: College Football Playoff nearing deal to expand to 24 teams
- Thread starter Richie O
- Start date
Not defensive at all. You and anyone else don’t have to like it. As a CFB fan and RU fan I love it and it’s happening and that’s all the counts.
I don’t see being like the NFL as a bad thing either because it’s the most popular sport in this country by far. Fans of all teams have hope every year to do something meaningful and now that will exist in CFB too for the teams in the P4. It’s also another mechanism to help parity a little more on top of NIL and portal.
Last edited:
Not defensive at all. I’m very aware that you barely watch college football so your opinion is noted. Just showing the different perspectives
Was looking at our schedules for the next few years and after next year it looks like we’ll have to make some changes to find that 10th P4 opponent.
2027: Akron, LIU, BC
2028: Norfolk St, UConn, Kent St
2029: UConn, Centtal Michigan, FCS or P4?
2030; Temple, Kent St, FCS or P4?
2027: Akron, LIU, BC
2028: Norfolk St, UConn, Kent St
2029: UConn, Centtal Michigan, FCS or P4?
2030; Temple, Kent St, FCS or P4?
Checking in live from a broken college football campus
View attachment IMG_3494.jpegView attachment IMG_3495.jpegThis never made sense to me because wouldn't the opposite be true? Lose 1 games and your games are meaningless. Under a 24 team system more teams are playing for something later into the season.
Would you rather watch those games or two 6-6 schools playing in the no one cares bowl with half the starters opting out?
Neither.
This ridiculous 24-team playoff ONLY makes sense if all other "postseason" or bowl games are gone. All of them.
5 of the teams in top 7 lost yesterday. None of that matters at all in 24 team playoff. Lame
It still matters and it’s just another example of increased parity. If it was 24 this year all those games would still have been exciting. There are still stakes even at 24 and it’s still the wonderful drama of sports.
The fact that it seems like just about anyone can beat anyone these days is the reason you need more access not less. It’s very difficult to create a super team now. Some 8-4/9-3 teams are better now than the past and the 1-2 loss teams probably aren’t as good as the past.
Iowa was 8-4 last season and pushed national champ IU to the wire and lost to Oregon by 2. They would’ve been a dangerous team last year. Pavia led Vandy was 10-2 and very capable. GT was 9-3 and the last 3 years lost to UGA by 1 score each year. These kind of teams can be potential troublemakers in a playoff.
It’s becoming harder to delineate and separate teams and evaluate because of the increased parity. I think many see that. If differentiation is harder than you need more access and then you settle it on the field.
The fact that it seems like just about anyone can beat anyone these days is the reason you need more access not less. It’s very difficult to create a super team now. Some 8-4/9-3 teams are better now than the past and the 1-2 loss teams probably aren’t as good as the past.
Iowa was 8-4 last season and pushed national champ IU to the wire and lost to Oregon by 2. They would’ve been a dangerous team last year. Pavia led Vandy was 10-2 and very capable. GT was 9-3 and the last 3 years lost to UGA by 1 score each year. These kind of teams can be potential troublemakers in a playoff.
It’s becoming harder to delineate and separate teams and evaluate because of the increased parity. I think many see that. If differentiation is harder than you need more access and then you settle it on the field.
Last edited:
In a 4 team playoff, the rest of the season doesn't matter for those 5 teams.
Lame?
It's a matter of perspective.
Lol at “CFB Playoff and ESPN are nearing a deal” as if ESPN isn’t the ones putting on the playoff. I mean for the first couple years the website “cfbplayoff .com” or whatever was actually just a subpage of espn.com if you went into the back end. Why play pretend. It’s the same thing as the FOX Crown basketball tournament. A TV invitational meant to make execs $$
The 1970s-80's? So you preferred having the coaches and sports writers voting in a champion and even split national champions? Or was it having a computer algorithm decide the national championship? Or a group of ADs, College Presidents and Politicians deciding who plays in a single game championship?
Really? I'm pretty sure that #4 Notre Dame, #5 Georgia, and #6 Indiana would still be in the running for the BCS Championship Game with half the season remaining and #13 Alabama is still very much alive in the 12-team playoff. What you (and many "experts") are missing is that this can create a better regular season. Teams should be more willing to schedule opponents who have a pulse rather than cupcakes because they no longer have to be concerned with the opinions of sportswriters. 12 of 25 teams in the preseason polls finish unranked and 38% of #2 teams defeated the #1 team in the BCS Championship. We have effectively crowned champions based on the opinions of people who are right about 60% of the time. Gee, why would we want to do away with that?!
Yes. One game should not make a break an entire year's work. We are still hearing too much whining about polls despite the fact they are no longer vital to having success in the sport. Right now we have #1 Miami, #2 Ohio State, and #3 BYU according to the Coaches and using the old BCS formula. "Miami has played anyone and Notre Dame is the only decent team they play this year! They are overrated!!!" is an argument that should be retired.
"Settle it on the field!" used to be the battle cry for the playoffs. It seems like some of us still want championships settled in board rooms by a committee of "experts" who get it right a little more than half the time.
If college football's annual beauty pageant model was so much better 50 years ago, why does every major sport worldwide have an expanded tournament playoff model to determine a champion instead?
You are correct. This account updates the would be BCS standings.
Because the longer you can falsely convince a fanbase that they could potentially win a championship, the longer they are willing to tune in. Further, coaches are completely disincentivized to want smaller playoffs because it makes them harder to fire if "they made the playoffs." It is the same reason coaches love the volume of meaningless bowls that have popped up in the last 25 years.
Ok...? Now frame your comments around how that applies to NBA, NHL, MLB, International Soccer, Cricket, Bowling, etc all increasing playoff participation. Or why we shouldn't just have the Pistons play the Thunder for the NBA Championship (suck it, Knicks) or just have the Yankees play the Dodgers for the World Series (oops).
The model from 50 years ago was like a monopoly controlled by the NCAA and independent Bowl Organizations. Aside from the National Championship game - the rest of the bowls became more and more meaningless over time - nothing more than exhibitions to create some extra sporting content for people to pass the time. College football also over that time has become big business - so naturally money will come into play and expanded playoffs mean much more money and attention - as the games actually mean something more than an exhibition -regardless of how lopsided some of the outcomes might turn out.
From a fan perspective beyond the Championship game and any Bowls that RU has been in- I was never a big fan of watching essentially meaningless bowl games. Football is about real competition / not exhibition games - and also choosing a champion by Coaches or Writers surveys (like they did 50 years ago) or the BCS Computers never made much sense to me. I much rather watch an end of year Tourney and let it play out on the field.
But the tradeoff is that there are no more meaningful regular season games. Thirty years ago, this past weekend would've been absolutely seismic in its impact, with a complete reordering of the national championship contenders. As it was, it was fun to watch, but more out of muscle memory than because it had any real impact on anything other than a temporary reshuffling of the top teams. Essentially meaningless, when there was a time when it would've been recalled as the weekend the entire season shifted across the country.
What does seismic in its impact mean and how does that translate? This past weekend was amazing football, stories, upsets, etc. Ratings will likely be through the roof. We have another potential setup like this on tap for the weekend of November 7th. Weekends like this won’t be any fewer in the new model. With less non-P4 crap games there will likely be more of them. How this weekend or any other weekend impacts the post season is somewhat meaningless. Enjoy the weekends as they happen.
I hate that too. When I was a kid, the regular season meant something in baseball. You won your division or you didn't make the playoffs. And there were only two divisions in each league. It was infinitely better. Having half the teams in the NBA make the playoffs is a joke; NHL too. I really couldn't care less about International (or domestic) soccer, cricket, bowling, etc so I can't speak to those sports.
You know what was really awesome about Ohio State vs. Indiana? Nothing really. I watched, but I didn't really care who won. They are going to play again in two months and that game will actually matter. That's a game I'm invested in.
Back in the day , if you didn't win the Crown you still had a chance to play in a major bowl as an at large .
2 losses might not stop you but 3 probably would,
Now with a 24 team playoff 3 losses might not stop your invite and major bowl games have vanished , turning into playoff venues.
Since the best of the bunches will be playing almost that good in a 24 team playoff
maybe it's time to to make all conference champions playoff teams and make all the P-4 Conference Championship games count as playoff games.
G-6 losers minor bowl players
Independents auto playoff invites if in top 25 rankings
Then have the losers play in what was once traditional major bowls against each other
The Rose Bowl has the BIG loser playing the B-12 loser
The Sugar Bowl has the ACC and SEC losers face each other
Last edited:
I like that idea..they should def still have the championship games for the conferences and just make that the play in game for autobid. The other team could have a possibility of an at large bid still otherwise still have those top bowl games for teams not in playoff. Get rid of all the other bowls thought
the significance is there, it just shifts out. People are watching, content is king, this is happening
Of course it's happening and content is king, but that's because it makes the most money for the media outlets and the programs. It does nothing for the fan.
People who have been all in on college football for 30, 40 years or more know the difference and know what's been lost over time. The 24-team playoff alone doesn't ruin it; it's just the nail in the coffin.
I remember being 15 years old and slightly bemused about why I was so much more drawn to the college game than the NFL, which was my entree to football. Before my teen years were through, it was clear to me that I loved the traditions and the regional rivalry, but the biggest thing was the absolute premium on every regular season game for a national championship contender. I grew up a Notre Dame fan, so it was relevant, but even if the Irish weren't in it, the national theater of the sport was just too much to resist. Even if teams I hated were the contenders, I was still fascinated and cared about every single game.
Now, it's pretty much going to be the NFL, which I only tune into on rainy Sundays when there isn't much to do.
Will Stein, born in 1989, isn't old enough to even remember the true greatness of college football. Good coach, but he only understands the watered-down context in which he's lived.
Anyone can feel whatever they feel. No issue with that. But actually, 24 team expansion isn't making any extra money. If you look at the post above I mentioned from Dellenger, it's negligible They're just being made whole from the money they lose from eliminating the conference championship games.
The reasons they're doing it is because they need to have some meaningful results to show for all the 10s of millions their pouring into coaches and players. It can't be we're spending all this money and we have nothing to show for it or a bowl which is meaningless.
It is great for many fans, especially fans of the mid and lower tiers in the P4, like us. Finally, you actually have hope to accomplish something meaningful if you pretty much just get ranked. With increased parity because of NIL/portal it's possible and as we've seen lately so many teams are coming out of nowhere for their moment in the sun. More often than the past anybody can beat anybody.
The expansion itself is another mechanism of parity. You can sell it as see even from here we can make the playoffs come help us go farther. A chance at playing time, some money and realistic opportunity to get in the CFP. Hope is spreading throughout CFB and hope is a fan's best friend in any sport.
Think about a home field playoff game at all these places that couldn't have dreamed of such a thing in the past. Freaking IU won a national championship which never would have happened in the past. That's awesome. The sport is evolving and opportunity is spreading. IMO that's all good for CFB.
Ratings have been going up and staying up (see CFB ratings thread) so plenty of people are watching. I didn't once think of 12 or 24 when I was watching all the great football and close crazy finishes the last 2 weeks. I was enjoying the wonderful drama of sports and rooting for the underdogs.
Latest
-
01
The Knight Report Football
ESPN FPI projects Rutgers Football's 2026 schedule - Week Eight
-
02
The Knight Report
Join The Knight Report TODAY and get it for 60% off!
-
03
The Knight Report
The Knight Report - Ask The Experts Chat: October 21st Edition
-
04
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football HC Greg Schiano talks Northwestern game week
-
05
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football rules two defensive backs out for the season