Well, that escalated quickly. This past Wednesday a handful of reports surfaced that a committee was working on a plan to expand the College Football Playoff and by the early afternoon on Thursday, June 10th the CFP Working Group came out with details on a proposal that would enlarge the post-season to 12 teams.
This did seem inevitable and there’s a possibility the playoffs will expand just over a decade of first coming into the sport and that’s pretty wild. The current ESPN playoff TV deal runs through the 2025 season with reports suggesting a 12-team tournament could come as early as 2023 or 2024.
Today, we’ll break down the proposal and see what’s good and bad, both for Notre Dame and the sport as a whole.
Proposal: 12 Teams
It had to be this way with any expansion. For a long time, people all over the country developed plans for a 6-team playoff while an 8-team tournament was always the most common initiative. Moving to 12 makes the most sense for everyone involved, from Notre Dame, to the Power 5, and to the Group of 5 teams.
Of course, the drawback here is the devaluation of the regular season at the expense of a greater number of important post-season games, plus a further devaluation of the small and mid-tier bowl games, but this is a feature that we’ve always had to accept once the playoff door was opened.
A few years back when Brian Kelly mentioned he favored an 8-team playoff I proposed a system that included double byes for the top 2 seeds and that aspect was reviled. Everyone tries to facilitate between creating a fair playoff with something that protects the regular season but also doesn’t make it too easy for the dominant teams across the country. Double byes are a great way to protect the epic undefeated showdowns but I think most would agree propping up the regular season is mostly lip service.
If there’s anything that’s been painfully clear about the playoff-era it’s that we largely have 2 groups of fans: Those who prioritize fairness and access at the expense of the regular season and those who generally don’t like the playoffs anyway. The latter group has officially taken their ball and gone home.
Adopting a 12-team playoff ultimately plants a flag in the ground that fairness and access will win out. This is the most sustainable solution moving forward and is one of the best decisions college football will have made this century.
Proposal: 6 Highest Ranked Conference Champions Get Auto-Bids
This seems bad at first but notice the verbiage is such that Power 5 conference winners do not automatically get a bid. “No conference would qualify automatically.” It is the 6 highest ranked league champions, which in theory, leaves the door open for a Power 5 champion to be left out.
For example, last year Oregon finished #25 in the final playoff poll and would’ve missed the 12-team tournament altogether as the 4 other Power 5 champions, plus #8 Cincinnati and #12 Coastal Carolina (although technically their league title game was cancelled) got in instead. Even Mountain West champions #22 San Jose State would’ve been in over Oregon.
However, last year’s pandemic shortened season was super weird and unlikely to unfold that way the vast majority of the time.
𝗢𝗙𝗙𝗜𝗖𝗜𝗔𝗟: 12-Team Playoff Proposed by College Football Playoff Working Group
Details on the proposal » https://t.co/pbRJKkQ1Zc#CFBPlayoff 🏈🏆 pic.twitter.com/JRSrfur0Rq
— College Football Playoff (@CFBPlayoff) June 10, 2021
For example, prior to last year each of the conference champion auto-bids would’ve gone to the following teams in the playoff era in this new framework:
2019: All Power 5, plus 12-1 Memphis
2018: All Power 5, plus 12-0 UCF
2017: All Power 5, plus 12-0 UCF
2016: All Power 5, plus 13-0 Western Michigan
2015: All Power 5, plus 12-1 Houston
2014: All Power 5, plus 11-2 Boise State
We like to pretend that the major conferences sometimes give us a 9-4 or 8-5 champion–or that the threat of this happening is horrific to our sensibilities–but it’ll always be super rare. And, in the event that it does happen that league champion now has a real shot (or at least a much likelier shot than ever before) at missing the playoffs.
Although, if you’re a skeptic it’ll be important to see if any mediocre teams who are poised to play in their Power 5 league title game slowly get bumped up the rankings late in the season in order to secure a playoff spot should they win. Again, I don’t think this will be a problem as I believe any 4-loss and certainly 5-loss Power 5 champion will be left out.
Proposal: 6 Other Ranked Teams Get In
This is good that nothing funky is going to happen with the other 6 playoff spots. There really isn’t a ton of controversy here, which is kind of the point when increasing to 12 teams overall. Just get the best teams in without any strings attached.
The biggest threat is a really poor non-Power 5 conference champion crashing the party but this would seem to be unlikely most of the time. Take the 8 Group of 5 teams mentioned above who would’ve made the expanded playoff scenario since 2014 and notice they went a combined 92-5 through conference championship week with 5 undefeated seasons total.
Proposal: No Limits on Teams from a Conference
In retrospect it’s wild to see 2019 Alabama being left out with a 10-2 record from a 12-team field which is weird because with an expanded playoff perhaps the biggest fear across the country is that it’ll be flooded by SEC teams. Here’s the Power 5 conference breakdown over the last 3 seasons with a 12-team playoff:
SEC: 11
BIG 10: 9
BIG 12: 5
ACC: 3
PAC-12: 3
Notre Dame and G5 teams would’ve eaten up 6 other bids in this timeframe.
You have to wonder if the playoff committee is going to start really giving the benefit of the doubt to blue-blood programs that are perceived as elite like Alabama back in 2019? That season, the Tide sat at No. 5 in their rankings and the Iron Bowl loss prevented Alabama from entering the SEC Championship. Plus, they put 3-loss Auburn at No. 12 one spot ahead of Alabama and what would’ve happened? Both teams would’ve missed the playoffs in this proposed 12-team field.
Obviously, 12-1 Memphis grabbing the No. 12 seed in 2019 as the 6th highest rated conference champion is one thing but it’ll be the teams like No. 11 Utah (10-2) and No. 10 Penn State (10-2) from that season who may be reshuffled in the future to be left out in favor of perceived “better” Alabama.
Proposal: 4 Highest Ranked Conference Champs Receive 1st Round Bye
Here’s where Notre Dame loses out. Admittedly, at first this seemed like an egregious mistake and even an unfair hand to deal the Irish. Upon further reflection, I think it’s okay.
The lack of a conference championship game, and therefore a bye to the rest of the world, I get it. When it comes to handing out a bye in the playoffs I can see the viewpoint from other programs on this one. With just a 4-team playoff less so, but with an expanded field I understand the thinking.
As long as the Irish don’t develop into an Alabama-like machine where the rest of the country knows we’re without a doubt a top 1-3 team every single year this lack of a playoff bye shouldn’t be too bad. If Notre Dame gets to that level, well, it’s super weird at best to not get a playoff bye and I wonder if things will be re-visited later down the road.
For the record, with this setup Notre Dame would’ve been a No. 5 seed in each of 2018 and 2020 and faced No. 12 Penn State and No. 12 Coastal Carolina in each of those seasons, respectively.
Proposal: 1st Round Higher Ranked Teams Host On-Campus Games
Thank goodness this looks like it’ll be a feature of the expanded playoff. Even though the Irish are shut out of a playoff bye at least there’s the proposal that they’d always be hosting a home game in the first round if Notre Dame is ranked really high all season long and at the final College Football Playoff rankings.
We’ll see how the money gets divided up between teams but being able to add a playoff home game pretty much any year the Irish are in contention is a major bonus. I’m not sure I would say this outweighs being unable to get a bye but if we’re able to see 4, 5, or 6 playoff games inside Notre Dame Stadium over a 10-year period once this plan goes into effect you have to admit that could be pretty incredible.
One worry did jump out to me, though: That No. 12 seed will often be a Group of 5 team which you could argue opens Notre Dame up to the unwanted “lose-lose” matchups of beating a team you should beat but also falling on your face at home against an inferior team. But, this is only likely if the Irish consistently get the No. 5 seed which I guess we can’t really guarantee would happen more often than not.
Proposal: Quarterfinals & Semifinals at Bowl Games, Championship at Neutral Site
We can’t kill these bowl games yet! I personally would’ve been floored if the committee hadn’t recommended bowl games for the quarterfinals while adding on-campus games for the 1st round and it looks like this is how they’ll continue for the foreseeable future. Using the 12-team template, 2020 would’ve looked something like this:
2020 FIRST ROUND – December 26th
#12 Coastal Carolina at #5 Notre Dame
#11 Indiana at #6 Texas A&M
#10 Iowa State at #7 Florida
#9 Georgia at #8 Cincinnati
2020 QUARTERFINALS – January 2nd
#8 Cincinnati vs. #1 Alabama [Peach Bowl]
#7 Florida vs. #2 Clemson [Cotton Bowl]
#6 Texas A&M vs. #3 Ohio State [Orange Bowl]
#5 Notre Dame vs. #4 Oklahoma [Fiesta Bowl]
2020 SEMIFINALS – January 9th
#4 Oklahoma vs. #1 Alabama [Rose Bowl]
#3 Ohio State vs. #2 Clemson [Sugar Bowl]
2020 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP – January 19th
#2 Clemson vs. #1 Alabama [Miami, FL]
I’m still thinking about the money in this scenario. Notre Dame would A) not play Alabama right away like they did in real life last year B) hosts a home game C) would maybe be favored over Oklahoma in the quarterfinals and end up playing 3 playoff games. This seems like a gold mine and at the very least a pretty entertaining ride to the semifinals.
This makes me think that there will be some sort of revenue sharing system, especially for Notre Dame not being in a conference, since the likes of Alabama and Clemson would be losing out on an extra home game. I’m curious to see how this plays out, especially if we begin to see more upsets than in recent years. After a while, I think the pressure will grow from the 4 bye teams to get the advantage of hosting their quarterfinal games on campus.
Obviously, a 12-team playoff crushes the mid-tier bowl games which frankly I think is great news. For example, North Carolina and Oregon got major bowl bids as lower ranked teams last year and in this 12-team scenario they would be moved down to 2nd-tier bowl games while Indiana and Coastal Carolina make the playoffs. In terms of name recognition that might not be a terrible trade-off for the 2nd-tier bowls but year after year they’d be getting lower ranked teams to fill their spots. With more attention paid to the 12 playoffs spots this will have a cascading effect of decreasing the importance and spotlight of those bowls.
Notre Dame Wins
I was really surprised that the initial reaction to the news of this proposed expansion plan was that it was terrible for Notre Dame–and even more shocking–that the lack of a bye within the playoff meant the Irish were going to join a conference. I’ll sum up this proposal in 3 ways:
#1 Independence Day
There was a chance that the playoffs expanded to 6 or 8 teams with Power 5 champion auto-qualifiers for the former and 6 conference champions auto-qualifiers for the latter system. Either scenario would’ve brought Notre Dame’s independence to its knees.
That Notre Dame was able to navigate a 4-team playoff without any conference auto-bids which is now looking to be followed up by a 12-team playoff with plenty of room to qualify is a massive win to retain independence. The lack of a bye (for now) is fine given that this saves Notre Dame’s independent status while at the same time making it nearly a lock that 1-loss Irish teams (and maybe occasionally a 2-loss team) get into the playoffs with little fuss.
In fact, short of a Super League forming maybe decades down the road I think this essentially saves Notre Dame’s independence for my lifetime. Even more so once they expand to 12 teams they will never, ever reduce the field in the future.
#2 Shifting Importance
An expanded field of 12 teams pretty much signals the end of the traditional bowl system in my opinion. It may take a long time from here on out but eventually the bowls in the quarterfinals and semi-finals could go away in favor of on-campus games. Once we start witnessing playoff games on campus it’s going to be a wild elixir that fans will demand even more of down the road. It may take a while, but I think we’ll get there eventually after the 1st round.
In general, there’s no turning back now (not that there ever was since 2014) and I’d expect college football to remain at 12 teams for a long time while some day in the future the dear Rose Bowl will be played by non-playoff teams.
#3 Greater Playoff Access
For whatever reason the loudest objections I’ve seen to the proposal for Notre Dame are coming from different points. One side is saying that not getting a bye and being forced to win 4 playoff games makes it much harder to win a title while the other side is critical that the Irish are taking the easy way out through much easier access to the playoffs while welcoming the money of an extra home game and merchandise sales of watered down playoff victories in the 1st round.
Notre Dame basically traded a the chance of a bye for a much wider path to the playoff (six at large bids). I think it’s actually a good deal for them. https://t.co/rKvzzw5TcA
— Dan Wetzel (@DanWetzel) June 10, 2021
Of course an expanded playoff is going to make it more difficult to win a championship, what was anyone expecting? Notre Dame doesn’t hold all the cards and chose to jump on greater playoff access as an independent. If that’s considered watering things down then so be it.
It also means more bites at the apple to be in the tournament to win a title, something that shouldn’t be overlooked. I’m not sure the lack of a bye in the 1st round of the playoffs truly moves the probability of a title when either way Alabama or Clemson will be standing in the way to glory eventually.
I think that worry about a lack of a bye is largely rooted in the belief that Notre Dame isn’t as talented as those elite programs and a 12-0 regular season only to be placed 5th is an unfair burden for the Irish. I see that side of things but I also see a negotiating Alabama playing No. 7 Florida in 2020 and No. 5 Georgia in 2018 (2 of the closest victories in the Saban era) in the SEC Championship while the Irish are resting and I’m not sure Notre Dame having the burden of a home playoff game against far inferior Coastal Carolina and Penn State squads (while Alabama rests) is really all that bad.
End of the day, Notre Dame has to prove it on the field. I think there’s a chance–if the Irish keep winning at a high level and break through in the playoffs with some big wins–that the bye rule may be revisited. Perhaps a clause can be put in where an undefeated Notre Dame who beat a final ranked top 5 opponent can receive a 1st round bye but never with 1-loss or more. Either way, the biggest obstacle remains beating the likes of Alabama and the layout of the playoffs isn’t changing that problem.
I agree that this is a pretty good deal for ND but, man, this structure just is not appealing at all. You’re basically taking the Russell Athletic Bowl, moving it to an on-campus site in December when students are home for winter break, and slapping the label “playoff” on it. And the ultimate outcome is no different — it’s still the Bama & Clemson Show, featuring special guest stars Ohio State and Oklahoma.
Plus, this will make regular season scheduling even worse. It incentivizes a P5 team to schedule 3 or 4 guaranteed wins OOC, then get through the conference schedule with 0 to 2 losses and participate in the conference championship game. Doesn’t really matter if they win at that point; they’re either getting a first round bye or a first round game. They’re in either way.
IMO, this is all about ESPN trying to salvage an investment they threw a ton of money at that didn’t really work out.
Sir, that is the Cheez-It Bowl now! And I don’t think that particular bowl is an apt comparison because it’s featured just 17 ranked teams with 17 unranked teams, and just 5 Top 15 teams (15th, 14th, 14th, 14th, 10th) since 2004. It’s difficult to compare with bowls, because of stupid tie-ins, even the Tier 1 non-NY6 bowls rarely feature Top 15 matchups. Plus, the top 4 byes push up the competitiveness of the 1st round playoff games.
For example, a #7 facing a #10 is basically a NY6 matchup in the current system not the Cheez-It Bowl.
But, even if the comparison were spot on moving it to a campus with greater consequences for someone who could win it all seems way, way better!
I’m not so sure. This isn’t the BCS era anymore. I think the playoff rankings have been doing a good job slotting teams based on schedule strength with 1-loss and 2-loss teams being so much more scrutinized than in the past. Think about Bama 2019!
I would never impugn the honor of the Blockbuster/CarQuest/MicronPC/Tangerine/Champs Sports/Russell Athletic/Cheez-It Bowl, sir. How dare you.
But come on. A winter break home game against Coastal Carolina? A Sun Belt team that moved up to FBS four years ago? That’s the national title-deciding postseason? If you just want to be able to say ND won a playoff game, fine, I guess. We’re still not going to be able to move the ball against Bama if and when we meet them later in the playoff.
As for scheduling, not one change in the last 20+ years of college football has produced better schedules. Check out Bama and Clemson’s schedules this year — Clemson is going to play one competitive football game and 11 scrimmages. A 12 team playoff certainly isn’t going to make that better, and will in all likelihood make it worse
That’s just 1 matchup from 1 year, and a weird season at that, where 2 G5 teams would’ve made the playoffs. That set up probably would happen once every 15 years. Plus, Coastal was a really fun team!
The 2019 1st round would’ve looked like:
#5 Georgia vs. #12 Memphis
#6 Oregon vs. #11 Utah
#7 Baylor vs. #10 Penn State
#8 Wisconsin vs. #9 Florida
How is this not way more exciting than the current set up? It’s basically the same group of teams that were in NY6 bowls anyway except Utah gets to not play 7-5 Texas in the Alamo Bowl and replaces 9-4 Virginia. Plus, games on campuses and it’s survive and advance.
Okay, well should we cancel the ND season and purposely have a worse post-season and weird bowl matchups because Bama is too good?
Hard disagree.
Let’s say your hypothesis is true that no changes for more than 2 decades has produced better schedules. You’re saying you don’t want the system where teams will have to win 3 or 4 games in a row against top ranked teams for the post-season? What alternative system are you suggesting to solve the problem in your eyes?
I guess if you really want to see 3-loss Colorado (who would have made the field in 2016) or 3-loss Kansas State (who would have made the field in 2014) in the national title conversation, that’s your preference. I don’t get it at all. These are Alamo Bowl teams and nothing more.
My point about not being able to move the ball on Bama is that scrounging up a “playoff” win against Coastal or Indiana or Baylor or whatever “fun” team we play does not actually change the national title picture. Even in your simulation, the four teams are the usual suspects: Bama, Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma. This is a structural issue with college football that no form of playoff fixes.
On scheduling, what do you mean “hard disagree?” What is that based on? Bama hasn’t played a home and home OOC series since 2011. Did you look at Bama’s schedule this year?
I guess if you really want to see 3-loss Colorado (who would have made the field in 2016) or 3-loss Kansas State (who would have made the field in 2014) in the national title conversation, that’s your preference. To me, it’s not so much about those types of teams being in the national title conversation it’s more a question of: Are we better off watching 2016 Colorado play No. 12 Oklahoma State (their actual bowl game that year) while No. 7 Oklahoma plays 8-4 No. 14 Auburn (in the Sugar Bowl no less!) or is it better if Oklahoma and Colorado faced each other in a do-or-die playoff game in Norman? Strictly speaking, if you’re dying for OOC home and home series during the regular season you have to admit this is preferable, no? Philosophically, there are going to be people who just aren’t going to be okay with “Alamo Bowl-level teams” once in a while being in the conversation. But, most people will be okay with it and it 1000% gives us better college football games. My point about not being able to move the ball on Bama is that scrounging up a “playoff” win against Coastal or Indiana or Baylor or whatever “fun” team we play does not actually change the national title picture. Even in your simulation, the four teams are the usual suspects: Bama, Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma. This is a structural issue with college football that no form of playoff fixes. Times will change, eventually. I don’t see why we should we create a playoff format that “fixes” a top-heavy game, and I’m not sure how we’d go about doing that? Is the stated goal of the playoff expansion to try and take Alabama and Clemson down a notch? The 12-team field creates more access and fairness, plus gives us bigger and more meaningful post-season games. On scheduling, what do you mean “hard disagree?” What is that based on? Bama hasn’t played a home and home OOC series since 2011. Did you look at Bama’s schedule this year? Alabama’s SoS has been perennially in the top 5 for Saban’s entire run. Over the last 5 seasons, they’ve faced 24 final ranked teams, 16 top 10 teams, and 10 top 5 teams. Those same years, Notre Dame has faced 21 ranked teams, 7 top 10 teams, and 6 top 5 teams. What you’re focusing on is something much more targeted, basically big OOC home and home series between blue-bloods. I’d agree it would be nice to see a little more of these games. I do think we’ve seen a decent uptick in these types of series since leaving the BCS behind where simply not losing became less important than collecting big wins for your resume. I guess my point would be, if you want big OOC games between national powers…the playoff is guaranteeing you those every single year. Some day, all of those games outside of the championship could be played on campuses too! I’m not… Read more »
I understand the idea behind the 4 conference champs get byes thing, but there should have been at least been a proviso in there that if a team:
That they then can ‘steal’ that bye. It adds a layer of importance onto some of the big regular-season non-league matchups and retains the possibility of ND getting a bye if they earn it by beating someone who would otherwise get one. It seems wrong that, for instance, ND can play Alabama in 2029 and 2030 and, regardless of whatever else happens, Alabama can benefit more by winning the game than Notre Dame can.
I really like that idea.
I think one of my hang ups isn’t just the top 4 conference champions get a bye so nd plays an extra game. I get that and I’m ok with it, the hard part is the ceiling is a 5 seed, which means nd would have to beat 3 of the top 4 teams to win a title. I think you could still execute this and put nd as a 2 seed then play the 12 seed and reseed after the first round. Instead Nd is locked into at best 12 seed then 4 seed then 1 seed then (probably) 2/3/6 seed.
So I guess my question is what does the 4th best conference champion look like most years?
The fourth best conference champion is Oklahoma most years.
The seeding can produce some odd/nonsensical results too — 12-0 ND is a 5 seed playing in the first round, while 11-2 Oklahoma is a 4 seed with a first round bye.
#4 seeds in each of the playoff years during this scenario: (FEI season ending ranking in parentheses):
2020 – Oklahoma 8-2 (4th)
2019 – Oklahoma 12-1 (4th)
2018 – Ohio State 12-1 (5th)
2017 – Ohio State 11-2 (4th)
2016 – Penn State 11-2 (30th)
2015 – Oklahoma 11-1 (9th)
2014 – Ohio State 12-1 (2nd)
Agreed. I think this format benefits us in an average year but hurts us in a good year.
That’s a fair way to look at it. I also wonder…
1) How much tougher will the average conference title game matchup be for seeds 1-4 than the game(s) Notre Dame would face in the 1st round? For example, in 2018 Notre Dame would’ve faced 9-4 Penn State in the 1st round, while the top 4 conference champs played:
7-7 Pitt
10-4 Texas
9-5 Northwestern
11-3 Georgia
Most years, the SEC will probably have a tougher matchup in comparison. The Big 12 and Big Ten maybe sometimes. ACC, right now, probably never.
2) How often have the #5 or #6 seeds (using the current 4-team model) been teams perceived as better than the #3 or #4 seeds? It’d be something I would like to look into more. In general, the CFP rankings, to me, have seemed pretty good so there’s less chance you’d want to play a #3 seed than a #6 seed.
3) I still go back to thinking about Alabama. This 12-team format basically helps them zero in an average year for them. The 1 year in the last 6 where they lost twice they wouldn’t have made the playoffs in an expanded field. And when they’re good the road for them is in no way THAT much easier just because of a 1st round bye. They still need to win the SEC, etc.
One other thing I saw on the ringer: if an undefeated Clemson loses in the title game, they still (probably) make the playoffs. We get no such luxury by replacing a conference title game with a playoff game. Lose, and we’re out.
Ultimately, I think Swarbrick did his job. He built a format that allows us to stay relevant, stay independent, and make a lot of money. I do think it makes it harder to win a title, but that is probably a trade I’d make if I had his job.
Can everyone agree that Clemson, Okl., Ala., and tOSU being givens kinda sucks ?
I do think there’s some irony in the fact that the current playoffs and this 12-team proposal have come at a time when they’re least enjoyable. Bama and Clemson are operating at historical levels in their program history and within all of CFB history. Ohio State isn’t quite at that level but not far off, either.
You’d think the playoffs will be best when there aren’t any dominant teams and there’s more chaos. But, if the NFL is any comparison we’ll probably hear just as loud of complaining about how there aren’t any good teams and a 2-loss 6-seed winning it all is dumb.
Maybe I should research which 5-year eras would’ve had the most fun playoffs??
I feel like the early/mid-2000s would have been wild. Imagine Urban Meyer Florida playing Pete Carroll Southern Cal.
Quick glance and 2003-07 would’ve been a good era. It’s after the Nebraska era dominance of the 90’s, right as Miami’s dynasty began to crumble, and the SEC was beginning to rise. Lots of very, very good teams but no one that had been dominating for a super long time.
The more I think about this the more I believe this is the perfect type of era right now, except the dominant teams don’t rotate enough.
The game is positioned really well with 2-4 very dominant teams each year, it’s just those teams keep staying the same. I think the very dominant teams are important, it just needs more variety.
My question is whether this (or anything) can make the game more competitive. My hunch would be this format makes the field slightly more likely to win vs Bama, but the final will likely include 2 of those 4 teams for a while.
I think it’s a small uptick in the field winning vs. Alabama. As crazy as their record in the playoff has been they’ve still lost 3 out of 11 times. So, nearly losing 1 in every 4 chances and now adding an additional game for them to potentially lose.
Thinking about it from the Bama POV, I can see how this sucks. They have to win an additional bowl game now against a Top 12 or Top 10 team with no home game thrown in there. I could see why they’d be like WTH when we beat up 7-loss Stanford to end our season, take a week off, host Coastal Carolina, and then get to quarterfinals, whereas they’d have ranked Florida, bye, and an extra game (everyone does now but still) to win that isn’t at home.
Just the fact that there are more games now that have real stakes as opposed to one off bowl games means higher quality games. That means 12 top teams will have fewer to zero players skipping their bowl games to focus on the draft. So many times I’ve hated bowl games for poor matchup selections or tie-ins that limit possibilities. This will be fun, and yeah there are things you can not pick but I’m going to enjoy this.
I was wondering about the timing / scheduling of each round of this playoff. Would the first round game get played soon enough so that students are still on campus? Does the second round play before X-mas with the semis around New Year’s, and the championship a week later? If so, this might explain the use of neutral site bowls after the first round — most campuses will be empty over break after the first round. But, is it reasonable to expect fans to travel to neutral site bowls for three rounds? I wonder if attendance might be an issue
It depends on schools’ schedules, but in ND’s case, the first round will almost certainly be played during break. Finals usually end around December 15, and the earliest bowl games don’t start until about December 20. Given that ND’s dorms close right when finals end, it is likely that almost no students will be around. Hopefully the locals want to sit outside in December for four hours.
I imagine travel to neutral site bowls will be an issue too, given that this all happens right before Christmas when travel is expensive and difficult.
Bob Bowlsby came right out and said they don’t care about in-person attendance; they care about TV viewers.
Did they officially say that the first round won’t start until December 20? With an extra round of games to play, I could see them starting that first round in early December right after the conference championship games so that they can get the second round in before New Year’s
Nothing official that I’ve seen. I would be surprised if they’d have teams go straight from CCGs to the playoffs with no bye week, though.
One thing I’ve seen thrown out is that the CFB season could start a week earlier, on the current Week Zero. I guess that would move CCG’s to Thanksgiving weekend, and then you have a built-in bye before the play-in games, which would be Dec. 13 or whatever that Saturday is.
I’d also imagine that if ND had a home playoff game a week after finals, they’d keep the dorms open an extra week.
This could be big news down the road, from Pete Thamel.
https://twitter.com/PeteThamel/status/1404832529270575107?s=20
Conference mulling over getting rid of divisions, or at least changing things so their top 2 teams meet in the league title games.
On average, probably protects the conferences from missing out on a playoff spot (in the event of a major upset) and boosts the likelihood of both teams getting in if it’s close.