Shot.
CFP executive director Bill Hancock told ESPN that nothing is imminent.
“There will not be a new format this season or next season,” Hancock said. “The timetable is certainly an important detail, but it hasn’t been determined yet. It’s too soon to predict the timing, but even if the board decides to alter the format, it may well not occur until after the current agreement has expired, which isn’t until after the 2025 season.”
Chaser ($$).
Concerned that their four-team product has been harmed by the dominance of a select few teams from the same region, FBS commissioners are seriously considering expanding the College Football Playoff. And while it’s long been assumed that any change to the format would be modest, several influential decision-makers are suddenly open to a playoff system that skips past eight teams and into the double digits…
“There are two unintended consequences people didn’t see when they created the Playoff,” said a college administrator familiar with the discussions. “One, seeing the same teams over and over from one part of the country. It’s impairing the product, because there’s boredom. … There’s risk to not enough (geographic) spread. Secondly, the brand damage to a conference that doesn’t get in it.”
And there you have it. It’s not about the best, or the most deserving. Playoff expansion is about brand damage to a conference. In furtherance of the academic mission, of course.
Enjoy those brackets, peeps, ’cause they’re coming. Very soon. Just ask Bill.
Get The Picture 
The double digits? What 12th or 16th team has ever proven they have a claim to be the best team in college football? I can see 8, but even that waters down the regular season big time.
LikeLiked by 3 people
If you want to talk about brand damage, then maybe the 12 Pac should consider the brand damage (and potential recruiting fall out) from its champion getting in under an 8, 10 or 12 team playoff and getting absolutely demolished in embarrassing fashion on national TV by Bama, Clemson, OU, or tOSU (or us even, for that matter). The 12 Pac has had two teams in the playoff since the 2014-15 season. Oregon that pounded FSU in the semis and then got pounded by tOSU in the championship and Washington that was completely overmatched by Bama in the semis and managed a whopping 7 points in the entire game. Is it better to bitch and whine about not getting in when you don’t deserve it but can at least argue the point or getting in and getting beaten so badly that it leaves no doubt that your champion had no business being on the same field?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Didn’t see this comment before I made mine below. Sorry about that, miltondawg.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Prediction: the year they expand the playoff, we beat Saban in the SECCG and then have to face them in a double elimination bracket in the playoff.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Might just boil down to “the name on the jersey”, if it ain’t UGA, me no watching…(with interest longer than 5 minutes)…
LikeLike
They’ll have college football fixed to death in no time…
How many less national titles would Saban have under the bowl system?
Its at least 3 less:
2011, 2015 and 2017 and 4 if #1 ND had found a team it could beat in a bowl in 2012.
The desire to end a “mythical” national championship has been the road to ruin.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Counterpoint: they were the best team all those years. Isn’t that sort of the point?
Conversely, I can think of several teams with a NC that wouldn’t have one had they actually had to earn it through the CFP system.
LikeLike
The 2011 LSU team was the most accomplished team ever. They got hosed by them “fixing it.”
Clemson won all their games in 2015 and lost to alabama by five. Close game.
Alabama didn’t even win its division in 2017 and but for the refs, they dont beat the east champs in the natty. Also close game.
ND I’ll give you but Alabama lost a regular season game. ND didn’t.
By “fixing” college football we’ve encouraged a concentration of talent that might be more dispersed and might lead to more interesting games/seasons/outcimes. Our own team will be favored by double digits at least 9 times in 2021.
Is that exciting?
I think they’ve fucked it up by digging and are threatening to throw down the shovels and bring in the backhoe.
Again I go back to the night of 1/1/84. Three games (6 teams) at one time with national title implications and it was decided that we should scrap it.
Why?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bring back the BCS.
LikeLike
The BCS can be a selection method, but going back to 2 isn’t the answer. If the BCS had still been in place in 2017, we go to the Sugar Bowl as the #3 team and SEC champions while the semifinal losers, Clemson and Oklahoma, play for the national title.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It’s Alabama. They would have claimed those titles anyway.
LikeLiked by 2 people
True dat.
LikeLike
Because it happened once in the past 37 years?
LikeLike
why not just hand out participation trophies to every team?
everyone gets a juice box and apple slices and huddles up at midfield to talk about their feelings after every game?
Gordon Gekko would be so proud.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Taking it from 6 to 8 with some sort of conference tie in isn’t participation trophy to me. Expanding it beyond 8 is silly though.
LikeLike
And you’re gonna give me how many teams from the left coast that should have been/might have been/thought about inviting to Micky’s little party…Agent Herbstreit will be a little cranky if some body from out west gets in before his beloved tosu…
LikeLike
If you have a conference tie in, then 1 for most years, no? That’s fine with me.
LikeLike
Do 8 – 5 power conf. champs and 3 at large. Done.
Regular season still means something as conf. champ is easiest way to ensure playoff bid. Determining how to select the 3 at large is the key.
LikeLike
I proposed exactly this. Do the first round on campus.
LikeLike
I want to see the best G5 get a bid too. One, it will shut everybody up. Two, I think in most cases it would be deserving and hurt nothing. Look, if we want to lament “what could have been” with JT Daniels as our QB by how much we improved, we have to at least acknowledge that Cincinnati was a pretty damn good football team. Whether they win it all or not doesn’t really matter….I don’t think the best G5 team would necessarily get steamrolled any more than everybody else who gets steamrolled when 1 or 2 teams break away from the pack.
I would suggest that they find a way of settling who is best among the G5 on the field. We don’t need BYU, Boise and UCF claiming injustice that only 1 of them was taken. Maybe a matchup of conference champions.
LikeLike
Silly. What team beyond about 4th or 5th place in the ranking (pick any rankings you want) has any shot of winning a NC at the end of the season?
And as the Senator says, put as many teams in as you want. The current top 4 or 5 will simply jostle for the top spots year after year anyway.
LikeLiked by 2 people
UGA last season.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah that’s one. My point is that outside those 4 – 6 top teams, it’s tough sledding. So a 8 – 16 team playoff is just fools gold. The same 4 – 6 teams will always play for the NC.
LikeLiked by 1 person
While we were a different team the last 4 games of the year with JT at the controls, I’m not sure we make a lot of noise in an 8-team playoff. Also, the expansion to 8 is going to give each Power 5 champion and the top Go5 team a spot. Notre Dame gets an at-large and Texas A&M gets the last spot.
LikeLike
Nd receiving an at large on a regular basis give no pleasure (as a football fan) to watching them get trashed, that will cause their fans to call for the coaches dismissal (either way)…is the viewing public tired the the usual suspects, probably…become a donor or move on in life….
LikeLike
But that’s not the point. Conferences getting their brand fee fees hurt for not having one of their teams invited is.
LikeLike
Yup. Gotta give them “hope”. That is the argument that Kanell takes. He doesn’t expect them to ever win one, but he thinks they need hope. They currently have no hope for making a 4 team playoff.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And by fee fees I mean their wallets fee fees…
LikeLike
It’s about $$$$$$$$$$ nothing more nothing less
LikeLiked by 6 people
Doctrine of unintended consequences at work. The problem with the current system is not that it doesn’t work it is that it works too well—at identifying the best team(s). And the Big 12 and Pac 12 plus every team in the B1G (except tOSU) and the Group of 5 don’t like it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agee, this is the result of the ESPNisazion of CFB. As the Senator has pointed out many times, breaking down the historical regional format that served CFB for so long is good for the few but bad for the whole.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not happy
LikeLike
More “diversity and inclusion”, in other words…. Makes me wanna hurl.
LikeLike
If we recognize that Mark Emmert is the Bill Hancock of the NCAA, does that mean Bill Hancock is the Mark Emmert of the Playoff?
Finkle is Einhorn, Einhorn is Finkle?
No matter what, we’re all left with a bad taste in our mouths. 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m actually starting to think they may do something crazy like an auto-bid for all 10 conference champs, plus 2 wild cards.
LikeLike
It’s going to be two incremental increases over the next 20 years. It will start with 6 and it will top out at 8, because they’re unwilling to play football over two semesters. That’s a HUGE sticking point. Anything more than 8 is impossible because of finals in the middle of December the week after the Championship Games.
I actually like the idea of 6 the most. Give all five P5 champs an “in” and then have a wild card for the next highest ranked team. The first two seeds get a bye, and you play the first round of the playoff at the home stadiums of the 3 and 4 seeds. Then the playoff proceeds as normal.
A move to 8 would just remove a first round bye so no extra week would need to be added, and the top-4 seeds would get the home game.
They may skip over 6 and go right to 8, but from everything I’ve read, more than 8 is a no go. That is the limit, because the SEC is completely unwilling to do away with the SEC Title Game.
LikeLike
I think if, rather when, it moves to 8… that will be the end of conference championship games.
LikeLike
Anything more than 8 would be the end of conference titles games. 8 preserves the conference titles games the same way 6 does. You have the conference title games the first weekend in December. You break for finals for two weeks. Then in the fourth week in December you have the first round of games (in either a 6 or 8 team playoff) at the homes of the higher seeds. Then in the first week in January you have the semifinals, just like you do now, at the revolving NY6 sites. Then in the second week of January you have the National Title Game, same as you do now.
Nothing really changes except starting a week sooner, in the middle of the crappy bowls games.
LikeLike
Those make too much money. The more likely thing is cutting a non-conference game or two. That mostly screws the G5 and Div1AA schools, and will be reasoned away as “sure they’re just playing conference games, mostly, but the playoffs will sort out the differences.”
LikeLike
Exactly. The only way to go past 8 in the playoff to 12 or 16 teams is to cut the season back to 10 games, and that’s just not going to happen.
LikeLike
I think they’ll go to 12 or 16. Keep the conference championship games. Auto bids for all conferences. They’ll just shorten the regular season, they can sacrifice a few weeks for higher playoff dollars.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You can’t go to 12 or 16. The SEC will not allow the SEC Title Game to go away, and they will not allow football to be played in two semesters, and there has to be a two-week break in December for finals.
8 is as high as it will go. The only way out of that is by cutting the regular season back down to 10 games, and that’s as much of a non-starter with schools as the doing away with the SEC Title Game is for the SEC.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe. But I don’t think it will stay a non-starter when compared to longer schedules that further diminish any hint of amateurism, lead to fully paid players, unionization, etc.
The status quo won’t hold, and 10 regular season games may be the compromise to keep the amateurism charade rolling.
LikeLike
It’s not about amateurism vs. not amatuerism, it’s about compromise between 5 regions of the country with vastly different ideas of how best to run and play CFB.
The SEC will protect the SEC Title Game at All Costs.
The Pac-12 and B1G will protect the Rose Bowl at all costs.
The ACC and Big-12 just want to keep their seat at the table should Clemson or Oklahoma fall-off in a big way.
No one wants to get rid of 2 guaranteed home games, and all the money that comes with that, per year, by going down to 10 games.
Everyone agrees that they don’t want to play football over two semesters and that it’s important to get the National Title Game played before second semester starts while providing a two-week off period for finals in the middle of December.
More than 8 teams is simply not feasible under any situation. It’s logistics, man. No one wants more than 8 anyway, really. Not even ESPN. The result of that watering down of CFB at that point will actively push viewers away
LikeLike
UGA will be in the playoff more in a new system than it will be in the current one. I’m surprised more people aren’t happy about that.
I don’t like the playoff and never have. I would legit rather have the old bowl system as, for me, the regular season is why I love CFB. The rivalries. The fact that losing 1 game can (and often does) carry so much weight that it takes you out of national title contention. But that was lost the moment CFB went to 4, and it was always inevitable they’d add teams. We’ve crossed a line that we can’t come back from, so it is what it is.
LikeLiked by 4 people
There are people who would rather us not be in the playoff more often if it also meant that Oregon or Washington or USC (lol, they stay fucking up) are in as well.
It’s mystifying to me.
LikeLike
I argued for a playoff based on the bowls (pick 2 or 4 after the bowls) but I’m with you now. I’d rather go back to the old bowl system, or even better, a bowl system with no conference tie-ins.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not a larger playoff guy because I believe the regular season proves who are those worthy to be national champions (I don’t think we deserved a shot the last 3 years based on the full body of work). I’m a 4-team guy but would like the selection method changed.
Given The Athletic is saying a 12-team playoff is gaining steam among the powers that be, I put together 1st round brackets for the last 2 years assuming what it sounds like is coming (Power 5 champions, highest ranked Group of 5, and 6(!) at large bids). I assumed the selection of at-large teams and the seeding of the 12 will be based on the committee’s rankings (no way ESPN gives up its weekly programming).
2020
9 Georgia @ 8 Cincinnati
10 Iowa St @ 7 Florida
11 Indiana @ 6 Oklahoma
12 Oregon @ 5 Texas A&M
2019
9 Florida @ 8 Wisconsin
10 Penn State @ 7 Baylor
11 Utah @ 6 Oregon (rematch of the Pac 12 CG)
12 Memphis @ 5 Georgia
EVERY one of those teams proved during the regular season they were flawed compared to the teams that were in the 4. Maybe Oklahoma 2020 catches fire and beats Ohio State, or Georgia 2019 puts in all together to beat Oklahoma. I just don’t see how this expansion does anything other than convince some guys not to opt out and it absolutely kills the bowl system.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I pine for the old BCS, but a guy at the Athletic has a good idea for expansion: go back to the bowl system and after bowls THEN pick the best four teams for a playoff.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would just pick the two best teams after the bowls for the natty, not set up additional playoffs.
LikeLike
So it is about getting the best teams or not?
LikeLike
N
LikeLike
No, the College Football Playoff, LLC was set up to create programming for ESPN. In order to get he rules changes tp permit the extra game College Football Playoff, LLC had to get suppor from he major bowls and from the most powerful conferences. The selection process through the self-important “Committee” is designed to create matchups that suit the bowls, the power 5 conferences and ESPN ratings needs.
The producers of the movie “Major League” didn’t create a baseball team and film its games. It was a movie using baseball for drama. The CFP is using college football for drama. If ESPN decides that too much Alabama and Ohio state is bad for ratings and advertising revenues and more Central Floridas and Boise States is good for ratings and advertising revenues it will push to get more Central Floridas and Boise States on its CFP programming.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ESPN isn’t saying Bama and Clemson fatigue is a problem. The market is telling ESPN it’s a problem. And the market is telling the P12 and B12 that not getting into the playoff is killing their leagues because people are tuning out, not buying tickets, and moving on.
ESPN isn’t the problem. The playoff is.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It has been a goat rodeo since day 1. You can’t have 5 major conferences and only 4 spots and not expect it to be a mess.
Especially when there is so little crossover between conferences.
Five conference champions, 3 at large. On campus for the first round.
There, solved it.
LikeLike
Once it went to a 4-team it was always going to expand, because as you said, the math never added up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yup
LikeLike
I understand your point and I agree that the playoff setup is the problem, but the playoff is an ESPN property. ESPN is a ember of the playoff LLC and ESPN had a major role in how this is set up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe people are tuning out because of who ESPN tends to highlight and focus on, and also who they give airtime and access to. The loudest voice for playoff expansion was ESPN, not the conferences. The B10 and P12 wanted to keep the Rose Bowl. But ESPN is mad that the playoff they wanted watered down the product. Instead of continuing to engage all areas of the country in a competition between regions in a regional game, they forced a national competition. That’s not necessarily bad, but they don’t understand that the soul of the game is in the regional rivalries. But this year, again, instead of letting the WLOCP stand alone for the beautiful event that it is, they’ll talk about “playoff implications”. To watch ESPN, that’s what’s important. At least for me, it’s not why we play the handbags and the barn. Beating Florida fills me up more than jockeying for playoff position ever would. I might be alone in that, but that’s where the soul of the game is, and if they’re afraid the game is becoming more shallow, I think they only need to find a mirror to understand why.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The question, it was rhetorical. But your answer is the truth.
LikeLike
its real simple there is big money to be made expanding the playoffs. Insert any excuse that fits to justify the want to obtain said money.
Just like the NFL expansion was cloaked under cover to create more fan interest. You’ll one day follow the NFL model of a team not deserving to be in the playoffs get hot at the right time and beats a conference champion that they themselves lost to in the regular season.
Like it or not their greed is endless and will continue as long as the $$$ support it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The best playoff system would be to have 4 super conferences each with 2 divisions and all four champions get into the 4 team playoff. That makes the conference championship games the de facto first round of the playoff and therefore 8 teams are in it without wrecking things. But for that to work one of the Power 5 conferences hast to disappear most likely the Big 12.
LikeLike
Given the fact that Texas isn’t going to join a conference that won’t allow them to keep a stranglehold on the revenues from the Longhorn Network and that Fox and ESPN are more than happy to pay for Big 12-2 content (because of … Texas), that league isn’t going anywhere.
LikeLike
The risk of having injuries influence the title gets greater as the number of playoff games expands. A full season plus three playoff games? Teams aren’t going to be willing to shorten the season for the playoffs (maybe conference championship goes away.). If I were a NFL caliber kid I may not want to risk injury and play either.
LikeLike
The SEC championship game isn’t going anywhere. You could argue outside of the men’s Final 4 and the CFP championship game, it’s the most valuable single college sports TV content.
LikeLike
The injury issue was the first thing I thought of as well when I heard about all this recent expansion talk.
LikeLike
Bowl games suck. Complete waste of time. Might as well expand the playoffs. Pay the kids for the extra games and I’m in.
LikeLike
Bowl games provide an important developmental opportunity. With shortened spring practice, most teams going to bowl games use pre-bowl practices as a jump start for spring ball for younger players (especially those who are expected to step into roles where players are leaving). Using your scenario, a team that doesn’t make the expanded playoff doesn’t get that benefit … potentially leading to more separation between the playoff programs and non-playoff teams.
LikeLike
The disconnect about all of this playoff discussion is based upon the original con job by ESPN and the College Football Playoff LLC. The original con job was convincing fans that it was a genuine playoff.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ok that first unintended consequence…they watch the games right? Good lord its obvious why the same teams get invited over and over again. These people get paid a lot of money, serves them well to understand their product better.
LikeLike
If college football’s problem is that there are just a handful of teams worthy to be considered as the best team in the country and viewers want there to be other teams capable of reaching the Alabama/Clemson/Ohio Stat/Oklahoma level.
Th hard part is figuring out a way to create more parity in FBS football. There has always been an uneven distribution of resources in college football. Go back to any previous era. There has always been a few dominant teams in any era, with all others being pretenders to the claim of the best. The identities of those few powers may have changed, but there has never been NFL style parity.
Expanding the ESPN Invitational to 6 or 8 or 32 teams does nothing to correct the structural issues allowing a few teams to dominate, but it is an easier thing to do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m going outside and beat my head on a cedar tree. The bark is softer than a hickory and it’ll make my head hurt less than bandying this subject anymore.
LikeLiked by 2 people
When do the extra playoff games get played? The NFL occupies both Saturday and Sunday at that time.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Brilliant. So the CFB gets expanded and we watch Bama utterly humiliate Southern Cal in a first-round game. No brand damage to the PAC-12 there.
LikeLiked by 2 people