Football Report: College Football Playoff nearing deal to expand to 24 teams

[rutgersguy2]

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.

I don't think it's watered down. To me a sport is really great if everyone has a realistic chance to do something meaningful in it. It's not a hopeless endeavor before the season starts. Now more than ever that's the case in CFB. IMO that's a good thing, having hope as fan going into every year.

 

[rutgersguy2]

After this past weekend, listening to their pods I've even some of the staunchest anti 24 CFB media pull back from their "whining" about the expansion. They still might not like it but they've toned it down some and are realizing "yea anybody can beat anybody" more often these days more access isn't so bad and the pool of capable teams is bigger.

 

[RUInsanityToo]

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.

You were a Notre Dame fan so of course your loved the tradition and the way the sport was in "days gone by". ND was on TV every week and essentially had their own dedicated TV Network to propagate their traditions and rivalries. If ND wasn't relevant in any particular season, I'm guessing that you followed the some of the other blue bloods in what you are calling the "national theatre of the sport".

College Football is business, and business is much more about growing the base and less about clinging to nostalgia. If we're being honest, the old model from 50 years ago was pretty much a "good ole boys club" with limited and exclusive memberships of select blue-blood or national programs. The new model creates much more excitement and interest among the much larger base of fans. Instead of a non-blue blood program clinging to a final goal of just obtaining a final top 25 Ranking with a Garden State Bowl invitation.......they now get a lottery ticket to an end of year tournament - with a chance - as slim as that might be. Also - I see this as much more of a March Madness event than comparisons to the NFL.

 

[SHUSource]

I don't think it's watered down. To me a sport is really great if everyone has a realistic chance to do something meaningful in it. It's not a hopeless endeavor before the season starts. Now more than ever that's the case in CFB. IMO that's a good thing, having hope as fan going into every year.

I might say that if anyone can beat anyone more than ever, then there would be fewer teams who embrace it as a hopeless endeavor. You just have to win.

 

[SHUSource]

After this past weekend, listening to their pods I've even some of the staunchest anti 24 CFB media pull back from their "whining" about the expansion. They still might not like it but they've toned it down some and are realizing "yea anybody can beat anybody" more often these days more access isn't so bad and the pool of capable teams is bigger.

I don't think there's necessarily a right or wrong, but I definitely feel the way I do, and I can look at how it was an dhow it is now and correct interpret the way each scenario makes me feel. Others may much prefer the expanded playoff, which is great for them, since it's happening no matter what I think.

 

[SHUSource]

You were a Notre Dame fan so of course your loved the tradition and the way the sport was in "days gone by". ND was on TV every week and essentially had their own dedicated TV Network to propagate their traditions and rivalries. If ND wasn't relevant in any particular season, I'm guessing that you followed the some of the other blue bloods in what you are calling the "national theatre of the sport".

College Football is business, and business is much more about growing the base and less about clinging to nostalgia. If we're being honest, the old model from 50 years ago was pretty much a "good ole boys club" with limited and exclusive memberships of select blue-blood or national programs. The new model creates much more excitement and interest among the much larger base of fans. Instead of a non-blue blood program clinging to a final goal of just obtaining a final top 25 Ranking with a Garden State Bowl invitation.......they now get a lottery ticket to an end of year tournament - with a chance - as slim as that might be. Also - I see this as much more of a March Madness event than comparisons to the NFL.

I started watching in earnest during the Gerry Faust years, pre-Lou Holtz, so those weren't exactly the glory days for the Irish. Yeah, it was pretty great during the Holtz years, but they still only won it al once.

But I generally had a distaste for the blue bloods. I loved when BYU won the national championship in 1984 on Steve Young's arm and scrambling ability, and I loved that it was disputed. I still love upsets and underdogs, even though the lethality of losing to one isn't what it was.

I have a master's from Temple, and so I root for them and yet I still embrace the old way of doing things, so it's not simply a matter of "my team is elite, so I like a system that favors them." Temple is headed nowhere fast, although -- at least in theory -- this would open up an avenue for them to make the playoff. But I always looked at it from more of a "what's better for the sport" than "what's best for my program" point of view.

 

[RUGuitarMan1]

The old refrain “it will reduce the importance of the regular season” has been used forever to try to prevent any coherent and competitive post season arrangement. The larger playoff is more fair, more inclusive and will make the sport more interesting and popular.

 

[rutgersguy2]

The old refrain “it will reduce the importance of the regular season” has been used forever to try to prevent any coherent and competitive post season arrangement. The larger playoff is more fair, more inclusive and will make the sport more interesting and popular.

To me it's not like basketball or baseball, there are only 12 games so they are all important regardless of 12 or 24 playoff.

Also in comparing, before maybe small handful of games might be 12/10 in importance but once one team loses the rest of the games go to 3/10 for that team now etc..same goes for everyone else.

Now some small handful of games might not be 12/10 but would still be 8-9/10 in importance and many others game are 7-10/10 depending on seeding/home field/elimination.

You might not get the extreme importance at the top end for a small handful of games but you get important to extreme importance for games from the top end all the way through to the middle.

 

[RU Cheese]

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.

This also will be the death of bowls (aside from the few that will continue in name only as part of playoffs)

 

[SHUSource]

The larger playoff is more fair, more inclusive and will make the sport more interesting and popular.

An increase in popularity is speculative, and "more interesting" is highly subjective. I and many others will find it less interesting -- significantly less, I imagine.

I thought Stewart Mandel of The Athletic put it well, just today in his mailbag:

* * *

First of all, Saturday was the first time in years I missed the BCS a bit. For those of you too young to remember, any time a No. 1 or 2 lost, much less three other top-10 teams, the result was complete chaos. I’m not oblivious that the stakes are already much lower in a field of 12 than they were even three years ago. But I definitely found myself wondering what something like this would feel like next year.

However, I want to be clear: The games themselves would be no less fun. Ohio State-Indiana coming down to Nick Marsh’s foot being inches out of bounds would still make me go, “Ohhhh.” Ditto when it looked like Florida State receivers Micahi Danzy and (maybe) Duce Robinson caught those Hail Marys that didn’t count. And the BYU-Notre Dame ending? Oh my.

But that doesn’t mean the urgency would be the same. Only Georgia-Auburn felt like an “oh well, Georgia stubbed its toe” situation. Ohio State was inches away from suffering its second loss, putting it perilously on the bubble. Next year, not so much. Would it still feel like Texas would be in crisis mode after blowing the Florida game, knowing it would still have two more mulligans*? And while rivalries like Alabama-Tennessee will always be important, the Tide would still be a long way from missing the Playoff.

* I don’t think most people realize how common it will be for 8-4 SEC teams to make the field. The committee has already been slotting three-loss SEC teams ahead of two-loss ACC and Big 12 teams. I’m sure that will extend to four-loss SEC teams vs. three-loss ACC/Big 12 teams. Especially a team like Texas with a marquee nonconference win.

Maybe I’m completely wrong. A devil’s advocate would say: It’s not like these early-season NFL games have much bearing on that league’s postseason stakes, yet people still freak out when the Washington Commanders blow the end of overtime, or the Los Angeles Rams fall to 2-4. Maybe our Saturday viewing experience will feel exactly the same.

But the NFL has never been anything else. Generations of fans have been conditioned to the slow burn of its regular season. Generations of college fans have been conditioned to a more frantic pace where, even today, everyone gets one mulligan, but no one is assured two. And now it’s being taken away from them. That’s why, when news of a deal broke last Thursday, it felt like a lot of people were in mourning.

* * *

The only way I disagree with this is in his second-to-last paragraph, about the Commanders blowing the end of overtime. I saw it as incredibly stupid, but almost completely insignificant. NFL players themselves have said in the past couple months that everything before Halloween is essentially preseason to them.

Now college football, to a lesser extent, is headed that way with diminished regular season games.

 

[Rutgers Chris]

An increase in popularity is speculative, and "more interesting" is highly subjective. I and many others will find it less interesting -- significantly less, I imagine.

I thought Stewart Mandel of The Athletic put it well, just today in his mailbag:

* * *

First of all, Saturday was the first time in years I missed the BCS a bit. For those of you too young to remember, any time a No. 1 or 2 lost, much less three other top-10 teams, the result was complete chaos. I’m not oblivious that the stakes are already much lower in a field of 12 than they were even three years ago. But I definitely found myself wondering what something like this would feel like next year.

However, I want to be clear: The games themselves would be no less fun. Ohio State-Indiana coming down to Nick Marsh’s foot being inches out of bounds would still make me go, “Ohhhh.” Ditto when it looked like Florida State receivers Micahi Danzy and (maybe) Duce Robinson caught those Hail Marys that didn’t count. And the BYU-Notre Dame ending? Oh my.

But that doesn’t mean the urgency would be the same. Only Georgia-Auburn felt like an “oh well, Georgia stubbed its toe” situation. Ohio State was inches away from suffering its second loss, putting it perilously on the bubble. Next year, not so much. Would it still feel like Texas would be in crisis mode after blowing the Florida game, knowing it would still have two more mulligans*? And while rivalries like Alabama-Tennessee will always be important, the Tide would still be a long way from missing the Playoff.

* I don’t think most people realize how common it will be for 8-4 SEC teams to make the field. The committee has already been slotting three-loss SEC teams ahead of two-loss ACC and Big 12 teams. I’m sure that will extend to four-loss SEC teams vs. three-loss ACC/Big 12 teams. Especially a team like Texas with a marquee nonconference win.

Maybe I’m completely wrong. A devil’s advocate would say: It’s not like these early-season NFL games have much bearing on that league’s postseason stakes, yet people still freak out when the Washington Commanders blow the end of overtime, or the Los Angeles Rams fall to 2-4. Maybe our Saturday viewing experience will feel exactly the same.

But the NFL has never been anything else. Generations of fans have been conditioned to the slow burn of its regular season. Generations of college fans have been conditioned to a more frantic pace where, even today, everyone gets one mulligan, but no one is assured two. And now it’s being taken away from them. That’s why, when news of a deal broke last Thursday, it felt like a lot of people were in mourning.

* * *

The only way I disagree with this is in his second-to-last paragraph, about the Commanders blowing the end of overtime. I saw it as incredibly stupid, but almost completely insignificant. NFL players themselves have said in the past couple months that everything before Halloween is essentially preseason to them.

Now college football, to a lesser extent, is headed that way with diminished regular season games.

My biggest takeaways…”the games themselves will be no less fun” stands out. We have no more cupcake games, so you’ll see more BYU/Notre Dame, Texas/Ohio State etc. matchups which have been the best of the season. You’ll have more teams competing for more playoff spots, making games of teams on the 15-25 range very meaningful at the end of the year. And the actual week/weekend of a 24 team playoff will blow away bowl games as we’ve known them since the BCS era.

If teams start mailing in late season games to rest up for the playoffs, you and Mandel will be right and this will be a downgrade. If they keep playing them as they are now, we get more meaningful football games which I’m all for

 

[MADHAT1]

Someone besides me not so happy with a 24 team playoff

Note: if all G-6 conference champions were auto invites, I'd be a fan



>However, rip the current state of college football as poetically, passionately, and creatively as Central Michigan head coach Matt Drinkall, and we'll make an exception. <

https://www.footballscoop.com/2026/10/20/matt-drinkall-college-football-playoff-truffula-trees-lorax

 

[RUGuitarMan1]

An increase in popularity is speculative, and "more interesting" is highly subjective. I and many others will find it less interesting -- significantly less, I imagine.

I thought Stewart Mandel of The Athletic put it well, just today in his mailbag:

* * *

First of all, Saturday was the first time in years I missed the BCS a bit. For those of you too young to remember, any time a No. 1 or 2 lost, much less three other top-10 teams, the result was complete chaos. I’m not oblivious that the stakes are already much lower in a field of 12 than they were even three years ago. But I definitely found myself wondering what something like this would feel like next year.

However, I want to be clear: The games themselves would be no less fun. Ohio State-Indiana coming down to Nick Marsh’s foot being inches out of bounds would still make me go, “Ohhhh.” Ditto when it looked like Florida State receivers Micahi Danzy and (maybe) Duce Robinson caught those Hail Marys that didn’t count. And the BYU-Notre Dame ending? Oh my.

But that doesn’t mean the urgency would be the same. Only Georgia-Auburn felt like an “oh well, Georgia stubbed its toe” situation. Ohio State was inches away from suffering its second loss, putting it perilously on the bubble. Next year, not so much. Would it still feel like Texas would be in crisis mode after blowing the Florida game, knowing it would still have two more mulligans*? And while rivalries like Alabama-Tennessee will always be important, the Tide would still be a long way from missing the Playoff.

* I don’t think most people realize how common it will be for 8-4 SEC teams to make the field. The committee has already been slotting three-loss SEC teams ahead of two-loss ACC and Big 12 teams. I’m sure that will extend to four-loss SEC teams vs. three-loss ACC/Big 12 teams. Especially a team like Texas with a marquee nonconference win.

Maybe I’m completely wrong. A devil’s advocate would say: It’s not like these early-season NFL games have much bearing on that league’s postseason stakes, yet people still freak out when the Washington Commanders blow the end of overtime, or the Los Angeles Rams fall to 2-4. Maybe our Saturday viewing experience will feel exactly the same.

But the NFL has never been anything else. Generations of fans have been conditioned to the slow burn of its regular season. Generations of college fans have been conditioned to a more frantic pace where, even today, everyone gets one mulligan, but no one is assured two. And now it’s being taken away from them. That’s why, when news of a deal broke last Thursday, it felt like a lot of people were in mourning.

* * *

The only way I disagree with this is in his second-to-last paragraph, about the Commanders blowing the end of overtime. I saw it as incredibly stupid, but almost completely insignificant. NFL players themselves have said in the past couple months that everything before Halloween is essentially preseason to them.

Now college football, to a lesser extent, is headed that way with diminished regular season games.

The tv ratings have been excellent during both regular season and playoff games during the playoff era. There is a reason ESPN is going to payout $1.5 B plus to cover this. More people are watching and are interested. Many more schools are going to be in the playoff hunt which will create more interest nationally. It’s better than having several big “name” or “brand” name teams dominate the NC picture every year with limited post season competition. It will also result in these ridiculously paid coaches being judged on playoff results rather than getting to 6 or 7 wins and an invite to the WeedEater Bowl.

 

[RUTGERS95]

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.

I hear you and everyone is different to their view.

 

[RUInsanityToo]

An increase in popularity is speculative, and "more interesting" is highly subjective. I and many others will find it less interesting -- significantly less, I imagine.

I thought Stewart Mandel of The Athletic put it well, just today in his mailbag:

* * *

First of all, Saturday was the first time in years I missed the BCS a bit. For those of you too young to remember, any time a No. 1 or 2 lost, much less three other top-10 teams, the result was complete chaos. I’m not oblivious that the stakes are already much lower in a field of 12 than they were even three years ago. But I definitely found myself wondering what something like this would feel like next year.

However, I want to be clear: The games themselves would be no less fun. Ohio State-Indiana coming down to Nick Marsh’s foot being inches out of bounds would still make me go, “Ohhhh.” Ditto when it looked like Florida State receivers Micahi Danzy and (maybe) Duce Robinson caught those Hail Marys that didn’t count. And the BYU-Notre Dame ending? Oh my.

But that doesn’t mean the urgency would be the same. Only Georgia-Auburn felt like an “oh well, Georgia stubbed its toe” situation. Ohio State was inches away from suffering its second loss, putting it perilously on the bubble. Next year, not so much. Would it still feel like Texas would be in crisis mode after blowing the Florida game, knowing it would still have two more mulligans*? And while rivalries like Alabama-Tennessee will always be important, the Tide would still be a long way from missing the Playoff.

* I don’t think most people realize how common it will be for 8-4 SEC teams to make the field. The committee has already been slotting three-loss SEC teams ahead of two-loss ACC and Big 12 teams. I’m sure that will extend to four-loss SEC teams vs. three-loss ACC/Big 12 teams. Especially a team like Texas with a marquee nonconference win.

Maybe I’m completely wrong. A devil’s advocate would say: It’s not like these early-season NFL games have much bearing on that league’s postseason stakes, yet people still freak out when the Washington Commanders blow the end of overtime, or the Los Angeles Rams fall to 2-4. Maybe our Saturday viewing experience will feel exactly the same.

But the NFL has never been anything else. Generations of fans have been conditioned to the slow burn of its regular season. Generations of college fans have been conditioned to a more frantic pace where, even today, everyone gets one mulligan, but no one is assured two. And now it’s being taken away from them. That’s why, when news of a deal broke last Thursday, it felt like a lot of people were in mourning.

* * *

The only way I disagree with this is in his second-to-last paragraph, about the Commanders blowing the end of overtime. I saw it as incredibly stupid, but almost completely insignificant. NFL players themselves have said in the past couple months that everything before Halloween is essentially preseason to them.

Now college football, to a lesser extent, is headed that way with diminished regular season games.

Best way to address this pointnis to personalize the situation. While for the good of college football might impact perhaps 10 programs consistently every year......for the rest of us, I think the expanded playoffs are a good thing. In 2006 most if not all RU fans would have easily traded the Texas Bowl for a playoff bowl.

 

[Rutgers Chris]

A mark for the “pro” column…

“There are scheduling agreements that are in place once this thing expands officially," Klatt told KTCK-FM 96.7 The Ticket in Dallas on Wednesday. "The next thing that will happen almost immediately is we're going to get scheduling agreements between the SEC and the Big Ten -- top-end matchups, mid-tier matchups, low-end matchups -- and we're going to be expanding the valuable matchups in the non-conference, far surpassing what we have now."