If a 24-Team CFP had existed from the very beginning (2014)

Lionhawk85

Junior
Jun 8, 2022
131
278
63
I hate the espn pundits that complain about “only the top 4 or so schools have a chance to win it all and therefore we should not be having this many teams in the playoff.”

Besides just spouting off what big money wants them to say, they are also completely missing the point that this type of wide, national involvement is exactly what makes college football so dynamic and successful. Start to limit it to just the “haves vs have nots” and the national appeal to every single fanbase will start to fade. Need to expand to at least 16 if not 24 and fix NIL/transfers rules to keep competitive and national balance, imo!
 

Titanhawk

Senior
Jul 14, 2011
566
589
93
I hate the espn pundits that complain about “only the top 4 or so schools have a chance to win it all and therefore we should not be having this many teams in the playoff.”

Besides just spouting off what big money wants them to say, they are also completely missing the point that this type of wide, national involvement is exactly what makes college football so dynamic and successful. Start to limit it to just the “haves vs have nots” and the national appeal to every single fanbase will start to fade. Need to expand to at least 16 if not 24 and fix NIL/transfers rules to keep competitive and national balance, imo!
College football is not like college basketball where a top 20 team could knock off number 1 and maybe make a run. Nobody, at the end of the season, thinks #12 could knock of #1, let alone #24. There's never an argument for who is the best beyond 4-5 teams
 
Oct 30, 2023
232
485
63
College football is not like college basketball where a top 20 team could knock off number 1 and maybe make a run. Nobody, at the end of the season, thinks #12 could knock of #1, let alone #24. There's never an argument for who is the best beyond 4-5 teams
The 10 seed and last P4 team in just went to the national championship and gave the #1 team all they could handle just this season.
 

DukeSlater

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2023
1,821
4,244
113
I hate the espn pundits that complain about “only the top 4 or so schools have a chance to win it all and therefore we should not be having this many teams in the playoff.”

Besides just spouting off what big money wants them to say, they are also completely missing the point that this type of wide, national involvement is exactly what makes college football so dynamic and successful. Start to limit it to just the “haves vs have nots” and the national appeal to every single fanbase will start to fade. Need to expand to at least 16 if not 24 and fix NIL/transfers rules to keep competitive and national balance, imo!
It needs to be 24 teams, period. That would put D1 in the same ball park with every other division of college football in terms of the percentage of teams who make the football playoffs.

In 1980 there were 15 major bowls, 30 teams. Last year there were 41 bowls, 82 teams. So if there are still sponsors and TV for bowl games, go ahead, but the playoffs should be 24 teams, and at least the first two rounds should be on campus.
 

DukeSlater

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2023
1,821
4,244
113
I really hope that they do not go to 24 teams!?! 16 is plenty... But in reality the current system is the best.

The NCAA basketball tournament is a joke at the 94 or however many teams they have it up to now. F'n joke.
Every other division of college football would disagree: FCS, with 128 teams, has 24 teams in its playoffs. Division two has a 32-team playoff. Division three has 40 teams in the playoffs. That's about 18-20 percent of teams in each of those divisions. Major college football has 138 teams, so 24 teams in the playoffs would be in line with every other division of college football, including FCS. Those are the facts.
 

WeBeHerkin

All-Conference
Aug 5, 2016
4,262
4,933
113
College football is not like college basketball where a top 20 team could knock off number 1 and maybe make a run. Nobody, at the end of the season, thinks #12 could knock of #1, let alone #24. There's never an argument for who is the best beyond 4-5 teams
All matters about when you get hot and injuries
 

rchawk

All-American
Oct 27, 2001
74,078
8,455
113
Every other division of college football would disagree: FCS, with 128 teams, has 24 teams in its playoffs. Division two has a 32-team playoff. Division three has 40 teams in the playoffs. That's about 18-20 percent of teams in each of those divisions. Major college football has 138 teams, so 24 teams in the playoffs would be in line with every other division of college football, including FCS. Those are the facts.
Just thinking about this, but very very few DIII teams receive national attention. Most know a handful of schools like Mount Union, North Central, and Wartburg. But there are many schools out there you and I have never heard of, or at least not much about. If one of them has a hot season nobody else knows about, they deserve consideration like being one of forty teams.
 
Last edited:

Lionhawk85

Junior
Jun 8, 2022
131
278
63
College football is not like college basketball where a top 20 team could knock off number 1 and maybe make a run. Nobody, at the end of the season, thinks #12 could knock of #1, let alone #24. There's never an argument for who is the best beyond 4-5 teams
In your analogy, a #24 knocking off a #1 would be the equivalent to a 16 seed beating a 1 seed in the ncaa basketball tourney. I actually think there’s a better chance of a football 24 beating a 1 seed than a 16 seed beating a 1 seed in March madness. It’s only happened 2 out of 164 times. I bet a football upset would happen more often.

I’m not actually making the argument that I think a 24 would win be try often at all. More so I’m saying if people like March madness set up (of 64/68 teams - not talking expansion), then I don’t see why you wouldn’t like a 24 team football playoff.
 

Hawk_4shur

All-Conference
Jan 2, 2009
823
1,952
93
The football and basketball tourneys are no longer about having teams that have a chance to be national champion. It's about money. More teams, more money. And, money is important for sure - but I'm not convinced it should drive every decision.

In the past, teams would be focused on trying to win their conference. If that didn't happen, you'd focus on getting to a bowl. Now it's making the playoffs. Without the top 24 teams the Bowls will really suck.

So, programs will get richer, coaches will get richer and players will get richer. Tickets for playoff games will be unaffordable for most.

In theory, it could mean much better out of conference games since teams can afford to lose more games and still make the playoffs, Maybe we'll see more OSU v Alabama instead of OSU vs. Cupcake State.

I guess we'll see how it develops
 

Palmerhawk

All-Conference
Jul 3, 2025
1,806
3,542
113
Pettiti made a rational case for his 24 team playoff.
I was not a big fan of it but if they really want to revamp the calendar it makes sense to try to get all the ducks in a row once and for all.

Calendar:
Start week zero...one bye only.

Finish regular season on Thanksgiving weekend.
Eliminate conference title games.
Start playoffs with 2 rounds on campus.
Finish season by Jan 8 .at latest.
Portal opens

It will be as much as 17 game season for title game participants
Like the NFL...which is what college football has become.
Elimination of conference title games revenue will require new revenue hence more playoff games.

As the old saying goes:
We have already established what college sports has become..now it's just determine the price
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ozzie89

Ozzie89

All-Conference
Dec 14, 2006
102,780
4,084
113
I hate the espn pundits that complain about “only the top 4 or so schools have a chance to win it all and therefore we should not be having this many teams in the playoff.”

Besides just spouting off what big money wants them to say, they are also completely missing the point that this type of wide, national involvement is exactly what makes college football so dynamic and successful. Start to limit it to just the “haves vs have nots” and the national appeal to every single fanbase will start to fade. Need to expand to at least 16 if not 24 and fix NIL/transfers rules to keep competitive and national balance, imo!

This is the real reason ESPN is against going to 24 teams:

  • Broadcast Rights: Because ESPN's current contract only covers up to 14 teams, the media rights for any additional matchups (10 games in a 24-team model) would hit the open market. Networks like FOX have expressed high interest in bidding on these games.
  • ESPN's Stance: ESPN has been reluctant regarding massive expansion, communicating a preference to cap the playoff at 12 or 14 teams (and no higher than 16), primarily due to economic concerns.