Saw a lot of news agencies were citing this article today and didn't see a thread on it.

TL/DR: Playoff Expansion working group presents results in July (17th-18th). Board looks at recommendations the week after. All the buzz is about a 12 team bracket. Supposedly the SEC supports this because they think they can get 3-4 teams in every year.

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football-playoff-expansion-plan-043900023.html

Makes no sense at all. With all the opt outs the national championship game will be all freshmen and walkons

Correction: Follow up CBS Sports article says the dates for meetings are this month, not July.

Cites multiple AD's stating SEC (who pulls the most weight) supports 12 teams. We'll likely see change for the 2023-2024 season.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/momentum-rapidly-growing-for-college-football-playoff-expansion-to-eight-or-more-teams/amp/

BAS65 said:

---

Makes no sense at all. With all the opt outs the national championship game will be all freshmen and walkons

---

No one has opted out of a playoff game yet. Only non-playoff games. This would definitely reduce opt-outs for high profile games like the NY6.

the 12-team playoff would have 6 automatic bids...which can unfortunately water down the field when upsets in the conference title games occur.

there needs to be a provision that 3-loss or 4-loss champions can be excluded or teams ranked outside the top 20 excluded and so forth.

another issue is rematches --- those need to be avoided as well. They are likely if one league...like the SEC...were to get 4 or 5 teams in the field

the article correctly states that stopping the opting-out is part of the new CFP intitiative

The biggest problem I see with 12 teams is scheduling.

8 teams fits nicely, with the quarterfinals being the weekend after Army-Navy, and the first weekend of bowl season. Allows for roughly a two week gap between CCG weekend, quarterfinals, semifinals, and championship.

12 teams would mean there's now the CCG weekend, the next weekend is 5-12 seed teams playing at the same time as Army-Navy, then having the quarterfinals the weekend immediately after that.

Everyone will love it until the year (2 or 3 in) that there is 6 SEC teams in the playoff

Then they all need to get better at football

Finally.

There is no way the best team in the country would be ranked 12th in the final polls. I could see a 5th-8th team but not 12. And there's absolutely no freaking way that a 4 loss P5 team that fell ass backwards into the championship deserves to be in the same playoff as an SEC team that ran the gauntlet can came away at large with an at large berth. If they expand there should never be automatic qualifiers because not every conference is created equal and the weak conferences shouldn't be rewarded for it.

12 is the most politically convenient decision. 8 is a nightmare for conferences like the sec, because just as we discussed on the last thread, it would NEVER be a true top 8. Powers that be would make it power 5 conf champion +1 Go5 + 2 at large.

12 makes more sense than 8, but I'm not for any expansion in general.

I 100% agree with everything you wrote. But something is going to give, expansion will happen, and the key is do we get stuck with automatic qualifiers plus two or a more complete tournament that the at large teams are half the field.

I heard Bjork mention the 12 team playoff and could tell there had already been significant thought that went into his "mere" mention of it.

I'd take the time to reconsider looking for benefits of a 12-team playoff that combines p5 champions plus one G5 plus the best six remaining. It actually is intriguing when you sort through combinations of very good and "surprise" conference championship winners.

I do think it is unwieldy. But you beed suppprt from conferences that are falling to the side competition wise because, in part, they cannot reliably make the four-team semis. Just saying they're not worthy doesn't create a solution.

hunter2012 said:

---

There is no way the best team in the country would be ranked 12th in the final polls. I could see a 5th-8th team but not 12. And there's absolutely no freaking way that a 4 loss P5 team that fell ass backwards into the championship deserves to be in the same playoff as an SEC team that ran the gauntlet can came away at large with an at large berth. If they expand there should never be automatic qualifiers because not every conference is created equal and the weak conferences shouldn't be rewarded for it.

---

I keep thinking back to 2012. Ten teams and we'd have been in and probably would have won it all. We probably would have gotten in with an eight-team scenario if it had been a selection committee using eyeballs and not just polls. But that was once-in-a-lifetime.

Auto-bids: not the same as auto-seeds. That's a committee job. Weak teams would be seeded lower and presumably eliminated early --unless you do get someone running hot at the end that carries momentum. I don't like completely getting rid of auto-bids because there's no guarantee that a committee dominated by the Power Five won't continue to discount the G5 schools --at 12, that can happen; 16, probably not.

Me, ruler of the universe: top four of the five P5 champions get auto-bids, highest-ranked G5 champion gets an auto-bid, then three at-large bids. Room is left for the last P5 champ if strong, a strong runner-up from any P5, and maybe something like a 12-1 G5 that lost closely to a weak champ but who is clearly stronger than the weakest P5 champ. And in years when it's something like a 8-5 P5 champ and no good G5s to take an at-large, then you have room for two additional P5 teams, maybe three if they are clearly teams that could beat the weak P5 champ "by the eyeballs."

hunter2012 said:

---

There is no way the best team in the country would be ranked 12th in the final polls. I could see a 5th-8th team but not 12. And there's absolutely no freaking way that a 4 loss P5 team that fell ass backwards into the championship deserves to be in the same playoff as an SEC team that ran the gauntlet can came away at large with an at large berth. If they expand there should never be automatic qualifiers because not every conference is created equal and the weak conferences shouldn't be rewarded for it.

---

I'll preface this by saying that I'm not a fan of the 12 team playoff, but in 2012, we were the best team in the nation, and nobody wanted anything to do with us at the end of the year, but we were ranked 9.

I strongly agree with that last bit though! Never guarantee any conditional team a spot. What if an 8-4 ACC team beats Clemson in the championship? There's no benefit to adding automatic qualifiers! It just limits your options. If you want to expand to 8, don't guarantee every conference champion a spot in, just give the conference champions a spot if their "EnTiRe BoDy Of WoRk" shows they earned it.

Personally, I'm all good with a 4 team playoff. We don't always have the top 4 teams, but all that matters is that the BEST team gets in their so they have the opportunity to win it. Should we have been in ahead of ND this last year? Yes, but to me the most important thing is that the best team, Bama was in. 2019 was a perfect example of why 4 is the right number though, because we had 3 undefeated, powerhouse, power 5 programs who ALL needed a chance in LSU, Clemson and tOSU.

Bison said:

---

hunter2012 said:

---

There is no way the best team in the country would be ranked 12th in the final polls. I could see a 5th-8th team but not 12. And there's absolutely no freaking way that a 4 loss P5 team that fell ass backwards into the championship deserves to be in the same playoff as an SEC team that ran the gauntlet can came away at large with an at large berth. If they expand there should never be automatic qualifiers because not every conference is created equal and the weak conferences shouldn't be rewarded for it.

---

I keep thinking back to 2012. Ten teams and we'd have been in and probably would have won it all. We probably would have gotten in with an eight-team scenario if it had been a selection committee using eyeballs and not just polls. But that was once-in-a-lifetime.

Auto-bids: not the same as auto-seeds. That's a committee job. Weak teams would be seeded lower and presumably eliminated early --unless you do get someone running hot at the end that carries momentum. I don't like completely getting rid of auto-bids because there's no guarantee that a committee dominated by the Power Five won't continue to discount the G5 schools --at 12, that can happen; 16, probably not.

Me, ruler of the universe: top four of the five P5 champions get auto-bids, highest-ranked G5 champion gets an auto-bid, then three at-large bids. Room is left for the last P5 champ if strong, a strong runner-up from any P5, and maybe something like a 12-1 G5 that lost closely to a weak champ but who is clearly stronger than the weakest P5 champ. And in years when it's something like a 8-5 P5 champ and no good G5s to take an at-large, then you have room for two additional P5 teams, maybe three if they are clearly teams that could beat the weak P5 champ "by the eyeballs."

---

I mean, maybe. We would still have had to play Bama again, historically the winning team doesn't usually win twice, particularly when there was an upset.

Bison said:

---

Auto-bids: not the same as auto-seeds. That's a committee job. Weak teams would be seeded lower and presumably eliminated early --unless you do get someone running hot at the end that carries momentum. I don't like completely getting rid of auto-bids because there's no guarantee that a committee dominated by the Power Five won't continue to discount the G5 schools --at 12, that can happen; 16, probably not.

---

Guaranteeing spots only makes sense for the Big 12 because the only college football tradition (since the playoff started) that's better than a different team getting to hand OU the Big 12 trophy every year is the tradition of the same OU team going on to lose in the playoffs.

Why guarantee any condition a spot in the playoffs? The committee can put whoever it wants in there? Why pigeon hole them. Why make the rule that every conference champion is in, when we can just have the unwritten rule that all conference champions are in, so that we can break the rule when an undeserving team

For example, look at a team like Georgia Tech this upcoming year. They end the season with 2 OOC games so their conference standing won't change. If they lose to Clemson in mid September, and finish the season with 3 straight losses to BC, ND, and UGA, they will be 6-2 in the ACC, beating every team in their division which will almost definitely make them the divisional champion. Then one swift injury to DJ Ukele in the championship game (whatever Clemson's QB's name is) and a good BC performance lands 9-4 Georgia Tech a spot in the playoff despite losing 3 of their last 4. GT almost did something about like that in 2012. Heck, a 10-2 North Carolina team that's only losses were to Clemson and South Carolina is more deserving than that GT team.

The Pac 12 has a non-top 15 ranked team in their CCG about every 3 years (2012, 2015, 2018, 2020)
The ACC has failed to field 2 top 15 teams in its CCG in '05, '06, '08, '09, '10, '11, '12, '13, '16, '18, '19 and a lot of those years had NEITHER team ranked top 15, and additionally, many of those were unranked. 10-2 SEC or Big 10 teams are more deserving than okay teams that win garbage conference championships.

Automatic bids just limit our options and hurt good teams that are incredible, but got left out of their conference championship game. It's like when hiring people, hire the best person for the job, don't try to hire someone on anything other than their merit.

The expansion topic is a seemingly solvable problem that gets complicated to solve with predictable outcomes based on the current recruiting landscape.

For example Saban is NOT the greatest coach of all-time, bur rather he is simply the most fortuitous (Bear didn't get to win 2 Natty's when coming in second place in the SEC). However, because of the arms-race that Bama is second to none in it becomes increasingly more difficult to actually "win" the championship when challengers (especially in the SEC) have to play Bama an extra time (either literally like Lsu in 2012 or figuratively like Georgia in 2018 finals).

Expanding just ironically will make it easier for the most stockpiled teams to get second chances to perfect what they may have erred on earlier in the season so until the talent gap in recruiting normalizes I don't think expansion will solve anything other than tarnish previously earned eras of dominance by other coaching legends.

Do I want to see expansion...yes because it will statistically improve A&Ms chances to get in, but playing Bama or Georgia for example twice to earn the title feels like something even mighty Bama wanted "no part of" in last years seedings..

Yawn
1. This will come with auto bids for conferences.
2. This will all but guarantee certain teams always get in. Boring.
3. This will allow undeserving teams to get in that don't play anybody and have no chance beating better teams. Not level playing field.
4. Never, ever, never have 12 teams deserved to be in playoff.
5. Worst of all, waters down best regular of any sport...this would be an awful shame.

The four best teams is perfect! They just need to do slightly better job of picking those four teams. Usually not hard but they screwed that up last year. Gotta cut them covid break I guess.

Aggieair said:

---

BAS65 said:

---

Makes no sense at all. With all the opt outs the national championship game will be all freshmen and walkons

---

No one has opted out of a playoff game yet. Only non-playoff games. This would definitely reduce opt-outs for high profile games like the NY6.

---

Didn't one opt out from Ohio State a few years ago?

just for fun...here's how a 2019 12-team playoff would have looked based upon the final BCS rankings:

auto bids ---> #1 LSU, #2 Ohio State, #3 Clemson, #4 Oklahoma, #6 Oregon, and #17 Memphis (group of 5).

the 6 at-large berths would have gone to:

#5 Georgia
#7 Baylor
#8 Wisconsin
#9 Florida
#10 Penn State
#11 Utah

the SEC would have only gotten 3 teams in. Utah & Oregon would have rematched the week after the Pac-12 title game.

#12 Auburn (9-3) and #13 Alabama (10-2) would have just missed the cut. That would have been controversial and unfavorable to the SEC

looking at 2018...the SEC would have gotten 4 teams in:

#1 Alabama, #5 Georgia, #10 Florida, and #11 LSU.

and that would have led to several sweet 1st round matchups that the TV networks would have loved:

#12 Penn State at #5 Georgia
#11 LSU at #6 Ohio State
#10 Florida at #7 Michigan

I need to bookmark this thread. This is long overdue and the people who say this will be the end of the world will look silly after this finally comes to pass.

rootube said:

---

I need to bookmark this thread. This is long overdue and the people who say this will be the end of the world will look silly after this finally comes to pass.

---

If nothing else, it will be nice to see teams other than Bama tOSU and Clemson in the playoffs every year

annie88 said:

---

Aggieair said:

---

BAS65 said:

---

Makes no sense at all. With all the opt outs the national championship game will be all freshmen and walkons

---

No one has opted out of a playoff game yet. Only non-playoff games. This would definitely reduce opt-outs for high profile games like the NY6.

---

Didn't one opt out from Ohio State a few years ago?

---

I think you are thinking about Bosa in 2018 who opted out the year OSU missed the playoffs. He had nagging injury and ended up the #2 overall pick so probably a good decision for him.

rootube said:

---

I need to bookmark this thread. This is long overdue and the people who say this will be the end of the world will look silly after this finally comes to pass.

---

Who said it'll be the end of the world on this thread?

I agree, I think 8 teams, no auto-bids is the sweet spot.

But all this coverage seems to indicate that 12 teams will be happening in 2023. The kids who get picked last, the PAC-12, BDF, and G5, are probably demanding auotbids, and the SEC and ND must be agreeing to autobids if they are (allegedly) supporting 12 teams to increase their at-large options/chances.

I know Saban and bama have been vehemently against expansion (because the status quo works great for them), so I don't know why SEC leaders would go to 12 instead of 8, creating one more obstacle for bama, unless autobids are almost a given.

Selection committee ranking btw. Not the old BCS.

The only issue with the list is exactly what the basis was for the order. Georgia, Oregon, Baylor, and Wisconsin all lost CCG games, btw.

Here is the good that I think many are missing. This would be a HUGE break for recruiting.
Think of how many elite players sign with tOSU, BAMA, OU and Clemson because multiple playoff trips are almost a guarantee.

Now this will give those recruits a reason to take a chance on other schools in the conference, which will in turn water down the recruiting for those four schools.

With the current Top 4 set up and Saban re-signing, A&M has an uphill battle matching BAMA's talent level and depth. This can make it more even a whole lot sooner.

Is making the playoffs that big of a deal if they let everyone in?

BAS65 said:

---

Makes no sense at all. With all the opt outs the national championship game will be all freshmen and walkons

---

I think the idea is another 8 teams won't have opt outs as their games mean something.

Aggieair said:

---

The biggest problem I see with 12 teams is scheduling.

8 teams fits nicely, with the quarterfinals being the weekend after Army-Navy, and the first weekend of bowl season. Allows for roughly a two week gap between CCG weekend, quarterfinals, semifinals, and championship.

12 teams would mean there's now the CCG weekend, the next weekend is 5-12 seed teams playing at the same time as Army-Navy, then having the quarterfinals the weekend immediately after that.

---

Agree. If the P5 CCG winners are automatically in, the top G5, and two slots for independent/at large then you have a de facto 12+ team playoff.

Aggieair said:

---

I agree, I think 8 teams, no auto-bids is the sweet spot.

But all this coverage seems to indicate that 12 teams will be happening in 2023. The kids who get picked last, the PAC-12, BDF, and G5, are probably demanding auotbids, and the SEC and ND must be agreeing to autobids if they are (allegedly) supporting 12 teams to increase their at-large options/chances.

I know Saban and bama have been vehemently against expansion (because the status quo works great for them), so I don't know why SEC leaders would go to 12 instead of 8, creating one more obstacle for bama, unless autobids are almost a given.

---

The other 4 conferences aren't going to agree to any expansion that doesn't include auto bids for CC.

The best part about an auto bid system is teams will be able to play good OOC game(s) without the worry that losing knocks them out of the playoffs. I would hope that translates into way more interesting OOC games. Even better would be if it restores some traditional rivalries that have been lost to conference changes.

AggieJoker90 said:

---

Here is the good that I think many are missing. This would be a HUGE break for recruiting.
Think of how many elite players sign with tOSU, BAMA, OU and Clemson because multiple playoff trips are almost a guarantee.

Now this will give those recruits a reason to take a chance on other schools in the conference, which will in turn water down the recruiting for those four schools.

With the current Top 4 set up and Saban re-signing, A&M has an uphill battle matching BAMA's talent level and depth. This can make it more even a whole lot sooner.

---

Those 4 teams were definitely beneficiaries of recruiting for the past decade(2010-2019) but what about this decade(2020-2029). What if WE would have been one of the four programs in which recruits flock to play for titles and this hurts us? Considering our last three classes(all top 7), it's DEFINITELY worth considering that we could easily be the HAVES over the upcoming decade and this expansion would help other programs catch up to US?