Okay, so I’ve been marinating over this topic over the last few days. The 2023-2024 college football playoff field is set, and unsurprisingly there exists a ton of salt from various fanbases, just as much pointless analysis to simulate a bunch of hypotheticals, and then a whole lot more salt from the results of such hypothetical matchups. Honestly, this isn’t something that I was really intending on writing about, but it’s getting a little slow at the office as we’ve entered the tail end of the year and the holiday season, and I’ve found a little bit of time here and there to help kill time by writing, win-win.
Honestly, I think the committee did an okay job with the four teams that are slated to play for the National Championship. The only one I really don’t agree with is Texas, but I’m completely okay with Michigan, Washington and Alabama being in the playoff. I wholeheartedly agree that Florida State, in spite of their 13-0 record and ACC championship aren’t a top-4 team, because the ACC has been more or less anything but a Power-5 conference since well, Trevor Lawrence left Clemson.
Trying to not sound like such a Georgia homer, but despite the fact that they did lose the SEC to Alabama, I still feel that they should’ve been in the playoff, especially instead of Texas. CFB is always about recency bias above all else, and Georgia did finally lose, at the worst possible time ever, but nobody’s going to convince me that the two-time defending National Champions who hadn’t lost in two years doesn’t deserve to be in the CFB playoff.
An even harder sell is convincing me, as well as millions of other CFB fans, that a Michigan/Washington/Georgia/Alabama field wouldn’t be absolute money for all parties involved, because it’s no secret that the SEC has flexed on the entire sport for decades at this point, and what better way for other conferences to try to overcome the mountain than by having two SEC powerhouses in the field?
If anything, the one flexible school that is in the field in my opinion is Washington, because they’re always a strong regular season school, but have done jack shit come postseason, with them getting trounced by Alabama just a few years ago the time they did make it in. Plus they have a far smaller fanbase that isn’t nearly as willing to spend money, travel, spend money or spend money than programs such as FSU, Texas or Ohio State, and as long as the CFB playoff remains a biased invitational, there will always remain arguments of keeping certain programs out for the pursuit of money.
Regardless of my armchair analysis, the one thing that most everyone can agree upon at this juncture is that the CFB playoff field desperately, desperately needs expansion. Fortunately, this is something that is mutually agreed upon by the CFB committee, but unfortunately this is not the year in which it rolls out, otherwise we’d have a pretty lit playoff field set.
But the word is that starting next season, the playoff will become a 12-team field with the top four seeds all getting bye weeks, and then 5-12 playing games to reduce to eight, then to four, before setting up the game for the Natty. And although this system is probably more than sufficient to get a lot of CFB fans wet, sure there is a lot for me to like as well, but I just think that it isn’t a particularly good idea as well.
To get to my point, I just think 12 teams is now, too many teams allowed now. Especially in CFB, there aren’t really many Cinderella stories, and by the time we get to the final rankings of a season, #12 will be #12 for a reason, and not solely because they’ve avoided playing stronger teams. #12 going up against #5 in the nation will more likely than not, get obliterated, as would #11 against #6, #10 against #7, and maybe a nail biter between #8 and #9. Outside of the top-10 in the CFB, AP or Coaches rankings, anyone #10 and up are almost never credible threats for championships, and I think it’s a waste of time letting them try; which brings me to my next point…
…Because it’s adding games for all teams involved, which is great for fans who want to see moar football, and programs because it’s more chances to bilk more money out of sponsorships, television and other revenue streams, but very counterproductive to the interests of the players themselves, as far as their health and safety are concerned. To put it in perspective, one of the main reasons the NFL has had any sort of work stoppage contention over the last few collective bargaining agreements has been over how many games they play, primarily over the preseason exhibition games, that don’t actually count, but there are still a ton of guys who are going to bust their ass out because their jobs are on the line and the risk of injury is still there. If players at the pro level are trying to combat the number of games that they have, why wouldn’t players at the college level be salty over the idea of adding more games?
Take for example, a school like Georgia if we’re looking at simulation of if this year were the 12-team format. They played one extra game already (#13), the SEC championship, which they lost to Alabama. Now they are in the first round of the new playoff, and play a game (#14) against Ole Miss. They win that, and then they have to play another game (#15) against Texas. If they win that, they play another game (#16) to see who goes to the National Championship, and if they make it to the Natty, then that’s game #17 on the season.
And then imagine if they lost the National Championship game; play all those extra games, only to lose in the end. Sure, the school might be raking in sponsorship and win-share dollars left and right, but the players themselves, NILs or not, have added up to a quarter season’s worth of extra games for nothing but heartbreak.
Not only does this stretch a season to the size of an NFL season, think about schools that ranked well, but didn’t have to play in a conference championship game, so are actually one game fresher than a higher ranked school? All those games, especially in a violent one like football, add up, and those miles eventually will bite some kids in the ass, and seeing as how NFL players have had numerous beefs about how much they have to play, that shit is coming for the college ranks at this rate.
For example, Ohio State, who is ranked #7, didn’t even play for the Big 10, so they’ve only played 12 games instead of 13 like Georgia, FSU or Oregon. One game less physical mileage seems like an advantage to me, and imagine what it’s going to be like when Notre Dame, who still doesn’t play for a conference only plays 12 games and gets a top-4 seed? Talk about a massive advantage for a school that also gets a bye on top of playing fewer games than everyone else?
Call me silly, but I tend to actually care about the physical wellbeing of these college kids, athletic ringers as they might be for their respective programs. They’re still human beings, trying to navigate a path to their dream profession, and a 12-team playoff system literally opens the door for an 18-year old true freshman who probably played 10 games their senior year in high school, suddenly being put in a situation where they might have to play up to 17 games, against legitimate NFL-caliber monsters who are all older, stronger and wiser, no matter how much natural talent they bring. Injuries can and will pile up, and the hangover effect from all these extra games could really change the landscape of the entire CFB scene in following seasons, but perhaps that’s the intention by the committee, but I highly doubt that they’ve looked big picture enough.
Like, what would happen next season, when second-year freshman Arch Manning, nephew of Peyton and Eli, and the holy grail of recruits takes the reigns at Texas, and they don’t get a top-4 ranking? Sure, they advance out of the first round, maybe the second, and then they square up against a fringe contender like Ole Miss who has another guy the size of Michael Oher on defense, and he gets squashed because his legs are tired and shreds his ACL in game #16? Injury is always a risk in sport, but it’s exponentially riskier when human bodies are tired from the grind of entire seasons.
If it were up to me, the playoffs are definitely expanded from four teams, but up to no more than eight teams. Eight teams creates a balanced bracket where no more than three extra games are added for the teams that advance the furthest, and it weeds out the #9+ ranked teams that really don’t have much business being in contention for a Natty in the first place. This doesn’t completely solve the number of games advantage that a team like TOSU would enjoy this season, but it does at least shave a game off of the gauntlet if UGA were to march to the Natty game.
But really, a six-team field is probably the best option if it were up to me, with #1 and #2 getting byes. It truly incentivizes and rewards the top two teams in the nation by having to play one fewer game, but at the same time it would have solved nearly every gripe that’s occurring right now with FSU and UGA being kept out of contention. It weeds out powerhouse teams that don’t play in conference championships like OSU, and progress really should be in baby steps; when four teams falls flat like it did this year, add two more teams and introduce byes for the top seeds, not introduce eight teams, many of whom have no business in entering the gauntlet, will be exposed nationally and get TCU’d.
It’ll look real silly if and hopefully when the 12-team format blows up in their face for any of the aforementioned reasons detailed why it’s not a great idea, and they’ll have to rejigger the playoffs yet again, and start cutting teams, because believe me, the salt that will come from the CFB community of #7+ or #9+ team’s fanbases for being chopped off, will be way worse than the salt that comes from the #7 or #9+ team’s fanbases for being left out.
But all this, is just one man’s opinion, where probably none of it will come to any fruition, because as great as CFB is, at the root of it, is still run by a bunch of old white guys who use the sport as their personal ATMs, and are slower than molasses when it comes to making changes to improve things for the better, and benefit of most parties involved.
