Expanded CFB Playoffs? Yes!

 Welcome back!

Those of you who are long time followers of this blog (yes, I'm talking to both of you!), know that I have been in favor of expanding the College Football Playoff to increase access.  The arguments against such a move are well known- it would "water down" the best regular season in all of sports, it would lead to more blowouts, and the #5 team is rarely deserving of inclusion (looking at you @philsteele42).  In a nutshell, my arguments for a playoff dispute all of these.

First, adding 4, 8, or 12 teams would still make this the most exclusive playoff in all of sports.  No other sport/division allows so few.  Having a 16-team playoff (which I have advocated for) would still allow only 12.3% of all FBS teams in, which is not only lower than any other sport, but MUCH lower (as I have pointed out in past blogs).  Second, before the season starts, 65 teams (the G5 plus Independents not named Notre Dame) are already excluded, which means the regular season is not only watered down, but completely immaterial for those teams, at least as far as the playoff is concerned.  In actuality, the regular season only matters for about 10-12 teams, at most.  This was proven when UCF went undefeated for 2 seasons in a row, and didn't even sniff a berth.  Yes, the regular season could be "watered down", but only for those 10-12 teams (again, at most).  Lastly, I agree, the 5-12 teams won't fare well, at least not initially, but when everyone has an equal chance of making the playoff, then more recruits may choose to play for teams closer to home, or places where they have a chance to start AND make the playoff.

Like I said, I have advocated for a 16-team playoff that would seed the 10 conference winners (decided by each conference), and then 6 at-large.  I have since come to realize that that is too big of a field.  I like what Stewart Mandel from the Athletic espoused about a 12-team playoff, where every team is either fighting for a bye (slots 1-4), a home game (slots 5-8) or a berth in the playoff (slots 9-12).  This is how I arrived at...

The Anderson Plan

I think a flexible approach is the best.  My plan actually calls for up to 22 teams!  Here is how it works.

The 1st round is the conference championship games.  That's 20 teams that are in the playoff.  Win and you are in.  The remaining 2 teams are at-large, but with these restrictions:

     1) It cannot be a conference championship game loser.  Sorry, but you just had your chance.  That's the 1st round of the playoffs, remember?

     2) It may be an independent, or a team (like Alabama in 2017) that did not make the conference championship game, that has only 1 loss.  

     3) If no team qualifies, or if only 1 does, then the field is capped at 10 or 11 teams, respectively.  

     4) At-large teams may not be seeded any higher than 5th (6th in an 11-team field, 7th in a 10-team field).  Sorry Notre Dame; if you want to be seeded higher, join a conference.  Several would love to have you.  And Liberty would be welcomed in CUSA or the SBC, I'm sure.

So how would this work?

12-team Playoff

1st weekend- 8 vs 9, 7 vs 10, 6 vs 11, and 5 vs 12

2nd weekend- 1 vs 8/9, 2 vs 7/10, 3 vs 6/11, and 4 vs 5/12

3rd weekend- semifinals: 1/8/9 vs 4/5/12, 2/7/10 vs 3/6/11

4th weekend- Championship Game: 1/4/5/8/9/12 vs 2/3/6/7/10/11

11-team Playoff

1st weekend- 8 vs 9, 7 vs 10, 6 vs 11, 5 vs bye

2nd weekend- 1 vs 8/9, 2 vs 7/10, 3 vs 6/11, and 4 vs 5

3rd weekend- semifinals 1/8/9 vs 4/5, 2/7/10 vs 3/6/11

4th weekend- Championship Game: 1/4/5/8/9 vs 2/3/6/7/10/11

10-team Playoff

1st weekend- 8 vs 9, 7 vs 10, 6 vs bye, 5 vs bye

2nd weekend- 1 vs 8/9, 2 vs 7/10, 3 vs 6, and 4 vs 5

3rd weekend- semifinals 1/8/9 vs 4/5, 2/7/10 vs 3/6

4th weekend- Championship Game: 1/4/5/8/9 vs 2/3/6/7/10

Simple and inclusive!  So how would that have worked out this past year?  I'm glad you asked!

Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, Oklahoma, Oregon, Cincinnati, San Jose State, UAB, Ball State and Coastal Carolina would have all been in as winners of their conference championship games (or in the case of CCU, declared champion).  The at-large berth(s) would have come down to:

Texas A&M 8-1 (only loss to Alabama, by 28)

Indiana 6-1 (only loss to Ohio State, by 7)

Washington (3-1, but pulled out of CCG, therefore ineligible)

Colorado (4-1, only loss to Utah by 17)

BYU 10-1 (only loss to Coastal Carolina, by 5)

Liberty 9-1 (only loss to NC State, by 1)

Ohio 2-1 (only loss to CMU, by 3)

Kent State 3-1 (only loss to Buffalo, by 29)

Louisiana 9-1 (only loss to CCU by 3)

USC, Buffalo, and Notre Dame would have been eliminated in the CCG, but would have made the CFB Playoff if they had won.  In a normal year, ND would have been in.

If the SBC had been able to stage their CCG, then the winner of CCU and UL would have been the representative, and the loser would be out.  Washington, Colorado, Ohio, and Kent State would not be considered, as they played too few games to get a good read on them.  In normal years, they probably have more than 1 loss

That narrows the field down to TAMU, Indiana, BYU, and Liberty.  The CFB would probably decide that BYU and Liberty did not play a rigorous enough schedule to merit inclusion.  That leaves TAMU and Indiana as likely choices.  It's possible that both would be included, but it's also possible that only 1 would be.  Indiana could be "dinged" for only playing 7 games (not their fault), and Texas A&M could be "dinged" for losing to 'Bama by 28.  Either way we have a 10, 11 or 12 team playoff field that would settle things on the gridiron.  The final decision for the CFB Playoff committee would be the seeding.

What do you think?  Do you like this plan?  Feel free to leave a comment!

Look for my CFB previews starting this summer!

Until next time, may you and your loved ones be blessed!