Field Expansion

[23andCounting]

12 Teams - Not enough. Last year two of the best three teams in the country were on the bubble of getting in and one didn't make it. It's flawed. 

16 Teams - Perfect in my opinion. Eliminate the committee. Use the AP poll..........or even better, an average of the AP, Coaches Poll, BPI, and Sagarin. 

24 Teams - Watered down in my opinion. 

I guess I'm siding with the SEC on this one. Sorry B1G. 

[Coach Nowlin]

At least no more stupid conference championships:  

[23andCounting]

1 hour ago, Coach Nowlin said:

At least no more stupid conference championships:  

I agree, those need to go.

[PDB26]

8 hours ago, 23andCounting said:

12 Teams - Not enough. Last year two of the best three teams in the country were on the bubble of getting in and one didn't make it. It's flawed. 

16 Teams - Perfect in my opinion. Eliminate the committee. Use the AP poll..........or even better, an average of the AP, Coaches Poll, BPI, and Sagarin. 

24 Teams - Watered down in my opinion. 

I guess I'm siding with the SEC on this one. Sorry B1G. 

Based on the AP final regular season rankings 1-16 with the theoretical elimination of conference championship games. 

2024 Playoff expanded field: Alabama, Iowa State, Miami, Mississippi, South Carolina

Miami (10-2) and Iowa State (10-2) would have been in after playing exactly zero playoff teams, and South Carolina (9-3) would have beaten zero playoff teams while losing to a playoff team and a theoretical playoff team. Alabama (9-3) had a playoff win and a playoff loss. Mississippi (9-3) had a playoff win and a theoretical playoff win.

Wins against playoff teams (and theoretical playoff teams): 2 (1)

Losses against playoff teams (and theoretical playoff teams): 2 (1)

2025 Playoff expanded field: ND, Vanderbilt, Texas, USC, BYU, Utah

Texas (9-3) beat two playoff teams, had a theoretical playoff win, and lost twice to playoff teams. Notre Dame (10-2) had a win over a theoretical playoff team and two playoff losses. USC had a playoff loss and a theoretical playoff loss. BYU (11-1) had a win over theoretical playoff team. Utah lost to a playoff team and a theoretical playoff team. 

Wins against playoff teams (and theoretical playoff teams): 2 (3)

Losses against playoff teams (and theoretical playoff teams): 8 (3)

I don't think the answer is to expand the playoff field unless you're looking to destroy the uniqueness of the college football regular season and how every week could be a quasi-elimination game. Do we need to expand the field to include teams with a combined 11 losses against the expanded field? Talk about sucking all the juice out of Michigan and Ohio State or Texas and Oklahoma. Texas and Texas A&M? Even the Alabama and Auburn game from this past season, which was a very real and entertaining elimination game for 'Bama, might have been rendered meaningless. Basically any game involving ND under the expanded format is meaningless.

I could get behind taking 1-12 with a formula made up of computer polls, but, with so few regular season games, the computer will give you a weird result like ND ahead of Miami despite the head-to-head loss.

Expanding to 16 is really going to stretch the seams of what makes college ball great––with so much of the greatness already destroyed by conference realignment––and you might as well set an alarm for December if they expand it to 24.

Edited May 8 by PDB26

[Irishman]

And here I was thinkin this was about the BBall tourney stretching to 76 teams. 🤣

There is a connection here.......in this era of NIL and the portal, There are fewer upsets......in both football and basketball. 

I have long said 16 for playoffs and no more. @PDB26 You bring up some great points to argue against it. But the one thing I do believe a 16 team field would have done the last two years, even with the janky system for the byes in year 1, is there would be no one who could argue they deserved to be in. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much time is wasted in both basketball and football about who did not get in and why they should have. Sure only a few teams are legitimate contenders, but I would prefer to hear/read conversations about the matchups themselves. 

As far as the basketball expansion; my impression is the NCAA is taking the Roger Gooddell approach....how can we take a great thing and  F**K it up as much as we possibly can? 

[Coach Nowlin]

Lets bring back the BCS 

[23andCounting]

1 hour ago, PDB26 said:

I could get behind taking 1-12 with a formula made up of computer polls, but, with so few regular season games, the computer will give you a weird result like ND ahead of Miami despite the head-to-head loss.

What's weird about looking at the entire body of work over an entire season? Computers cut through all the crap, the kind of crap the the committee is full of. 

Anyone with a football pulse could sense that Notre Dame was a Top 5 team last year, but the committee couldn't?

If the committee had any brains at all, they would have paid closer attention to how Miami played after the first playoff ranking was announced. Damn, those clowns almost eliminated the second best team in the country in favor of Alabama. They did eliminate a team that film experts called the third best team in the country. ESPN had Notre Dame as a 5 point favorite in Norman just days before the snub. Anyone in their right mind think that IU would have beaten ND 38-3? C'mon. 

Long story short, the committee needs to go. Replace them with computers.........or at least the AP and Coaches Poll. Too much bias behind closed doors. 

39 minutes ago, Irishman said:

And here I was thinkin this was about the BBall tourney stretching to 76 teams. 🤣

As far as the basketball expansion; my impression is the NCAA is taking the Roger Gooddell approach....how can we take a great thing and  F**K it up as much as we possibly can? 

I'm pretty sure an IU insider had something to do with this decision. 

[Komets2727]

Conference championship games have always been a bad idea, they were only done for the almighty dollar. I believe 16 teams is the right amount, but I can live with 24 teams as that would be the trade off dollar wise to get rid of the conference championship games. No way they get rid of those title games without replacing the revenue 

Edited May 13 by Komets2727

[PDB26]

On 5/8/2026 at 9:19 PM, 23andCounting said:

What's weird about looking at the entire body of work over an entire season? Computers cut through all the crap, the kind of crap the the committee is full of. 

Anyone with a football pulse could sense that Notre Dame was a Top 5 team last year, but the committee couldn't?

If the committee had any brains at all, they would have paid closer attention to how Miami played after the first playoff ranking was announced. Damn, those clowns almost eliminated the second best team in the country in favor of Alabama. They did eliminate a team that film experts called the third best team in the country. ESPN had Notre Dame as a 5 point favorite in Norman just days before the snub. Anyone in their right mind think that IU would have beaten ND 38-3? C'mon. 

Long story short, the committee needs to go. Replace them with computers.........or at least the AP and Coaches Poll. Too much bias behind closed doors. 

I'm pretty sure an IU insider had something to do with this decision. 

I'm not going to re-litigate ND/Alabama again––ND would have blown their doors off, for what it's worth. Brooks is great, but I don't think we need to cite YouTube "film experts" for why ND, or anyone else, should have been in. The field isn't set based entirely on what a team might do in the playoff––although that is part of it. It should be hard for teams with multiple losses and no marquee wins to get into the playoff. The upshot is that expansion to 16 will resolve that "problem" at the cost of more of the week-to-week stakes from the college football season. 

[23andCounting]

2 hours ago, PDB26 said:

I'm not going to re-litigate ND/Alabama again––ND would have blown their doors off, for what it's worth. Brooks is great, but I don't think we need to cite YouTube "film experts" for why ND, or anyone else, should have been in. The field isn't set based entirely on what a team might do in the playoff––although that is part of it. It should be hard for teams with multiple losses and no marquee wins to get into the playoff. The upshot is that expansion to 16 will resolve that "problem" at the cost of more of the week-to-week stakes from the college football season. 

Film experts and Vegas Odds are just simply two good examples of what the public perception (those who know what they are talking about) was about Notre Dame. At the end of the day, five teams from the SEC (2nd best conference) compared to the B1G's three is a total sham. I could put together a committee from this forum who could have done a better job than the current one we have. Notre Dame vs IU would have been a classic. Instead the country was left with an embarrassing 38-3. 

Still wondering what posters think of 16 or 24. I think 24 is kind of a joke. I'm siding with the SEC on this one. Based on what transpired last season, 12 apparently isn't enough. Sixteen is the number in my opinion. 

 

[Bash Riprock]

On 5/8/2026 at 1:46 PM, Coach Nowlin said:

At least no more stupid conference championships:  

although I hate that for Indy...I am sure the Big 10 championship game was a money maker for the city

[Bash Riprock]

On 5/8/2026 at 1:46 PM, Coach Nowlin said:

At least no more stupid conference championships:  

So how does one decide a conference champion?  the #1 seed for their conference? (realizing the latter may not be the same)

Edited May 14 by Bash Riprock

[PDB26]

22 hours ago, 23andCounting said:

Film experts and Vegas Odds are just simply two good examples of what the public perception (those who know what they are talking about) was about Notre Dame. At the end of the day, five teams from the SEC (2nd best conference) compared to the B1G's three is a total sham. I could put together a committee from this forum who could have done a better job than the current one we have. Notre Dame vs IU would have been a classic. Instead the country was left with an embarrassing 38-3. 

Still wondering what posters think of 16 or 24. I think 24 is kind of a joke. I'm siding with the SEC on this one. Based on what transpired last season, 12 apparently isn't enough. Sixteen is the number in my opinion. 

 

This forum can't even appropriately rank Crown Point.

The middle of the Big Ten is as good or better than the middle of the SEC, but (4) Michigan and (5) SC would have lost to all of the SEC playoff teams––and Texas, too––with the exception of, maybe, Oklahoma.

A 24 team playoff is a joke and will be a disaster for what has made college ball great, even if it incentivizes some sterilized matchups between marquee names, and 16 team field is pushing right up against the limit. 

If there is any real villain in the 2025/26 season, it's not the CFP committee but the ACC and its tiebreaker system.

1 hour ago, Bash Riprock said:

So how does one decide a conference champion?  the #1 seed for their conference? (realizing the latter may not be the same)

You see, they play a round robin and the team that wins the most games is the conference cha...sorry, glory days. The answer is tie breakers.

[23andCounting]

13 minutes ago, PDB26 said:

This forum can't even appropriately rank Crown Point.

The middle of the Big Ten is as good or better than the middle of the SEC, but (4) Michigan and (5) SC would have lost to all of the SEC playoff teams––and Texas, too––with the exception of, maybe, Oklahoma.

A 24 team playoff is a joke and will be a disaster for what has made college ball great, even if it incentivizes some sterilized matchups between marquee names, and 16 team field is pushing right up against the limit. 

If there is any real villain in the 2025/26 season, it's not the CFP committee but the ACC and its tiebreaker system.

Your analysis of Michigan and SC is debatable. The SEC was overrated last year, plain and simple. 

Have to have at least 16 though. Having only 12 proves that one of the best teams in the country could be left out. Hell, Miami was a bubble team for crying out loud. It has to be 16, the committee really struggled last year. 

You think the ACC's tiebreaker system was a bigger issue than five SEC teams getting the nod compared to the B1G's three? Five SEC teams an no Notre Dame? C'mon. The committee is either biased or stupid, no in between. 

 

[Bash Riprock]

20 hours ago, PDB26 said:

This forum can't even appropriately rank Crown Point.

The middle of the Big Ten is as good or better than the middle of the SEC, but (4) Michigan and (5) SC would have lost to all of the SEC playoff teams––and Texas, too––with the exception of, maybe, Oklahoma.

A 24 team playoff is a joke and will be a disaster for what has made college ball great, even if it incentivizes some sterilized matchups between marquee names, and 16 team field is pushing right up against the limit. 

If there is any real villain in the 2025/26 season, it's not the CFP committee but the ACC and its tiebreaker system.

You see, they play a round robin and the team that wins the most games is the conference cha...sorry, glory days. The answer is tie breakers.

I get tie breakers....but these conferences have gotten so large, that unlike other sports, many won't play each other and the SOS will be quite different for teams within the conference for football.  At least in the past, the 2 top teams or division winners had to square off on the field.  Now you could have teams with identical records, varying SOS's and now formula's dictating who wins the conference.  Not my favorite way of earning a championship trophy and ring.

[PDB26]

39 minutes ago, Bash Riprock said:

I get tie breakers....but these conferences have gotten so large, that unlike other sports, many won't play each other and the SOS will be quite different for teams within the conference for football.  At least in the past, the 2 top teams or division winners had to square off on the field.  Now you could have teams with identical records, varying SOS's and now formula's dictating who wins the conference.  Not my favorite way of earning a championship trophy and ring.

Agreed. I didn’t mean to suggest that you didn’t know. I meant to say “tie breakers!!!!!” to indicate my lack of support for the expansion of the conferences, and the playoff, to the point that conference schedules are unmanageable for producing an sensible result. At the end of the regular season, four SEC teams were tied for first and five ACC teams were tied for second—insane.

[PDB26]

On 5/14/2026 at 2:34 PM, 23andCounting said:

Your analysis of Michigan and SC is debatable. The SEC was overrated last year, plain and simple. 

Have to have at least 16 though. Having only 12 proves that one of the best teams in the country could be left out. Hell, Miami was a bubble team for crying out loud. It has to be 16, the committee really struggled last year. 

You think the ACC's tiebreaker system was a bigger issue than five SEC teams getting the nod compared to the B1G's three? Five SEC teams an no Notre Dame? C'mon. The committee is either biased or stupid, no in between. 

 

I wouldn't say I offered any analysis, but there wasn't even a fourth Big Ten team seriously sniffing the playoff last year. Neither Michigan nor SC beat an opponent of note, and neither was particularly impressive in their most important games. However, I would have liked the Big Ten's three against any of the SEC's five, except for, maybe, Oregon in some matchups. 

Miami was on the bubble because they played, and lost, a terribly undisciplined game at SMU and they let themselves get ambushed by Louisville––one of the classic blunders. The ACC tiebreaker is just the cherry on top of the Miami scenario. ND almost certainly makes the playoff if Miami gets the ACC auto qualifier. 

I'm not sure how a field of 12 proves anything about one of the best teams being out; it just so happened that some legitimate contenders played themselves onto the bubble. I don't think anyone considered the burst-bubble teams from 2024 as contenders, and I don't think making it safer for top teams is the road college football needs to go down.

Edited May 15 by PDB26

[23andCounting]

13 hours ago, PDB26 said:

I wouldn't say I offered any analysis, but there wasn't even a fourth Big Ten team seriously sniffing the playoff last year. Neither Michigan nor SC beat an opponent of note, and neither was particularly impressive in their most important games. However, I would have liked the Big Ten's three against any of the SEC's five, except for, maybe, Oregon in some matchups. 

Miami was on the bubble because they played, and lost, a terribly undisciplined game at SMU and they let themselves get ambushed by Louisville––one of the classic blunders. The ACC tiebreaker is just the cherry on top of the Miami scenario. ND almost certainly makes the playoff if Miami gets the ACC auto qualifier. 

I'm not sure how a field of 12 proves anything about one of the best teams being out; it just so happened that some legitimate contenders played themselves onto the bubble. I don't think anyone considered the burst-bubble teams from 2024 as contenders, and I don't think making it safer for top teams is the road college football needs to go down.

But when it mattered the most, at the end of the season, the B1G showed out.............proving that the previous two years wasn't a fluke. Now that's the streak is three years, will the committee finally pop out of their state of denial and recognize that the B1G is the best conference in the league?

Miami should have never been a bubble team when we all knew that Alabama was not. Anyone with a pulse could see how well the Hurricanes were playing that first week they were left out of the playoff picture. If you way their two losses mid-season with how they were playing at the end of the season against Alabama's three losses, in my opinion, it was a no-contest. This whole thing comes down to Alabama and the committee's bias toward the SEC. And what did we get? We got a 38-3 instead of a 24-20. The tide proved what most fans north and west of the bible belt knew all along........the Tide didn't belong, and as a result, they got rolled. 

The whole thing honestly comes down to Alabama or Notre Dame, not so much the B1G getting three in versus the the SEC's five. And you said it yourself. Notre Dame would have steamrolled Alabama. Last year's post season was telling, bottom line.