Trip to the College Football Multiverse - Part 3

Hopefully you've enjoyed the first two parts, where we explored what the smaller championship game scenarios might have looked like under past systems. The "alternate universe" trilogy ends right here, with a look at what might have been under a bigger playoff.



We've already heard the calls for a larger playoff. From the Big 12 co-champs in 2014, to red-hot Stanford in 2015, and to even-hotter USC and Penn State in 2016. Some factions of college football fans are clamoring for greater inclusion - particularly to the benefit of those "hot" teams.

The size of the CFP has been up for debate, though it's generally accepted that things are in the right direction after the two-team BCS. Also up for debate is the makeup - should it be strictly the Top (6,8, ???), or should there be some automatic bids (i.e. the Power Five, and possibly a high-ranking Group of Five)?

Unlike the previous two posts, where I relied heavily upon the polls or "mock" rankings, I can simply keep the final CFP rankings as my reference.

Assumptions:

• The CFP committee would NOT change rankings to manipulate matchups or avoid rematches. 
• No reseeding. Any setup would be a pure bracket system.
• Seeding is strictly done by ranking. No priority given to conference champions or to power conferences.

SIX TEAMS
First off, let's expand to 6. I've created two scenarios: (1) Straight-up Top 6; (2) Auto-P5, 1 At-Large

Not much difference. You either get Oklahoma or Michigan in that last spot, which would land that team a chance at redemption vs Ohio State, followed by a game against Alabama. Good luck!

Once again, we have Washington vs Penn State. We also have Alabama and Clemson getting a bye.

I'd imagine in this setup, the New Year's Six would still alternate - with a system close to what we have now. Two would take a "break" from being a CFP game one year, serve as a quarterfinal the second year, and serve as a semifinal the third. The Championship Game remains separate from a bowl.

EIGHT TEAMS

The largest cries for a larger playoff have been for 8, with the expectation that no team outside of this range should realistically be trying to claim it's the best in the country. 

But would we truly have a Top 8 playoff? I can imagine the conferences lobbying for automatic berths for the Power 5, with the Group of 5 agreeing if they can secure a spot under the right circumstances.

Below, check out two possible 8-team playoffs. First is a straight-up Top 8, followed by a bracket with automatic berths for P5. I chose Top 16 as the cutoff for automatic G5 access (max. 1, unless another one fits into the at-large), or undefeated regardless of ranking. That also guarantees 2 at-large teams from among the conference runner-ups, independents, and other G5 teams

.

Washington vs Penn State is just destiny outside of a 4-team CFP! Old bowls, BCS, and now a 6 or 8-team playoff!

Ohio State and Michigan get a rematch of their instant classic. Would the Wolverines come out ready for revenge?

Clemson and Oklahoma meet again! Can Swinney and the Tigers beat Stoops and the Sooners yet again?

The entire New Year's Six could become CFP games, rotating to serve as a semifinal once every three years (just like now) - and becoming a quarterfinal the other two years.

The only difference in either 8-team setup for 2016 was the last spot. Either Wisconsin or Western Michigan would be opening up their CFP run against Alabama.

SIXTEEN TEAMS

Continuing the trend of playoff growth, let's take this to the extreme. Some people would like every conference to be represented, and for "hot" teams to have a chance to atone for its early-season slip-up(s). While not the most supported expansion option, I thought I'd paint a picture of what such a CFP would look like. I used two scenarios:

• A guarantee to the P5 champs, and one guaranteed spot to the highest G5 champ. This also happened to be a straight-up Top 16 for 2016.
• A guarantee to all 10 FBS conference champs, with the remaining 6 spots to be filled in by the highest remaining at-large teams.

I chose App State over Arkansas State to represent the Sun Belt. Both teams were co-champs who missed each other in 2016, but I gave App State the edge due to its better record.

Finally, a scenario where we break away from Washington-Penn State. Not that I would dislike that game, it's just funny seeing it everywhere else besides here and the 4-team CFP.

Louisville, West Virginia, Oklahoma State, and Auburn make it under the first scenario. 

Temple, San Diego State, Western Kentucky, and Appalachian State replace those four under the second scenario. 

Do we really need either set of teams just to give USC a chance to flex its "hot streak" muscle?

This goes well beyond the concept of bowl games. I can't begin to speculate how everything will work with a 16-team playoff. That being said, I can't imagine the bowls dying completely. The rest of the ranked teams will want to play one more game, or perhaps an "exhibition" (think NIT) tournament?

CLOSING THOUGHTS

Well, this concludes our multiverse exploration. In a smaller BCS setup, or even the old bowl system, we may have never seen Clemson get a shot at a title. Instead, the CFP gave us a system where the Tigers beat BOTH of the teams ranked ahead of them in the AP and Coaches polls (though the CFP committee did deem Clemson's ACC Championship worthy of giving them the #2 spot over Ohio State).

In a larger setup, who knows who everything would have went down. Perhaps Alabama or Clemson get a little rusty with the extra wait under a 6-team setup? Perhaps another team gets hot? Or, on the unfortunate side, perhaps a player gets injured (I'd hate to see it, but it is a distinct possibility with more games).

As for Ohio State and Washington, do they still get to the semifinals? And if so, is there something they could pick up from the quarterfinal to make their respective games closer (assuming they still meet up with Clemson and Alabama)?

Think about what a "hot streak" would mean, particularly under an 8-team setup. USC would certainly be pushing HARD for a spot over Wisconsin, if those were the two teams near the cutoff.


This Spring, be on the lookout for another round of Butterfly Effect posts. It's been a few years since my last set, but we've certainly had some moments!