New CFP Coming???

 Anyone with an eye on the continually-developing world of college football should be well-aware of the news from a few days ago.  An expanded College Football Playoff may be on the horizon!

A working group - consisting of the SEC, Big 12, and Mountain West commissioners, and chaired by the Athletic Director of Notre Dame, issued a set of recommendations for a 12-team playoff. And it wasn't just a general statement; there were some specifics.  

You can click on THIS LINK to go to a CBS article that spells out those proposed specifics.  And I emphasize "proposed," as this still has to go through the CFP Management Committee this coming week (June 17-18, 2021) and then the CFP Board of Managers (June 22). 

As things stand at this moment, I'll lay those details out below, with some of my own commentary:

Playoff Makeup - Automatic Teams

As mentioned above, this would expand the Playoff from 4 to 12 teams.  That's considerably more access, for those feeling like the power in the sport has consolidated to just a handful of teams.

Six (6) of those teams would be conference champs. No specific conferences - just the Top 6 champs.  While this will almost always yield the P5 champs and the highest-ranked G5 conference champ, there are oddball-type situations where two G5 champs could hypothetically rank above a P5 champ. 

• Years like 2012 (Wisconsin) or 2020 (Oregon) giving us a substitute team pulling off an upset in a conference title game
• Years like 2001 (LSU) or 2005 (Florida State), where barely-ranked teams simply pulled off upsets in the SEC and ACC Championship Games (respectively).

Overall, my point is that the working group is wise not to name specific conferences. For all intents and purposes, this gives us "P5 + 1 G5" as automatic berths, barring something unusual, without any of the headaches over anti-trust policies. The examples above are certainly deviations from the norm, but it's good to establish policies that cover the deviations.

Playoff Makeup - At-Large Teams

The other six (6) teams would be the highest-remaining from everyone else. Hypothetically, this could include other conference champs, independents, or any team. The possibilities are endless. And as it is now with the CFP, there would be NO LIMITS to how many teams a conference sends to the playoff (allowing for the 6 automatic berths, of course, for a practical limit of 7 teams).

From a practical perspective, this will probably be:

• Other "at-large" P5 teams, typically 10-2 or better (maaaaybe 9-3 if the conditions are right, like 2014 Ole Miss ranked #9). 
• Maybe an Independent like BYU, if they can turn in a year with solid competition and an 11-1 or better record. 
• And almost certainly an 11-1 or 10-2 Notre Dame (but not always - see 2019, 10-2 ranked #15).

It's hard to go wrong with six at-large teams. Even if pure chaos were to happen, and there were loads of non-champions ranked very highly (see 2012, with #1 Notre Dame, #4 Oregon, and five SEC non-champs in the Top 10), this would be a guaranteed opportunity for ANY team ranked #6 or higher.

Playoff Seeding - Teams 1-4

According to the working group, the top 4 seeds would be the four highest-ranked conference champions. These teams would get a first-round bye.

The word "seeded" sticks out to me here. 

• A team such as Notre Dame could be a Top 4 ranked team. But as an Independent, they would be ineligible for a Top 4 seed. The same is true for any independent.  
• The same would hold true for a 1 vs. 2 Conference Title Game, where one team wins by a single point as time expires. The loser of that game would almost certainly be ranked #2; however, they would be ineligible for a Top 4 seed under this proposal.

Some might argue that the seeds should be strictly ranked-based, and therefore merit-based. But I'm OK with the way this was proposed. This allows conference championships to matter - and by extension, the race for the conference championships. No coasting for the top teams.

And Notre Dame's AD is on board with this, so I'm not particularly worried about a high-ranked independent feeling slighted. After all, they got their "bye" during championship weekend.

Playoff Seeding - Teams 5-12

After the Top 4 are seeded, it seems that the remaining 8 teams will be seeded by their ranking. These teams would play a first round game, with 5 hosting 12, 6 hosting 11, 7/10, and 8/9.

These hosting teams (seeded 5-8) would include those highly-ranked Notre Dame-type teams, conference/division runner-ups, or one or both of the automatic qualifiers not receiving a bye.

And the teams seeded 9-12...well...they would be the teams just happy to be there. And in some cases, depending on the year, these are teams that wouldn't even be in a NY6 Bowl, much less the Playoff under the current format (example: 2015 11-2 UNC, ranked #10).

Once again, I'm happy with this arrangement. I'll go deeper into the venue side of things in a moment, but I like how this provides an opportunity to highly-ranked teams that might not be as highly-seeded.

Venues and Timing

As alluded to above, Seeds 5-8 would be hosting Seeds 9-12. After that, the winners would advance to the quarterfinals (those winners to semifinals, then those winners to finals). ONLY the first round games would be played on-campus. Everything else would be worked into bowls and neutral sites, as is done today for the 4-team CFP.

The first round games would occur within 2 weeks of Conference Championship Weekend. Assuming 2 weekends exactly, the date range of these on-campus games would be December 15 to 21 - depending on the calendar for that particular year. 

The quarterfinals (aka the "Elite 8" round) would occur on consecutive days on or around New Year's Day. I would expect these to be upper-level bowls currently associated with the NY6.

The semifinals and finals still need to be determined. And this is where it gets tricky due competition from NFL Playoffs, as well as the inevitable extension of the college football season well into January. But I have to think that the powers-that-be will be able to find something that works for all interested parties. 

Other Specifics

Based on the same proposal, there would NOT be reseeding after each round of action. Personally, I'm OK with this.  This keeps the tournament feel of the CFP closer to other college sports, without making it a watered-down version of the NFL Playoffs.

The semifinals might not be a doubleheader, as we see now.  Instead, this could give us a BCS (and more recently, NY6)-style feel of multiple top-level games over the course of a couple of days/nights. Although not stated explicitly in the CBS article, I cannot fathom why this wouldn't also apply to the first two rounds. With enough space between rounds, I do not see a particularly large advantage that comes with playing one game a day or two earlier than the other.

Seeding would not be manipulated to avoid rematches. In other words, the committee will let the chips fall where they may.  Which makes sense, as I do not believe a team should be rewarded with an easier opponent, or punished with a harder one, due to the possibility of a rematch.  And sometimes, there are clear lines between teams (see 2019, where Oklahoma was a clear step below the other contenders).  

Of course, from a practical standpoint, the lines between teams can be VERY blurry, especially as one goes further down the rankings. So I would expect that rematches can be avoided "by happenstance" quite often, and that it would have to be pretty egregious to accuse the committee of manipulating matchups.

Closing Thoughts

We've got a couple of very interesting weeks ahead! There seems to be a lot of excitement across the college football landscape for this expanded Playoff. And while not every detail is necessarily universally-approved by the fans, I do believe that things will move forward.

I like the idea of "tiers": the BYE tier, the HOSTING tier, and then the HAPPY tier. Each group has something to look forward to, and it allows the regular season to remain nationally relevant for more teams for as long as possible.  

The earliest this could happen is after the 2023 season, though it could wait until after the 2026 season if the current contract is carried out completely. I think the former is more likely than the latter. It will allow the current semifinal cycle to complete, and allow for bowls, conferences, teams, and television networks to prepare. 

For what it's worth, should we see a 12-team after the 2023 season, the dates for the first two rounds would be as follows:

First Round (Teams 5-12, 4 games): Saturdays December 9 and/or 16 (maybe 2 per day??)

Quarterfinals (4 games): Monday-Tuesday, January 1-2 (will the Rose Bowl become the very first Quarterfinal, just like it was the first Semifinal following the 2014 season??)

Hopefully you enjoyed this breakdown!  I'll be interested to see what the CFP big-wigs have to say. And if they give a thumbs-up, will any of these specifics be altered?  Regardless of how it all shakes out, I look forward to seeing the opportunities that may come!