16 in ’18 or ‘19? A College Football Playoff Proposal

Come Sunday evening we’ll finally know the answer to the question the NCAA, the Playoff Committee, and the major networks have been asking us since the first week of the college football season: “Who’s In?”

The Buckeyes?  Maybe, but probably not.  Michigan?  As likely as Memphis, Montana or Maine.  Alabama?  That win over Mercer was pretty impressive so, perhaps, but regardless of who actually is in, I’ve already fast-forwarded a season or two and I’m expanding the party by asking “who else is in?”

To me, the more the merrier and in this scenario the more is 12 and the merrier is a better college football championship celebration.

Since I’m already seasons ahead, some of the participants may seem unlikely, but for the purpose of outlining my proposal I’ve changed the names to protect the innocent while hopefully providing a workable alternative to the current format.

My concept not only expands the field, it also equalizes scheduling among the Power Five Conferences; rewards conference champions; allows for more non-power five league schools to possibly participate; provides additional revenue; keeps the Bowl system intact; and potentially requires SEC teams to actually travel somewhere to play.

Before I get to the details there are a few caveats to address:

1. I’m a fan of college football not an administrator or official with the NCAA or any of its member institutions.
2. I can operate Microsoft Word.
3. Gerd and Mr. Ed have published other articles from me that, at least in my estimation of their editorial guidelines, “don’t completely suck” so if you’re reading this it must have passed that hurdle.
4. It’s quite possible I’ve overlooked some very critical factors that could derail my entire theory, but that’s never stopped me before.

The Sweeter Sixteen Proposal

All Power Five schools will play eleven regular season games.  These will consist of nine conference games and two non-conference games.  This accomplishes two goals.  First, it levels the field with all P5 teams playing the same number of conference games.  Second, it reduces the regular season by one week potentially reducing the risk of injuries and allowing student athletes to spend more time for academics.

No P5 team will play FCS opponents.  No more Mercer, no more Citadel, no more Directional State games.   I realize these games are key sources of revenue for these FCS schools, but there is more than enough money available to go around and I’d earmark a portion of the revenue from the expanded playoff system for the FCS programs.  This may come from a percentage of ticket sales of playoff games, network rights fees, advertising sales, etc.  Since I’m not too “mathy” I can’t give you an actual revenue projection, but I’m very confident there will be plenty of cash to go around so the smaller schools that sign up for the “slaughter for dollars” games will still get theirs.

After eleven games the Conference Championship participants will be identified.  The two teams involved in the Conference Championship games would play a 12^th game and those games can be held in the sites they currently are—Indy for the Big Ten, Atlanta for the SEC, Charlotte for the ACC, etc.

Following the Conference Championship games, the Playoff Committee will rank and determine the sixteen qualifying teams.  This should be the five champions and eleven “at large” selections.  Many of these may be the losers of the championship games or other teams from the P5 conferences that had successful seasons.  If the P5 conferences got 2 teams each, there’d be room for five more teams and these could come from the group of five and that would allow for teams like UCF, Boise State, etc. who haven’t made it in the past.  It’s possible the P5 teams could take 15 spots but there’d still be room for a team that can’t get in now.

The remaining bowl games get to select their participants as they do today, they just will have fewer teams to choose from, but not enough to significantly impact them.  Most folks don’t know who’s playing in the Belk Bowl or when it is, but we’ll watch anyway, and this plan doesn’t change that.

Once ranked, the 16 teams play each other.  1 plays 16, 2 plays 15 and so on.  The top eight teams are rewarded by getting a home game in the opening round.  This gives them another home game and with higher ticket prices, additional revenue.  It could also set up some very interesting possibilities in terms of “home field advantage” in December.

Let’s say Minnesota wins the 2019 Big Ten Championship and because P.J. Fleck had all Gopher oars rowing as one all season and they finished year 12-0, the Playoff Committee ranked them #1.  The Gophers would host the #16 team in an opening round game and in this scenario, we’ll assume a team like Miami or FSU or LSU or even Coach Saban’s disappointing 9-2 Tide squad finishes ranked 16^th.

They go to Minneapolis to play.  The second Saturday in December.  You’re welcome.

Might that mean #12 USC has to play at #5 Pittsburgh the same weekend?  Yep.  #15 Arizona State at #2 Boston College?  Bingo.  Would #8 UCF actually get to host a game against #9 Oregon State?  Indeed, and that would be a big plus for the program and their fans.

This might be my favorite part of the plan.  Would the big, bad SEC be as big and bad if they had to play really, really important games outside of their geographical footprint?  I don’t know for sure, but I’d like to try it a few times and check the results.  Heck even if they win the games convincingly and reinforce their superiority, won’t it be fun to watch them play in the cold and snow?

The eight winners advance and now all remaining games are played off campus in the New Year’s Six-type sites and the teams get a week off and these games are played between Christmas and New Years as they currently are.  Prior to the season, the sites for the Semis and Championship games will be identified so you rotate the other major bowls—Cotton, Fiesta, Orange, etc. that aren’t hosting the semis or championship games and they get the second-round games.

The four winners advance and those winners then play for the National Championship in the pre-determined sites.  The final two teams will have played 16 games but they will have occurred over about 20 weeks, so there is time for rest and studies which we know is a big concern to university officials at the P5 schools because that’s always something pointed out as a reason the playoffs can’t be expanded.  It works at the other levels and it will work here.

Does the plan care that the National Champion could be 16-0 or 13-3?  It does not.

Does it care about the #17 team?  It does not.

#17 through #70-something will go to bowl games, reward their players with swag and a chance to claim a trophy they can hold high and provide their fans with the opportunity to travel to exotic locations like Shreveport, El Paso, Albuquerque, and Annapolis to cheer on their team exactly as currently happens.

A National Champion will be crowned and the conversations and accusations of “we’re better than those guys” discussions by the fans will go on as they have for years.

The plan has leveled the field with all teams playing the same total number of games and conference games; addressed and tried to better equalize the strength of schedule factor by eliminating the FCS opponents and by sharing the revenue generated through the new structure provide the resources they need to run their athletic programs; allowed the traditional bowls and their host cities to still get games; provided a Cinderella opportunity for the Boise States of the college football world to be a part of things and potentially become the best story of the tournament as happens in March Madness; and we’ve increased the excitement for the fans and quite possibly the television ratings.

All this and requiring teams from warm climates to have team parkas, what more do we need?