The Case for an Eight Team College Football Playoff

Share This Post

franklin

For the second time in the three-year history of the College Football Playoff, we have six teams with valid arguments to make it into the tournament. We have six teams that could easily win a National Championship.

In 2014, it was Alabama, Florida State, Oregon, Ohio State, TCU, and Baylor. 2015 was a little clearer, but when it came down to it, Michigan State got in over Iowa because of its Big Ten Championship win over the Hawkeyes, and Stanford was a distant sixth (though…like this year’s Penn State/Oklahoma, won a major conference).

So, who are the candidates this year?

Alabama – Pretty obvious here. There’s little doubt that Nick Saban’s Tide belongs here, and really, there’s no sense in presenting a case for/against them.

Clemson – Won a stacked ACC (the second best conference in college football this year), beat Louisville, beat Florida State, but where’s the convincing win against a quality opponent? The Tigers struggled with Auburn, Virginia Tech, NC State, and Troy. Are they really head and shoulders above the teams left out? They don’t pass the eye test as one of the four best teams in college football.

Ohio State – In 2014, the Buckeyes got in because they won their conference championship. This year, they didn’t even win their division and they’re in. They lost head-to-head to the Big Ten Champions, and struggled against Northwestern and lowly Michigan State. They barely survived Michigan. Like Clemson, is Ohio State really head and shoulders above the teams left out?

Washington – I’m sorry, but there’s definitely something to the non-conference schedule argument against the Huskies. When you open the season with Rutgers, Idaho, and Portland State, you lose a bit of credibility. Now, the Pac-12 was a really good football conference this year and Washington has some quality wins (Wazzou, Colorado, Utah), but let me ask again – are they really head and shoulders above the teams left out?

Penn State – James Franklin’s boys got screwed. In my opinion, this is the team that has the biggest gripe with the system. They won the best conference in college football, beat Ohio State head-to-head, and finished the season with nine straight wins. Yet, Ohio State gets in over them? Give me a break.

Michigan – 10 wins in what was unequivocally the best conference in college football in 2016 has to count  for something. I understand they lost their two games at the most critical point in the season, but look at the body of work. They started the season with nine straight wins, including a three-game stretch where they played Colorado, Penn State, and Wisconsin consecutively. More so, they never really even had a problem with anyone outside of Iowa and Ohio State. They lost to the Hawkeyes on a field goal as time expired. They lost to the Buckeyes in double overtime. It’s not as if this team was ever out of the equation. You ask me which team in the country has the best chance to take down Alabama, and I say Michigan without hesitation.

And, you know what – I’ll hear your arguments about Oklahoma, too. I don’t think they belong, but I can certainly see why people think they deserve a shot. Won a major conference, 10 wins, competitive in both losses, yadda yadda yadda.

But, this is the biggest problem with CFP. It’s subjective, and it’s not inclusive. Sometimes, winning a conference championship matters. Sometimes, body of work matters. Sometimes, level of competition matters. Sometimes, the eye test matters, but there’s no standard way to earn a bid.

Sure, that creates excitement and unpredictability. It allows ESPN to go on the air for eighteen frickin’ hours to talk about it. So, yeah – Big E(SPN) probably doesn’t want to standardize this and take away that element of excitement.

But, it’s also controversial. When there’s no standard way of getting in, the committee can throw out vague explanations of why a certain team got in over another. Controversy may be great for the television networks, but let’s be honest – it’s a shitty way of determining who the best college football team in the country is.

It’s simple – you have eight spots. You give five to each of the major conference champions (SEC, B10, ACC, Pac-12, and Big 12), you give one spot to the highest ranked ‘Group of 5’ contender, and that leaves you with two wild cards. Get those eight together, and then rank them however  you want, as long as those eight get in.

So, let’s look at the main arguments against an eight team playoff

“It would devalue the regular season.”

Um, to who? The same committee that has already obviously devalued the regular season by allowing Ohio State in the tournament despite losing head-to-head to the champions of the best conference in college football? The same committee that basically says it doesn’t matter who you play in the regular season?

Rutgers. Idaho. Portland State.

That’s basically saying, “We don’t really care who you play out of conference if you win the Pac-12.” So, what’s to stop other major conference teams from scheduling crappy teams? What would happen then? It would devalue the regular season.

Hate to break it to you guys, but the committee will value and devalue whatever is convenient to support their argument. They’ve already demonstrated a devaluation for the regular season when it suits them.

“We can’t add another game to the season.”

I don’t think we should. I think we should get rid of these bogus conference championship games that apparently mean very little. Tell me – what did Alabama, Clemson, Penn State, and Washington do for themselves by playing and winning their conference championships?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Alabama, Clemson, and Washington were already in the top four, and for Penn State, the committee straight up did not care. So, why would any team in contention ever want to play in one of these games?

Win your conference straight up during the regular season (hey – that might help NOT devalue the regular season, too), and the first week in December, you get a national quarter-final game.

“Well, no matter what – there’s always going to be a team left out.” 

Nope. Just….nope. You know who would’ve been the first team out this year under my proposed format? 10-3 Wisconsin. You think people are going to be raising pitchforks to get the Badgers into the CFP? No – there’s absolutely no argument for Wisconsin.

I’ll do you two better. In 2015, that team would’ve been 10-2 Notre Dame. You think people are going to be arguing that Notre Dame should’ve gotten in over 12-1 Iowa or 11-1 Ohio State? No way. Or, how about 2014? The first team out would’ve been Big Ten runner-up: 10-2 Michigan State. Again, no way people are boycotting the CFP over the Spartans being left out.

By painting a clearer picture of how to qualify for the CFP, you take away any subjectivity and weaken any argument for a team that didn’t make it in.

The ‘Group of 5’ spot would limit the number of wild cards to two, and give a fair shot to a team from lesser competition. Look at Western Michigan – they won every game this season and were never once even in consideration for a CFP spot. No, they don’t look like one of the best eight teams in college football, but they’ve earned an opportunity…just like 12-1 Houston in 2015, and 11-2 Boise State in 2014.

If the ‘Group of 5’ has no chance of getting into the playoffs, why should they even try? What’s to stop them from separating and forming their own division? Why shouldn’t they say ‘screw you’ to the big conferences and compete for their own National Championship. I’d sure as shootin’ watch a playoff that consisted of Western Michigan, Navy, Boise State, San Diego State, Houston, South Florida, Appalachian State, and Western Kentucky.

You ask me, I’d have Alabama, Clemson, Penn State, and Washington ranked in that order based on who “earned it,” but I’d say the four best teams in the country are Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State. That’s a problem. It doesn’t add up. It doesn’t make sense. As long as that keeps happening, this system won’t simply won’t be fair.

(1) Alabama vs. (8) Western Michigan
(2) Clemson vs. (7) Michigan
(3) Penn State vs. (6) Oklahoma
(4) Ohio State vs. (5) Washington

This is the only way to get it right.

Stoney Keeley is the editor of the SoBros Network, Tennessee Titans Featured Analyst for Pro Football Spot, Contributor to FanSided’s Bama Hammer, and covers the WWE for WrestlingNews.co. Follow on Twitter @StoneyKeeley@PFSpot@WrestlingNewsCo@Bama_Hammer

Follow us on Twitter @SoBrosNetwork

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Get updates and learn from the best

More To Explore