College football coaches endorse 24-team playoff, eliminating conference title games

Donate To GopherHole
MisterGopher

MisterGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
502
Reaction score
321
Points
63
https://sports.yahoo.com/articles/college-football-coaches-endorse-24-003015550.html

College football coaches are moving to support a 24-team College Football Playoff format.

The American Football Coaches Association (AFCA), a group that represents many prominent college football coaches, reportedly voted last week to support a 24-team playoff format and discontinue conference championship games, per Ross Dellenger of Yahoo Sports. The news comes amid heated discussion about the future of the sport’s postseason, with battle lines being drawn between conferences and their associated television networks in recent weeks.

While the AFCA has no formal authority over the future of the College Football Playoff, its coaches have the ability to influence decision-makers, like the conference commissioners and university presidents who form the CFP’s governance committee.

The most vocal opposition for the 24-team playoff format comes from SEC commissioner Greg Sankey, who has been adamant in support for a 16-team format that would ease the CFP into expansion. Privately, reports have emerged that ESPN executives have also dismissed the 24-team playoff, suggesting alignment between the SEC and its exclusive media rights partner. ESPN, for its part, is guaranteed broadcast rights for any games up to a 14-team format. Beyond that, additional games would be brought to the open market. A smaller format would ensure ESPN retains near-exclusive control over the playoff.

On the other side of the equation are the Big Ten and Fox Sports. Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti has supported the idea of a 24-team playoff, in some form or fashion, since last summer. And last month, Fox Sports CEO Eric Shanks publicly endorsed the 24-team format. Of course, Fox stands to benefit from expansion if it can submit a successful bid for broadcast rights for the additional inventory created by the new format.

Notably, multiple coaches on the AFCA board are members of the SEC, including Oklahoma’s Brent Venables and Vanderbilt’s Clark Lea. It’s not hard to imagine why, either. Easier access to the playoff means better job security for head coached.

At the moment, the SEC is the lone holdout among the power-four conferences, with both the ACC and Big 12 having recently come around to supporting a 24-team model. If enough SEC coaches begin to pressure Sankey, it is possible the conference could eventually accept expansion to 24 teams.
 

Dilute until nobody cares and then what? Spread the games out all over the streaming services and see what happens. Just go to 48 teams and create a tournament as a season for the top 48. Start in June with simmer league and then go till may 15th with winter/spring league, select say 60 teams to playoff until August which overlaps the spring league a little, nobody will notice. Every two years the champ gets a spot in the Super bowl.
 

In 10 years, some "visionary" media executive will roll in, restore the NCAA tournament to 64 teams, restore the bowl season and restore the regional conferences.

They will be showered in bonuses for "fixing" college sports.
 

I think eliminating conference playoffs is a good idea. I think 16 teams in the football playoffs is the right number but 24 gets more Big Ten and SEC teams in and allows the James Madison's and Tulane's to grab a spot as sacrificial lambs to the top seeds without leaving out Vanderbilt and Notre Dame, for instance.
 

I realize this is about more money but haven’t they proven they will just spend more money. Are there other rationalizations for this decision and oh yeah, how do the additional games benefit the student athletes.

Just go to 32 at this point. No byes and associated horse trading by the committee.
 



Considering the college football polls have been around for nearly a century, I would think that 24 is a good number. Being ranked has always been a goal of most programs. It's been a bar that ranks the top 18% of programs in the country. 24 teams is 17% of the FBS teams. Even if you consider 68 teams as Power football. 24 is 35% of that. Pro leagues let in 50%+. NFL is 44%.

It's not crazy to take 24 teams and have a quality playoff season. I agree with the coaches and what they want for the playoff and season.

If NIL leveled the playing field (it didn't) then we should have more teams in the playoffs. With 16-18 team leagues and unbalanced scheduling, more teams is better.
 

Beyond just another money grab I can’t see any reason why anyone would be in favor of this. College football just doesn’t have the league parity that the NFL does where a wildcard can win a superbowl. Outside the top 3-4 teams nobody really has a realistic shot barring about a dozen injuries to a top team the week before.
 

CentralGopher said:
Beyond just another money grab I can’t see any reason why anyone would be in favor of this. College football just doesn’t have the league parity that the NFL does where a wildcard can win a superbowl. Outside the top 3-4 teams nobody really has a realistic shot barring about a dozen injuries to a top team the week before.
Click to expand...
Miami was a 10 seed last year and made it to the championship. The year before was a 8 v 7 championship matchups.

Right now higher seeds seem to be getting a disadvantage with time off/not getting a home game. Hopefully this should get resolved with expansion.
 



pharmacygopher said:
Miami was a 10 seed last year and made it to the championship. The year before was a 8 v 7 championship matchups.

Right now higher seeds seem to be getting a disadvantage with time off/not getting a home game. Hopefully this should get resolved with expansion.
Click to expand...
They began as the third ranked team in the country, went through a few rough games, didn’t get beat in the second half of the season, and played like the 3rd ranked team in the playoffs.
 

7 wild card teams in 56 years (13%)
1 at large has won the national title in two years of a 12 team playoff (50%)

A 7 seed has never been to a Super Bowl, 2 seeds seeds have been to a Super Bowl.
An 8 seed has already won a national title game.


I don’t disagree with your analysis that there aren’t many teams that can realistically win a national title. I do disagree that there are 14 teams in the playoff who can win the Super Bowl. I also disagree if you’re implying the 3-4 teams that can win the CFP are always rated in the top 4.
I also STRONGLY disagree that the purpose of college football is to win a national title.
 

Some guy said:
7 wild card teams in 56 years (13%)
1 at large has won the national title in two years of a 12 team playoff (50%)

A 7 seed has never been to a Super Bowl, 2 seeds seeds have been to a Super Bowl.
An 8 seed has already won a national title game.

I don’t disagree with your analysis that there aren’t many teams that can realistically win a national title. I do disagree that there are 14 teams in the playoff who can win the Super Bowl. I also disagree if you’re implying the 3-4 teams that can win the CFP are always rated in the top 4.
I also STRONGLY disagree that the purpose of college football is to win a national title.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't any NFL Wild Card team be a #9 Seed at minimum currently?

In the NFL the Seeds are doubled because there are #1s, #2s etc for both the AFC & NFC.
 

CentralGopher said:
They began as the third ranked team in the country, went through a few rough games, didn’t get beat in the second half of the season, and played like the 3rd ranked team in the playoffs.
Click to expand...
Aren't you making the point for expansion? Under the old CFP, they were nowhere near making a 4 team playoff even though you're stating they were playing like a top 4 team.
 



Ope3 said:
Wouldn't any NFL Wild Card team be a #9 Seed at minimum currently?

In the NFL the Seeds are doubled because there are #1s, #2s etc for both the AFC & NFC.
Click to expand...
I tried to normalize for that by saying make the Super Bowl rather than win the Super Bowl.
 

Don't have a problem with eliminating the conference Championship Games. I think expanding to 16 teams is the way to go. I don't like the idea of 24 teams. To me, it is more of an accomplishment to make the 16 team playoffs. Expanding to 24 you lose a little of that special feeling. It's all about money I get it. But going from 4 to 12 has been great. Expanding to 16 makes sense. Expanding to 24 is too much.
 

If it expands to 24, we'll likely see some teams holding out players during rivalry week to rest of for the CFP.

Go Gophers!!
 

Lifeleadership said:
Don't have a problem with eliminating the conference Championship Games. I think expanding to 16 teams is the way to go. I don't like the idea of 24 teams. To me, it is more of an accomplishment to make the 16 team playoffs. Expanding to 24 you lose a little of that special feeling. It's all about money I get it. But going from 4 to 12 has been great. Expanding to 16 makes sense. Expanding to 24 is too much.
Click to expand...
16 with a straight up bracket. Top 16 as well, not some combination slots for conference champions.
 

PMWinSTP said:
16 with a straight up bracket. Top 16 as well, not some combination slots for conference champions.
Click to expand...
I'm okay with 24. I'm assuming top 8 get a bye which continues to reward regular season games. Other 16 play at home sites, then the following week those 8 teams with a bye get a home site game as well.
 

So at 24 teams, is every conference champ getting a bid to the tournament, or how that going to work. Adds more P4 teams I’m sure, but how many of the 10 conferences will have auto-bids?

5 games to a title is a lot, not a huge fan of that. But 95% of the time, champion will play 4 games. I guess better access for all conferences lifts the sport.
 

pharmacygopher said:
Aren't you making the point for expansion? Under the old CFP, they were nowhere near making a 4 team playoff even though you're stating they were playing like a top 4 team.
Click to expand...
No, I’m saying Miami wasn’t really a Cinderella story to begin with.
 

Some guy said:
7 wild card teams in 56 years (13%)
1 at large has won the national title in two years of a 12 team playoff (50%)

A 7 seed has never been to a Super Bowl, 2 seeds seeds have been to a Super Bowl.
An 8 seed has already won a national title game.


I don’t disagree with your analysis that there aren’t many teams that can realistically win a national title. I do disagree that there are 14 teams in the playoff who can win the Super Bowl. I also disagree if you’re implying the 3-4 teams that can win the CFP are always rated in the top 4.
I also STRONGLY disagree that the purpose of college football is to win a national title.
Click to expand...
What is the purpose if not to win a national title?
 

disco said:
What is the purpose if not to win a national title?
Click to expand...
You’re seriously on a gopher football message board in 2026 and think there is no purpose other than to win a national title?

This is an insane takes. There are hundreds if not thousands of reasons to watch college football apart from your team winning a national title.
 






Wild to me that ESPN has such a large voice.
The CFP is owned by the conferences (and Notre Dame). Youd think they’d do what they want then sell to the highest bidder.

Meanwhile, somehow ESPN has bamboozled college football into letting ESPN act as defacto college football commissioner and playoff selection committee.

If I’m the CFP. I don’t even want the games on espn. I want them on network. Even for a slightly lower bid it would be beneficial to be on multiple networks that are network TV for the cross promotional opportunities leading to long term more money.



And I might even agree with ESPN’s position on the issue
 
Last edited:

Some guy said:


Wild to me that ESPN has such a large voice.
The CFP is owned by the conferences (and Notre Dame). Youd think they’d do what they want then sell to the highest bidder.

Meanwhile, somehow ESPN has bamboozled college football into letting ESPN act as defacto college football commissioner and playoff selection committee.

If I’m the CFP. I don’t even want the games on espn. I want them on network. Even for a slightly lower bid it would be beneficial to be on multiple networks that are network TV for the cross promotional opportunities leading to long term more money.



And I might even agree with ESPN’s position on the issue
Click to expand...
exactly! AND... to be the defacto college football commissioner while being in bed financially with one of the conferences is beyond insulting.
 

Some guy said:
You’re seriously on a gopher football message board in 2026 and think there is no purpose other than to win a national title?

This is an insane takes. There are hundreds if not thousands of reasons to watch college football apart from your team winning a national title.
Click to expand...
You said you STRONGLY disagree. Why? Shouldn't making the playoff and having a shot be the goal of every team? It's why I so adamantly feel every conference champion should be represented in a playoff. Otherwise, what's the point? Sure, not every team - hell, most teams - don't have a legitimate shot every year, but the hypothetical path should always be there.
 

disco said:
You said you STRONGLY disagree. Why? Shouldn't making the playoff and having a shot be the goal of every team? It's why I so adamantly feel every conference champion should be represented in a playoff. Otherwise, what's the point? Sure, not every team - hell, most teams - don't have a legitimate shot every year, but the hypothetical path should always be there.
Click to expand...
You said what’s the purpose if not for X
Implying there aren’t other purposes beyond the national title

May have read your post wrong
 

I still think 12 is just fine. The issue with the top teams not advancing often is that they have such a long break between games. Almost 4 weeks off is too much. That's a big disadvantage.

I would add a 13th regular season game instead, play the 1st round the week after, and quarterfinals the week after that. Then the semifinals be around New Years with the championship a week or so later.

This past season it would have looked something like this:

Dec 6: last regular season game
Dec 12-13: 1st round
Dec 19-20: Quarterfinals
Jan 1: Semifinals
Jan 10: Championship

The longest break anyone ever has is 2 weeks. You could do the same with 16 teams, but that would take away much of the advantage of being a top seed.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom