There is no perfect playoff system. In the four team playoff, the number five and six schools always complained about being slighted. In the new 12 school playoff, numbers 13 and 14 are going to cry, and so is numbers 29 and 30 in a 28 team system. Let’s wait and see how well, or not, the 12 team system works out before the crying and posturing begins.
It’s the same as the NCAA Tournament! Eventually the dilution reaches a threshold. I think the way to even things out is to allow more conference champions into the tournament/playoff. The NCAA basketball tourney makes money so why can’t the football thing do the same with AQs for the non power 4 conferences?
I agree with you. Allow more conference champions into the playoffs. Big 10, Big 12, SEC, ACC, AAC, a rebuilt PAC 12. Expand the playoff to 16 schools, and add champions from the Mountain West, Conference USA and the MAC. Let these schools from these smaller conferences have a chance to make their case that they belong.
None of this is going to happen. I would make a case for a 64 team playoff, like in basketball, and shorten the regular season to 10 games. That way almost, everyone with a winning record in FBS has a shot. The current bowl games would be incorporated in this playoff process so they would not get left out. In fact, viewing interest will be increased for marginal bowl games like Motor City in Detroit if they are a potential pathway to the national Championship. But the SEC and B1G will have none of this. They are trying to monopolize college football and keep all the money for themselves. They want only their winning teams in a playoff and exclude everyone else. This way, the rich get richer and the poor get a lot poorer. Just like the leaders of those conferences, people like Phil Knight, want it. If there was a 64 team playoff over the course of late November, December and early January, there are too many opportunities for a team to be upset along the way and denied from the really big payday of the National Championship. Its all about the money, after all
28 is way too big too. I honestly think 12-14 is about perfect. You have everyone who can even possibly remotely win the title included, and enough others that 24-30 teams are still alive in November
Those teams will all either have 2-3 losses and/or not be a true national title contender anyway
The reality is there are only 4 schools outside those 2 conferences who are equipped to win a national title. That said, nationwide representation is important so there will likely always be a spot reserved for three champions of the Big12, ACC, and the best G6
I see this going to 14 in 2026 and holding there through the contract
I’d you want the NFL, watch the NFL. CFB is a very different sport.
NFL has an Extremely high level of parity 1-32. FBS is two completely different levels of football (3 if you really want to be honest about it) and the disparity of quality and talent in each of those levels is much wider than the NFL.
Number 28 would lose by 50 to number 1. We don’t need a whole round of those games to tell us what we already know after 12-13 games
I still say let the Big 10 & SEC run the top of football as long as the rest of the schools get a share of the playoff (like the NCAA bball tourney). I'd go to 14 team CFP with 6 conference champs guaranteed and only the top 2 (most likely SEC & B10) getting byes. Yes those conferences will also get more spots and and as long as money gets shared reasonably all boats will float. Specifically I don't see the SEC wanting to chnage anything since they have both top level Fball & a regional all sports conference,
More importantly use this opportunity to get the rBig 10 & ACC in the other sports back to regional conferences. I still say the new PAC 12 should start by working with the Big 10 to get their 4 schools back for the other sports. I believe those 4 schools as well as their eastern Big10 counterparts who are travelling up to 3000 miles cross country realizes this is already a burdon and will get old soon. So lets fix it by separating FBall. For example watching those poor Maryland & Rutgers VBall teams having to take the NW swing to get beaten by the Ducks and Huskies did not look like fun for those athletes, especially when their parents can't even travel with them. It's obvious to all this is not going to work long term. Football is different, with less games and less trips and only one opponent per weekend. And that is where the money Is, If the Big 10 is smart it does this so it also gives them more room to take more eastern top level FB teams (like FSU, Miami, &/or Clemson) which they couldn't do wiith all sports..
For the PAC that would mean 12 in the conference now. (7 all sports, 5 all but football). Then get one or more of the ACC non full revenue teams recent adds (SMU, Cal, or Stanford) to come as all sports members. Best if they got all 3 or evne both old Pac schools. The PAC12 could return as an excellent conference, with good media contracts and lots of good brands, even the ones without football. Just my opinion
My concern for 24 is that it will continue to exclude the non P2 schools. They have almost enough programs in the B1G and SEC to hold their own 24 team playoff. Maybe 6 or 8 teams from those two conferences and then fill it out with 3 or 4 from the B12 and ACC. That still excludes half of FBS football who will never have any chance of playing in the CFP. That will kill any chance of recruiting a championship team. As it stands now, and Indiana is the school proving this, is any school who has a shot at the CFP by being in one of the blessed conferences can get the players it needs to do so if it can raise the money to buy the needed players. But, if the door is closed by some arbitrary line drawn through the middle of the FBS, then that ceases to be a possibility. NAIA teams could never compete for the CFP since they aren't allowed in the door, no matter now much money they might raise to buy players under NIL rules. Why close the door on half the FBS, many which have proud traditions on their side? You seem to be arguing to exclude any team not in the P4 from ever participating in the CFP (and no, I am not impressed with one berth allotted to the bottom half of FBS)
Because if the format is expanded, the two conferences controlling the CFP will demand most of that expansion goes to them. Make the CFP bigger than the two schools winning teams and they will not be able to exert that force. Really, a higher authority, like the NCAA, should be controlling this, like the commissioner of the NFL does its rules. Someone needs to be unbiased to make the right decisions for everyone, not just a handful of randomly selected and self appointed "top schools". I like free markets, but college sports are more than a free market. Universities are not independent businesses. Most are public owned.
Yet, most public universities look out for their own self interest in a variety of endeavors rather than participate in a kumbaya equity vision designed to make less fortunate feel better about themselves. The right decisions for everyone can lead to mediocracy in total.
I completely agree. Semi-pro football and basketball do not belong embedded in a university, especially a public school with its inherent "selfish" interests that are completely unaligned with sports. Spin out revenue sports as just a long term, privately held, business interest. This is done all the time with businesses born of a university's IP coming from research done by faculty. The IP is licensed to a business startup with possibly some equity investment from the university's investment fund. As the business develops, the university is rewarded. No reason sports can't operate in the same way with the "tradition" of the university the IP and the school's alumni, students and faculty a great built-in customer base.
Would be interesting to know more details/facts about Indiana. The new coach brought 13 players with him from James Madison. I believe 8 are starting. Did they enter the portal and choose Indiana because of him and his staff, or because Indiana had NIL money?
I don't think any of them were above a 3-star recruiting status. 14 of 27 transfers have started at least one game, and several lead a position's statistical category at their position. I imagine with so many of them from James Madison (a good FCS program) the learning curve for playbook and coaching expectations was minimal. The obvious comparison is Coach Prime's first year at Colorado - and Cignetti has excelled. Reportedly there wasn't a lot of NIL money to attract those guys, but since the zero defeats start to this season the Hoosier fans are feeding the NIL now generously....which should help in 2025 and beyond. Indiana's schedule has been "soft" based on opponent W-L records, BUT they have won by big margins. They haven't played "footsie" with that schedule.
I count (4) 4 stars either recruited (1) or transferred (3) in 2024 and (6) from the 2023 transfer class. I don't think you go undefeated in the B1G without at least a handful of studs. Oregon State never needed 15 or 20, but always had 3 or 4 the past few years, and also back in the Erickson regime. Until their team average got above 85 on 247 Sports, they weren't competitive. https://247sports.com/college/indiana/Season/2024-Football/Commits/
Does anyone think a 4 or 5 star athlete, who can command a good payday, is going to ignore getting paid out of loyalty of following a coach? All the top players are playing for the money, not for an education in a certain school
Agreed about quality, depth. But #1 in Basketball is way better than #64 every year. The regular season would need to be shortened to accommodate a 64 team playoff, which gives the most teams the most opportunities. 64 gives half the 134 team FBS a shot meaning a winning record, just like the NFL. 64 teams in single elimination requires a 6 game playoff. If the regular season is reduced to 10 then that is a max of 16 games, about the same as current for a few teams that play 12 games, a conference championship and a national bowl game.
No one thinks about injuries in college football. There are kids playing that want to try their luck/skill at the next level. 64 team playoff would mean more injuries and potential future pro careers ended.
No, some teams will play 16 games the way the schedules are currently structured. No difference. There are four games to win the CFP. There are twelve games in the regular season. What about conference championships? There will be more than 16 games for some teams in 2024
Not if the games are playoff games and actually mean something. You win and you advance and might win the national championship. Bowl games mean nothing which is why so many players sit out.
The point you made was "16 games are too many". The point I made is that this year, in 2024, at least two teams will play 16 games. I am not sure how I missed it. If you don't think there should be a CFP, well, good luck with that. Again, just follow the money
I think he's factoring in the fact that both of Georgia's games against Alabama and Texas were true road games, respectively, whereas both of Oregon's games against Boise State and Ohio State were at home. The net point differential in those games (+8 for Georgia, +4 for Oregon) is essentially a wash.
The beauty of the 12-team playoff is that it will ultimately be settled on the field, unlike in the past when it would have been up to AP voters and BCS computers.
This is true...the AP poll means nothing and is not worth worry about or writing about. Wait until the CFP poll comes out but even then until the season is over and the final poll is out.
I agree with coach. The bowl system has become a joke. The stadiums are empty and the kids don't really care. I'm all for expanding the playoffs, but not if it means getting more 3rd tier SEC and Big ten teams in. Let all the G-5 champs in, then back fill. Great for everyone! GO DUCKS!
I agree with Coach Dickert that it's time to do away with bowls unless they are directly involved with the CFP. Many players don't want to play in them anymore and most fans are becoming increasingly apathetic about them. It's time to move on.
For comparison's sake, right now the FCS has 129 teams and a 24-team playoff bracket. There are 134 FBS teams, so by that basis I am advocating for doubling the size of this year and next year's FBS CFP bracket. Essentially, if you are ranked after 12 regular season games and conference championship weekend, you're in. Top 8 get a first-round bye into the round of 16. Seeds 9-24 play each other in the round of 32.
The college bowl season of 1983-1984 there were sixteen bowl games. You had to be pretty good as well as deserving to be awarded a bowl bid. The number of games has slowly, but have steadily increased, to the 43 games we have today.
I blame the gluttony of bowl games on greed. The NCAA, conferences, networks, corporate America, and the universities themselves. Greed has broken the bowl system. Using the most traditional bowl games as playoff games is the best way of honoring bowl history. The rest are participation trophies.🏆
The way we get to ~24 playoff spots in FBS football is recognize that it already is two different levels of football masquerading as one
Start a 12-16 team playoff for the group of 6 to crown their own champion. There is the expansion some want and we end up with a ton of more competitive games versus lumping them all together, and the G6 teams can actually play for a national title instead of just a hat on the table and a loss
“I heavily weigh who you play, where you play, and how you do,” Wilner told me. “So strength of schedule and strength of competition matters a lot to me..."
Well then, if Wilner has a Heisman vote then I assume Jeanty would not be No. 1 on his list?
Dickert makes a lot of sense. Expand the playoffs a little, but not to the extent that everyone gets in. Everyone does not deserve a shot. Playoffs should be a reward, but not be monopolized by two conferences.
Hope Wazzu does not get stuck in the Holiday Bowl. I love San Diego, but the turf is problematic. Wazzu needs to let its athletes run; hard for them to win in a slugfest.
The CFPBM was ready to expand to 16 teams earlier this year. It's only a matter of time before it happens and then it's 24 teams, 28 teams, 32, etc. Dickert is right.
I've got a crazy idea. What if we just had 10 conferences and only the conference champions and 2nd place teams, plus the 4 highest rated schools that didn't finish top 2 in their conference made the playoffs? You know, actually earned it on the field instead of getting in because of someone's opinion, regardless of results on the field. Now there's a novel idea. What could've been that just got pissed away out of greed.
Yes, I realize that. Hence the sarcasm and then the last statement about pissing it all away due to greed. Even up to a few years ago this solution was a no brainer, except the SEC and Big 18 were never into a fair playing field. Hence the POS system we have now that has relegated over 75% of all FBS programs irrelevant before the season even begins and it's only going to get worse.
I subscribe to the Seattle Times ( which basically reprints Washington Post and New York Times articles). Wilner’s articles are printed to offset the ST’s lame Husky Homers on their equally lame sports department. The majority of reader comments regarding Wilner’s writing believe he hates the Husky’s and loves the Ducks. I think his stated reasoning holds up. Until someone lifts up the trophy as the confetti falls, it’s all opinion.
Funny how fans perceive media bias. Someone once compiled a collection of quotes from college football fans claiming ESPN hates their team. It was hilarious.
Any forecast on what impact lies ahead for the Oregon football program upon the death of its primary benefactor, Phil Knight? Can Oregon remain an elite competitive program w/o his generosity?
28 teams? Why not 64? Why not 128? Or how about every team gets a participation trophy and that way no one is offended. Twelve teams is good. Let’s see how that goes over the next decade or so. Four teams were good before NIL changed the landscape.
Conference title games are important. Look at the current ACC. Miami is #5 in the AP, but Clemson is currently a top the conference. I have a strong feeling that if Clemson and Miami face off in the conference championship, Clemson will open the eyes of all the people who don’t see the Canes having the softest schedule this year. These conference championships are vital for the winner to get a first round bye. And now that the Pac12 is no longer a power conference, the four remaining power conferences (Big10, SEC, ACC, & Big12) should all produce one bye game playoff team.
Also, John, you said a few articles ago that you have a friend who votes in the AP poll. Can you find out their reasoning for Miami being #5 having played no ranked teams and barely squeaking by bad teams like Cal and VT? Indiana should be ranked higher than the Canes as they whooped Nebraska and beat up a decent UW team.
With the exceptions of the major ones, which are now part of the College Football Playoff, college bowl games are stupid and pointless. Really, who cares about an 8-4 team from the ACC facing a 9-3 team from the Big 12 besides fans of the schools involved? Those games are basically just late-December filler for ESPN. Elite players don't even play in the games anymore because they understandably don't want to risk losing the millions they'd earn in the NFL. Other players leave via the transfer portal before the games are even played, leaving benchwarmers to play in their place (see Ben Gulbranson starting for Oregon State against Notre Dame in last year's Sun Bowl). I like Dickert's idea: If college football wants to have elite players in its showcase postseason games, it should get rid of the bowl system and conference championship games and go with a 28-team playoff in what was formerly the Football Bowl Subdivision.
There is no perfect playoff system. In the four team playoff, the number five and six schools always complained about being slighted. In the new 12 school playoff, numbers 13 and 14 are going to cry, and so is numbers 29 and 30 in a 28 team system. Let’s wait and see how well, or not, the 12 team system works out before the crying and posturing begins.
It’s the same as the NCAA Tournament! Eventually the dilution reaches a threshold. I think the way to even things out is to allow more conference champions into the tournament/playoff. The NCAA basketball tourney makes money so why can’t the football thing do the same with AQs for the non power 4 conferences?
I agree with you. Allow more conference champions into the playoffs. Big 10, Big 12, SEC, ACC, AAC, a rebuilt PAC 12. Expand the playoff to 16 schools, and add champions from the Mountain West, Conference USA and the MAC. Let these schools from these smaller conferences have a chance to make their case that they belong.
If they get blown out in the first round, so what? I like the idea of a Cinderella in college football.
We all fell in love with Boise State after they upset Oklahoma in that Fiesta Bowl game…
It’s Landon Donovan, by the way.
Thanks for the careful eye.
None of this is going to happen. I would make a case for a 64 team playoff, like in basketball, and shorten the regular season to 10 games. That way almost, everyone with a winning record in FBS has a shot. The current bowl games would be incorporated in this playoff process so they would not get left out. In fact, viewing interest will be increased for marginal bowl games like Motor City in Detroit if they are a potential pathway to the national Championship. But the SEC and B1G will have none of this. They are trying to monopolize college football and keep all the money for themselves. They want only their winning teams in a playoff and exclude everyone else. This way, the rich get richer and the poor get a lot poorer. Just like the leaders of those conferences, people like Phil Knight, want it. If there was a 64 team playoff over the course of late November, December and early January, there are too many opportunities for a team to be upset along the way and denied from the really big payday of the National Championship. Its all about the money, after all
64 is too big, IMO. The No. 64 team in football is not like the No. 64 team in hoops.
28 is way too big too. I honestly think 12-14 is about perfect. You have everyone who can even possibly remotely win the title included, and enough others that 24-30 teams are still alive in November
my only issue with 12... is how SEC/Big Ten dominant it will be with some teams in the 13-15 range that are interesting. Would 16 work?
Those teams will all either have 2-3 losses and/or not be a true national title contender anyway
The reality is there are only 4 schools outside those 2 conferences who are equipped to win a national title. That said, nationwide representation is important so there will likely always be a spot reserved for three champions of the Big12, ACC, and the best G6
I see this going to 14 in 2026 and holding there through the contract
In the NFL, 14 out of 32 teams qualify for playoffs, or 43% of overall teams.
What Dickert suggested is the same 43%. There are 65 Power 5 NCAA football teams and 28 to playoffs is 43% of overall.
If the 43% formula is good for NFL, why isn’t it good for CFB?
I’d you want the NFL, watch the NFL. CFB is a very different sport.
NFL has an Extremely high level of parity 1-32. FBS is two completely different levels of football (3 if you really want to be honest about it) and the disparity of quality and talent in each of those levels is much wider than the NFL.
Number 28 would lose by 50 to number 1. We don’t need a whole round of those games to tell us what we already know after 12-13 games
I still say let the Big 10 & SEC run the top of football as long as the rest of the schools get a share of the playoff (like the NCAA bball tourney). I'd go to 14 team CFP with 6 conference champs guaranteed and only the top 2 (most likely SEC & B10) getting byes. Yes those conferences will also get more spots and and as long as money gets shared reasonably all boats will float. Specifically I don't see the SEC wanting to chnage anything since they have both top level Fball & a regional all sports conference,
More importantly use this opportunity to get the rBig 10 & ACC in the other sports back to regional conferences. I still say the new PAC 12 should start by working with the Big 10 to get their 4 schools back for the other sports. I believe those 4 schools as well as their eastern Big10 counterparts who are travelling up to 3000 miles cross country realizes this is already a burdon and will get old soon. So lets fix it by separating FBall. For example watching those poor Maryland & Rutgers VBall teams having to take the NW swing to get beaten by the Ducks and Huskies did not look like fun for those athletes, especially when their parents can't even travel with them. It's obvious to all this is not going to work long term. Football is different, with less games and less trips and only one opponent per weekend. And that is where the money Is, If the Big 10 is smart it does this so it also gives them more room to take more eastern top level FB teams (like FSU, Miami, &/or Clemson) which they couldn't do wiith all sports..
For the PAC that would mean 12 in the conference now. (7 all sports, 5 all but football). Then get one or more of the ACC non full revenue teams recent adds (SMU, Cal, or Stanford) to come as all sports members. Best if they got all 3 or evne both old Pac schools. The PAC12 could return as an excellent conference, with good media contracts and lots of good brands, even the ones without football. Just my opinion
There is no way they’re going to add an extra conference champion bid. Zero chance.
Also no way the big ten schools are gonna rejoin the pac
We can always dream that commom sense will prevail.
My concern for 24 is that it will continue to exclude the non P2 schools. They have almost enough programs in the B1G and SEC to hold their own 24 team playoff. Maybe 6 or 8 teams from those two conferences and then fill it out with 3 or 4 from the B12 and ACC. That still excludes half of FBS football who will never have any chance of playing in the CFP. That will kill any chance of recruiting a championship team. As it stands now, and Indiana is the school proving this, is any school who has a shot at the CFP by being in one of the blessed conferences can get the players it needs to do so if it can raise the money to buy the needed players. But, if the door is closed by some arbitrary line drawn through the middle of the FBS, then that ceases to be a possibility. NAIA teams could never compete for the CFP since they aren't allowed in the door, no matter now much money they might raise to buy players under NIL rules. Why close the door on half the FBS, many which have proud traditions on their side? You seem to be arguing to exclude any team not in the P4 from ever participating in the CFP (and no, I am not impressed with one berth allotted to the bottom half of FBS)
12 team includes non-P2 schools, so why would a 24 or 28 not?
Right now at least a dozen non P2 schools are alive and well in the playoff hunt.
Because if the format is expanded, the two conferences controlling the CFP will demand most of that expansion goes to them. Make the CFP bigger than the two schools winning teams and they will not be able to exert that force. Really, a higher authority, like the NCAA, should be controlling this, like the commissioner of the NFL does its rules. Someone needs to be unbiased to make the right decisions for everyone, not just a handful of randomly selected and self appointed "top schools". I like free markets, but college sports are more than a free market. Universities are not independent businesses. Most are public owned.
Yet, most public universities look out for their own self interest in a variety of endeavors rather than participate in a kumbaya equity vision designed to make less fortunate feel better about themselves. The right decisions for everyone can lead to mediocracy in total.
I completely agree. Semi-pro football and basketball do not belong embedded in a university, especially a public school with its inherent "selfish" interests that are completely unaligned with sports. Spin out revenue sports as just a long term, privately held, business interest. This is done all the time with businesses born of a university's IP coming from research done by faculty. The IP is licensed to a business startup with possibly some equity investment from the university's investment fund. As the business develops, the university is rewarded. No reason sports can't operate in the same way with the "tradition" of the university the IP and the school's alumni, students and faculty a great built-in customer base.
Would be interesting to know more details/facts about Indiana. The new coach brought 13 players with him from James Madison. I believe 8 are starting. Did they enter the portal and choose Indiana because of him and his staff, or because Indiana had NIL money?
My understanding is both
I don't think any of them were above a 3-star recruiting status. 14 of 27 transfers have started at least one game, and several lead a position's statistical category at their position. I imagine with so many of them from James Madison (a good FCS program) the learning curve for playbook and coaching expectations was minimal. The obvious comparison is Coach Prime's first year at Colorado - and Cignetti has excelled. Reportedly there wasn't a lot of NIL money to attract those guys, but since the zero defeats start to this season the Hoosier fans are feeding the NIL now generously....which should help in 2025 and beyond. Indiana's schedule has been "soft" based on opponent W-L records, BUT they have won by big margins. They haven't played "footsie" with that schedule.
I count (4) 4 stars either recruited (1) or transferred (3) in 2024 and (6) from the 2023 transfer class. I don't think you go undefeated in the B1G without at least a handful of studs. Oregon State never needed 15 or 20, but always had 3 or 4 the past few years, and also back in the Erickson regime. Until their team average got above 85 on 247 Sports, they weren't competitive. https://247sports.com/college/indiana/Season/2024-Football/Commits/
Does anyone think a 4 or 5 star athlete, who can command a good payday, is going to ignore getting paid out of loyalty of following a coach? All the top players are playing for the money, not for an education in a certain school
Agreed about quality, depth. But #1 in Basketball is way better than #64 every year. The regular season would need to be shortened to accommodate a 64 team playoff, which gives the most teams the most opportunities. 64 gives half the 134 team FBS a shot meaning a winning record, just like the NFL. 64 teams in single elimination requires a 6 game playoff. If the regular season is reduced to 10 then that is a max of 16 games, about the same as current for a few teams that play 12 games, a conference championship and a national bowl game.
No one thinks about injuries in college football. There are kids playing that want to try their luck/skill at the next level. 64 team playoff would mean more injuries and potential future pro careers ended.
No, some teams will play 16 games the way the schedules are currently structured. No difference. There are four games to win the CFP. There are twelve games in the regular season. What about conference championships? There will be more than 16 games for some teams in 2024
You missed the point. Also, with more games, more potential nfl players will sit out.
Not if the games are playoff games and actually mean something. You win and you advance and might win the national championship. Bowl games mean nothing which is why so many players sit out.
Not if the playoff games carry bonus checks, like in the NFL. These kids aren't sitting out a game that gives them a $25K bonus
The point you made was "16 games are too many". The point I made is that this year, in 2024, at least two teams will play 16 games. I am not sure how I missed it. If you don't think there should be a CFP, well, good luck with that. Again, just follow the money
The other culprit in this 12 team playoff and the realignment of conferences, which excludes many from the playoffs is Disney/ESPN/ABC. $$$
"Their performance in big games has been better than Oregon's". Well, let's look at that...
In Oregon's 2 biggest games, Boise and Ohio State, Oregon is 2-0.
In Georgia's 2 biggest games, Alabama and Texas, Georgia is 1-1.
Who performed better?
I think he's factoring in the fact that both of Georgia's games against Alabama and Texas were true road games, respectively, whereas both of Oregon's games against Boise State and Ohio State were at home. The net point differential in those games (+8 for Georgia, +4 for Oregon) is essentially a wash.
The beauty of the 12-team playoff is that it will ultimately be settled on the field, unlike in the past when it would have been up to AP voters and BCS computers.
You're probably right, and what's most important is, Wilner's vote, and the entire AP poll, mean absolutely nothing.
This is true...the AP poll means nothing and is not worth worry about or writing about. Wait until the CFP poll comes out but even then until the season is over and the final poll is out.
Apparently to Wilner a good loss is bettter than a good win
Why not eliminate the regular season and give every game playoff status?
Think of the possibilities!
GreatStuff John
GO DAWGS 🙏🏼
I agree with coach. The bowl system has become a joke. The stadiums are empty and the kids don't really care. I'm all for expanding the playoffs, but not if it means getting more 3rd tier SEC and Big ten teams in. Let all the G-5 champs in, then back fill. Great for everyone! GO DUCKS!
Yes, the formerly important Fiesta Bowl last year with Liberty was a joke.
I agree with Coach Dickert that it's time to do away with bowls unless they are directly involved with the CFP. Many players don't want to play in them anymore and most fans are becoming increasingly apathetic about them. It's time to move on.
For comparison's sake, right now the FCS has 129 teams and a 24-team playoff bracket. There are 134 FBS teams, so by that basis I am advocating for doubling the size of this year and next year's FBS CFP bracket. Essentially, if you are ranked after 12 regular season games and conference championship weekend, you're in. Top 8 get a first-round bye into the round of 16. Seeds 9-24 play each other in the round of 32.
The college bowl season of 1983-1984 there were sixteen bowl games. You had to be pretty good as well as deserving to be awarded a bowl bid. The number of games has slowly, but have steadily increased, to the 43 games we have today.
I blame the gluttony of bowl games on greed. The NCAA, conferences, networks, corporate America, and the universities themselves. Greed has broken the bowl system. Using the most traditional bowl games as playoff games is the best way of honoring bowl history. The rest are participation trophies.🏆
The way we get to ~24 playoff spots in FBS football is recognize that it already is two different levels of football masquerading as one
Start a 12-16 team playoff for the group of 6 to crown their own champion. There is the expansion some want and we end up with a ton of more competitive games versus lumping them all together, and the G6 teams can actually play for a national title instead of just a hat on the table and a loss
I like the idea of eliminating the conference title games. Seem superfluous with the expanded playoffs.
“I heavily weigh who you play, where you play, and how you do,” Wilner told me. “So strength of schedule and strength of competition matters a lot to me..."
Well then, if Wilner has a Heisman vote then I assume Jeanty would not be No. 1 on his list?
Dickert makes a lot of sense. Expand the playoffs a little, but not to the extent that everyone gets in. Everyone does not deserve a shot. Playoffs should be a reward, but not be monopolized by two conferences.
Hope Wazzu does not get stuck in the Holiday Bowl. I love San Diego, but the turf is problematic. Wazzu needs to let its athletes run; hard for them to win in a slugfest.
Go Cougs!
The CFPBM was ready to expand to 16 teams earlier this year. It's only a matter of time before it happens and then it's 24 teams, 28 teams, 32, etc. Dickert is right.
I've got a crazy idea. What if we just had 10 conferences and only the conference champions and 2nd place teams, plus the 4 highest rated schools that didn't finish top 2 in their conference made the playoffs? You know, actually earned it on the field instead of getting in because of someone's opinion, regardless of results on the field. Now there's a novel idea. What could've been that just got pissed away out of greed.
If the conferences were close to balanced this could work. However, they aren’t even remotely close.
Yes, I realize that. Hence the sarcasm and then the last statement about pissing it all away due to greed. Even up to a few years ago this solution was a no brainer, except the SEC and Big 18 were never into a fair playing field. Hence the POS system we have now that has relegated over 75% of all FBS programs irrelevant before the season even begins and it's only going to get worse.
There’s more parity at the top of the sport this season than we’ve had in decades
I think it could work. Bowl games would have to compete (and maybe pay) to be playoff host sites.
Agreed, the current bowl system is games that largely are opportunities for back-ups to get playing time these days.
Most bowl games would not have to pay anything since half of the bowl games are owned by ESPN.
Wilner hates the Ducks!
Matt,
I subscribe to the Seattle Times ( which basically reprints Washington Post and New York Times articles). Wilner’s articles are printed to offset the ST’s lame Husky Homers on their equally lame sports department. The majority of reader comments regarding Wilner’s writing believe he hates the Husky’s and loves the Ducks. I think his stated reasoning holds up. Until someone lifts up the trophy as the confetti falls, it’s all opinion.
Funny how fans perceive media bias. Someone once compiled a collection of quotes from college football fans claiming ESPN hates their team. It was hilarious.
Woodburn,
Exactly!
https://www.cornnation.com/2014/12/14/7351623/espns-secret-hate-list-revealed
That is funny!! I got a kick out of the comments regarding Anderson from Wisconsin to Oregon State. Hard to believe that was 10 years ago.
Any forecast on what impact lies ahead for the Oregon football program upon the death of its primary benefactor, Phil Knight? Can Oregon remain an elite competitive program w/o his generosity?
Without Phil's money and without the Nike connection and the loss of his leadership, Oregon reverts back to the 1995 version of the Ducks pretty fast.
I believe that Phil Knight will leave the Oregon athletic department with a nice big endowment.
Which if managed well, can last for a very long time.
Good luck
Don’t worry. Oregon will be just fine
Orangie is just full of hope and praying for the collapse of the Ducks. It couldn’t happen soon enough to suit him.
28 teams? Why not 64? Why not 128? Or how about every team gets a participation trophy and that way no one is offended. Twelve teams is good. Let’s see how that goes over the next decade or so. Four teams were good before NIL changed the landscape.
Conference title games are important. Look at the current ACC. Miami is #5 in the AP, but Clemson is currently a top the conference. I have a strong feeling that if Clemson and Miami face off in the conference championship, Clemson will open the eyes of all the people who don’t see the Canes having the softest schedule this year. These conference championships are vital for the winner to get a first round bye. And now that the Pac12 is no longer a power conference, the four remaining power conferences (Big10, SEC, ACC, & Big12) should all produce one bye game playoff team.
Also, John, you said a few articles ago that you have a friend who votes in the AP poll. Can you find out their reasoning for Miami being #5 having played no ranked teams and barely squeaking by bad teams like Cal and VT? Indiana should be ranked higher than the Canes as they whooped Nebraska and beat up a decent UW team.
Thanks for your articles, kind sir.
With the exceptions of the major ones, which are now part of the College Football Playoff, college bowl games are stupid and pointless. Really, who cares about an 8-4 team from the ACC facing a 9-3 team from the Big 12 besides fans of the schools involved? Those games are basically just late-December filler for ESPN. Elite players don't even play in the games anymore because they understandably don't want to risk losing the millions they'd earn in the NFL. Other players leave via the transfer portal before the games are even played, leaving benchwarmers to play in their place (see Ben Gulbranson starting for Oregon State against Notre Dame in last year's Sun Bowl). I like Dickert's idea: If college football wants to have elite players in its showcase postseason games, it should get rid of the bowl system and conference championship games and go with a 28-team playoff in what was formerly the Football Bowl Subdivision.