Should the College Football Playoff Expand?

Ever since its creation in 2014, the College Football Playoff has been surrounded with questions of expansion. Under the current model, a panel of experts choose the four best teams at the end of the season to make up the playoff roster. This design leaves us college football fans wanting more.

Not only does having four teams disregard the fans, it also leaves out at least one of the power five conference champions, which opens the yearly debate of how much a conference title really means. Often a team that feels like they belong because of a conference championship ends up being left out, thinking what more can we do? This has already happened three significant times in the brief five year CFP history with TCU in 2014, Penn State in 2016, and Ohio State in 2017. Why have a power five if there is no power in a championship?

Along with leaving out a conference champion, four teams also all but guarantees that we will never see a non power five team in the playoff, so we can never definitively say if UCF deserved a chance to back up their claim to being the 2017 National Champions.

Prior to the CFP, the best teams and big conference champions all played in the BCS bowls: the Sugar, Orange, Rose, and Fiesta. This design gave a deserving non power five contender the opportunity to play in a meaningful bowl against a great opponent. Now that only two of the four actually mean something each year the significance of the names is greatly diminished and any non SEC, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, or Pac 12 team can kiss their hopes of playing in a truly meaningful bowl game goodbye.

So we’ve now established that four teams is too small, but then what is the right amount?

How about 16, that seems like a pretty sweet number for tournament teams, and it gives the most fans across the country the possibility of a rooting interest. However, this also prolongs the season by two games for the championship contenders. Two games may not seem like that much, but after already playing 14 games, the cost of two more may be an ACL for some of the nations best football players; leading to more players sitting out from bowl games and potentially missing out on the NFL if they’re not as lucky.

Along with the added injury risk, 16 teams may not be worthy of a chance at a national championship. Historically, teams ranked in the top eight of the CFP end of year rankings have a win percentage of 91 percent, a number that we see drop a staggering 13 percent down to 78 for the ninth through sixteenth finishers. This represents a clear drop off in talent, chemistry, and overall team ability from the top contenders to the second tier. The playoff was always meant to give deserving teams a chance at a title, not second tier competitors.

Maybe 16 isn’t so sweet for football afterall, but how about eight?

Eight teams would give all power five conference champions an automatic bid, ending the yearly debate, and missing out for at least one. Not only would that debate end, but also three wild card teams would be able to show they belong, opening the door for the next UCF. A non power five team getting in likely would not become a yearly occurrence, but one could at least have the potential to earn their way to a playoff birth. This would also give meaning back to all four of the former BCS bowl games, with each getting its own playoff game. Statistically, eight teams also gives all of the best competitors in college football a shot at the trophy. Unlike the win percentage drop to 78 for 16 teams, teams who have finished fifth through eighth in the CFP rankings have a win percentage of 86. 

Overall, eight teams seems to answer all of the questions posed for a possible expansion and, although the expansion may not happen for several years, it seems clear that an eight team playoff would be best for college football, the fans, and the teams involved.