24 Team Playoff - Pros

[cdibbs]

This year you will see several 9-3 teams with much better resumes miss out on the playoffs.

Indiana will be 11-1 with 0 ranked wins

UCLA will be 12-0 with a backup QB with 1 "ranked" win over Oregon 17-15

In a 12 team playoff, weak schedules matter too much for how the committee ranks teams. 

In my opinion, a 9-3 Texas or 9-3 LSU should be in over an 11-1 Indiana if you compare the resumes honestly.  In a 24 team playoff, you get to see that actually play out on the field vs leaving it to a committee. 

[McCoyColt]

Yup. Plus a 10-2 Notre Dame team should not get in if there only “good” wins out to Wisconsin and SMU

[TexasMDcoach]

25 minutes ago, cdibbs said:

This year you will see several 9-3 teams with much better resumes miss out on the playoffs.

Indiana will be 11-1 with 0 ranked wins

UCLA will be 12-0 with a backup QB with 1 "ranked" win over Oregon 17-15

In a 12 team playoff, weak schedules matter too much for how the committee ranks teams. 

In my opinion, a 9-3 Texas or 9-3 LSU should be in over an 11-1 Indiana if you compare the resumes honestly.  In a 24 team playoff, you get to see that actually play out on the field vs leaving it to a committee. 

Soundly stated though I do think Indiana is a very good team.

[cdibbs]

5 minutes ago, TexasMDcoach said:

Soundly stated though I do think Indiana is a very good team.

I don't doubt they are playoff worthy but they simply haven't been tested in the same way. I think the 24 team playoff lets it play out on the field vs relying on a committee which is a positive in a sport with vast scheduling differences. 

[Tuco Ramirez]

Debating the pros of a 24 team playoff is a bit like debating the pros of getting herpes. 

[cdibbs]

2 minutes ago, Tuco Ramirez said:

Debating the pros of a 24 team playoff is a bit like debating the pros of getting herpes. 

You wouldn't have wanted to see Texas get a shot at the playoff last year in a year where Miami got hot and nearly ran the table after barely squeaking in?

[CJ Vogel]

20 minutes ago, TexasMDcoach said:

Soundly stated though I do think Indiana is a very good team.

THey have a very good defense. 

The quarterback is atrocious.

[HookemTexas]

I have thought of it as this way - the 24 team playoff is essentially a second season.  The regular season is primarily just exhibition now - you just have to be in the upper quarter of your conference (whether your conference is good or not). 

This gives much more leeway for teams in the SEC to beat each other up and still get in.  It also means other teams will have to strategize how they manage their personnel.  Do they try to get more players playing time to increase experience in preparation for the playoffs or do they go all in trying to get the best record during the "regular season" and risk either being short-handed due to injury in the playoff season.

[Tuco Ramirez]

16 minutes ago, cdibbs said:

You wouldn't have wanted to see Texas get a shot at the playoff last year in a year where Miami got hot and nearly ran the table after barely squeaking in?

The problem last year wasn’t the number of teams in the playoff. It was the CFP committee ignoring SoS. Going to 24 teams could water down the regular season, ruin non-playoff bowls, and ultimately, without regard for SoS, it won’t change anything. A 9-3 Texas team could still lose out on home field advantage while a 11-1 clown college gets home field because SoS is still ignored. 24 teams isn’t a solution, it’s a money grab. 

[cdibbs]

6 minutes ago, Tuco Ramirez said:

The problem last year wasn’t the number of teams in the playoff. It was the CFP committee ignoring SoS. Going to 24 teams could water down the regular season, ruin non-playoff bowls, and ultimately, without regard for SoS, it won’t change anything. A 9-3 Texas team could still lose out on home field advantage while a 11-1 clown college gets home field because SoS is still ignored. 24 teams isn’t a solution, it’s a money grab. 

But we have to accept they'll never grade SOS properly. So I agree with you somewhat, but at the same time, I'd rather Texas have a shot last year vs getting screwed by whoever is on the committee and/or media narratives. Let it play out on the field. 

[Tuco Ramirez]

I agree it should be played out on the field, but I think that should include the regular season as well as post-season. I don’t agree that we should have to accept that SoS will never be a factor. Sankey had an opportunity to force that change, but the feckless ef’er could only manage a requirement that P4 teams play at least one P4 opponent OOC. So now cowards like cignetti will always play arky to get home field advantage while we play great entertaining games that football fans want to see but at the risk of losing home field because SoS doesn’t exist. How pissed off will Texas fans be if we had to play a playoff game on the road at Northwestern or Wake Forest? 

[AusMOJO]

But to me, they could just change how they format the 12 teams instead of adding another 12 teams. Because you're then adding a bunch of not very good teams to the playoff race.

I think 12 is a good spot. Do some tweaking with the time in between the end of regular season, conference title games and the playoffs. Rework the bowl game system.

Seems like just adding 12 more teams to the playoffs is the easy way out for the "big brains"

[4thandFive]

I love it. It keeps more fanbases engaged for longer. Ideally Texas should expect to be in every year. Parity almost necessitates it to overcome conference strength and schedule disparities.

[Kevin C]

I love the 24-team format.   Bowl games have been a joke for too many years.   Conference championships are a disadvantage to play.   New format makes regular season even better and more meaningful for more teams.   National champion will be settled on the field.   Rewards teams who are improving the most, playing at highest level down the stretch.   Two weeks of 8 games on campuses.   December gonna be better than ever starting 2027.