The leaders of the college football world are debating whether to expand their greatest asset, the College Football Playoff, to 24 teams as part of its latest 30-day negotiation window with ESPN. A potential leap from 12 to 24 teams opens the door for a new postseason scheduling model and virtually removes the bowl game concept in its current, fleeting form.
Brett Yormark and the Big 12 have historically pushed for an expanded playoff scenario, where previously the league might land one or two programs; now we’re talking about multiple at-large bids for teams with 10, nine or even as few as eight wins could potentially earn a playoff spot should the committee feel they’re appropriate for the cause.
Moreover, what normally is considered bowl season now becomes populated with first and second-round playoff games eating up much of December after the regular season ends. It’d naturally make for a longer season, too, with the final four teams playing as many as 17 or 18 different football games over the course of one season. Is this change worth the cost, and does the Big 12 win?
CAN THE BIG 12 DISTINGUISH ITSELF?
There are zero powerhouse programs in the Big 12 these days. The likes of Texas Tech and BYU are merely good enough to qualify, and the latter of which hasn’t done so even once in school. On paper, the Big 12 has yet to assert itself in the college football playoff, and the flame has been short-lived every time it does.
The Big 12 is just 1-8 overall in its CFP history, with that lone win courtesy of TCU in 2022. Exciting runs by Arizona State, Texas Tech, and former foes Texas and Oklahoma have all missed the board. The Horned Frogs, too, were subject to one of the more humiliating losses, falling flat against Georgia 65-7, in that 2022 national championship game.
In short, the Big 12 would only widen its already unrelenting roster deficit, with schools forced to spend even more to compete in a 24-team postseason. Opening the conversation to three or even five schools on a good year means the league must account for spending trends across the country while accommodating a longer season. Expanding the playoff helps the Big 12 get in the door, but how much will it cost the average member simply to have a shot at seeing the postseason?
THE REGULAR SEASON MEANS LESS
Much of the Big 12’s appeal is the resulting unpredictability from Texas and Oklahoma’s mutual exit. Under an expanded playoff, those upsets and midseason losses mean less on paper and take some of the juice out of the league’s high-stakes football schedule.
Conversely, more programs stay in the hunt, and fans are engaged deeper into the regular season because two or three losses don’t automatically remove you from the committee’s big board. It’s not to say folks won’t tune in, but it removes the do-or-die nature of a game like Arizona-BYU or Texas Tech-Houston, two early Big 12 matchups that drew over a combined 6 million viewers.
JOSH PATE ARGUES THE NUMBER IS ENDLESS
College football guru Josh Pate is among the counter-crowd on this topic, arguing that an expanded playoff will only worsen the game’s long-term financial situation and considers the 24-team expansion proposal a “bailout,” for the Power Four leadership.
He’s not completely wrong. The committee promising to schedule harder as a result of an expanded playoff is the same folks in charge of the seeding and selection process at the end of the day. The incentive to schedule harder because the criteria for getting in are weakened is totally bogus – Power Four schools are spending millions upon millions on fielding a football team at this point, and that number isn’t slowing down because now a program can afford a couple more losses.
Accessibility to the playoff, though, remains a real motivator among the CFP leadership, which sees an expanded postseason as a potential cash cow mirroring the scales of March Madness, but for the No. 1 sport on American television.
One can argue whether the Big 12 wins or loses with a 24-team playoff, but it’s certainly won’t become any more affordable.
