The Best College Football Playoff Format
Eight teams, no automatic qualifiers — just the best schools.
It seems every year since the College Football Playoff was established in 2014, there has been chatter about potential playoff expansion and debate over what the best playoff format would be.
With this year’s CFP just a few weeks away, the conversation was reignited again by a report suggesting that an eight-team format featuring the Power 5 champions, the highest-finishing Group of 5 team, and two at-large bids is gaining traction among the powers that be.
This model has certainly been the most popular one I’ve seen passed around, with its proponents claiming it to be the fairest proposal. The winner of each conference gets a guaranteed spot, while also giving a Group of 5 team a chance to make some noise and allowing two at-large slots for independents like Notre Dame or worthy teams that failed to win their conference.
Under this proposal, everyone gets an opportunity. My question is: should they? I believe a different eight-team format would be best for the College Football Playoff. But first, let’s discuss a few of the more general questions surrounding expansion.
When would a potential expansion take place?
Any CFP expansion would go into effect two years after its announcement. In theory, this means the earliest possible time we could see an expanded playoff would be for the 2022 season.
However, most people in the college football community seem pleased with the current system. At the very least, there is no urgent need to usher in change. Doing so now likely wouldn’t even be possible, as there are still many aspects that would need to be worked out.
Far and away, the likeliest time for a change would be the 2026 season, the first year of the CFP’s next television deal. The current contract, signed with ESPN, began along with the start of the CFP in 2014 and runs for 12 years, through the end of the 2025 season.
Both sides seem content to let the contract play out. As we get deeper into the deal, negotiations for the following deal will take place. Playoff expansion is likely to factor heavily into those talks.
Is eight the right number of teams for the CFP?
I think so. The current format is the best system college football has put in place for determining a national champion so far. It still blows my mind that there wasn’t even a real championship game until the 1990s.
Sure, there will be some years like 2018 where two teams are clearly better than the rest of the field and dominate their semifinal matchups (the same could be true for 2019 with LSU and Ohio State, but that remains to be seen).
But far more often, there is a real debate surrounding who deserves to play for a national championship, particularly in years where there are three undefeated teams. Clemson may only be ranked #3 this season, but they are the defending national champions and have won all 13 of their games by an average of 36 points. Leaving them out doesn’t make sense. Nor does having everything decided by a computer. The switch to a four-team playoff with teams chosen by a selection committee is a big step for college football.
This doesn’t mean the system is perfect, though. Under the current format, half of FBS schools begin the season with no chance to compete for the title. While every FBS team is eligible for the CFP, in reality, only Power 5 schools and Notre Dame stand a chance at competing.
We knew this going in, but luckily, UCF was able to demonstrate this fact during the 2017 and 2018 seasons. In 2017, the Knights finished just 12th in the final CFP rankings despite being the only undefeated FBS team. They won their bowl game against Auburn to cap off a perfect year.
Then, the following season, they went undefeated yet again through their conference championship game. Still, UCF finished just #8 in that year’s CFP rankings, still some distance away from the top four. If a team can go undefeated in back-to-back seasons and still not receive playoff consideration, they never stood a chance at all.
Expansion to an eight-team playoff still wouldn’t guarantee teams like UCF a spot in the field, but the opportunity would still exist. And with a field that size, I think the committee would be more willing to give Power 5 teams a chance. As much as I would love to guarantee a spot to any undefeated teams, that would only incentivize weak non-conference scheduling, and a 16-team playoff would likely dilute the field too heavily.
So, an eight-team playoff beginning in the 2026 season seems to be a strong possibility. How should we decide which eight teams compete for a title? I don’t think the plan of taking the Power 5 champions, one Group of 5 team, and two at-larges is poor, but we can do better.
I don’t think we should guarantee any teams a spot in the field of eight. Instead, a committee should simply choose and rank who they believe to be the top eight teams in the country. It’s that simple, and it would lead to the most competitive games.
While guaranteeing a Group of 5 team a spot would all but solve the UCF problem, it’s also true that the Group of 5 may not always be worthy of a spot in the field. #17 Memphis had a great season and finished as the highest-ranked Group of 5 team, but I don’t think they’d be in my top eight.
In the same regard, Power 5 champions may not necessarily be deserving of a spot. Last year, a 10–3 Washington team won the Pac-12 and finished #9 in the CFP rankings. I’d have taken UCF over them, which would leave the Huskies on the outside looking in.
Just think about if Virginia had somehow managed to beat Clemson in the ACC Championship this year. The Cavaliers would be given an automatic spot in the field, even though they probably wouldn’t be deserving of one. That might knock out a team like Baylor who finished #7, only losing two games by a combined 10 points to Oklahoma.
Perhaps what frustrates me the most about the leading expansion proposal is that it assumes the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac-12, and SEC are and will always be the best conferences in college football. If we’re being honest, the American might be better than the ACC and Pac-12 right now. It’s better than the Pac-12 in basketball, too.
This shouldn’t be a huge surprise. The American was founded by members of the old Big East, which was a power conference. Who’s to say another round of realignment won’t cripple a league like the Big 12? It makes no sense to force the American to compete with four other conferences for one spot when they have much more in common with the Power 5 than, for instance, the MAC.
As we transition to the second half of ESPN’s CFP rights deal, eight-team expansion seems like the way to go for the future. However, there are still many things to be decided, such as how to determine which teams make the field, where the quarterfinal games will be played, and if any additional schedule changes need to be made to accommodate the extra games.
For my money, though, the plan that makes the most sense isn’t to divvy up spots by conference, but rather by giving the best eight teams a chance to win it all.
Connor Groel is a writer who studies sport management at the University of Texas at Austin. He also serves as editor of the Top Level Sports publication on Medium, and the host of the Connor Groel Sports podcast. You can follow Connor on Medium, Facebook, and Twitter, and view his archives at toplevelsports.net.
