Alternative College Football Playoff: The Current Plan, and a Slightly Different Plan
All the confetti has been cleared from the Raymond James Stadium field, and Clemson fans are still basking in the glow of their thrilling Championship victory over Alabama. It wasn’t just a treat for them, either; college football fans (and SEC Haters) were all rejoicing at the quality and suspense of the game. Depending on who you ask, the instant classic was anywhere from the best to 5th-best championship ever— for what it’s worth, my personal rankings go: 1. Texas-USC, 2. Ohio St-Miami, 3. Clemson-Bama redux, 4. FSU-Auburn.
Anyways, the thrilling nature and quality of the last two championship games, and of the semifinals in the inaugural year, have led many pundits to declare the 4-team playoff a success and reiterate the mantra that there’s “no need to expand the playoff.” Maybe. But altering the landscape to include more, or a more specific sample of, teams has its many boons beyond simple entertainment appeal. Said boons range from better playoff representatives, less layoff time, a more egalitarian postseason, etc.; these all will be discussed in further detail. Thus, though fans from Clemson, Alabama and Ohio State probably have very few complaints about the state of things, I thought it might be worthwhile to examine some alternative playoff options, particularly because these discussions might prove relevant down the years. We’ll start tonight with a simply modified plan.
First, a refresher on the current playoff system:
-4 teams who play in two Semifinals
-The Semifinals are 2 bowl games out of the “New Year’s Six,” meaning the sites will be Pasadena (Rose), Glendale (Fiesta), or Arlington (Cotton) and New Orleans (Sugar), Atlanta (Peach), or Miami (Orange)
-A playoff committee ranks all teams and seeds the 4 playoff teams
-Which teams play in which bowl is defined geographically; the higher seed will ideally have a better crowd advantage at the game.
And now, to some alternatives:
4 Conference Champions
The Format: This idea, which was one promulgated during the initial playoff discussions, is a pretty mild departure from the status quo. In fact, it could uphold pretty much every aspect of the current playoff, down to the number of teams and the semifinal sites. The key difference would be an insured emphasis on conference champions: the playoff would consist of the Top 4 conference champions ranked within the Top 6. If, and only if, there are less than 4 conference champions ranked in the Top 6, an at-large team could qualify. Why 6? This number accounts for 5 Power Conferences as well as a Non-Power Conference.
Case Study: This would not have been pertinent to any playoffs until this year’s, given that the first two iterations featured 4 conference champions already. However, this year saw mild controversy as Big Ten Champions Penn State were left out in favor of Ohio State, whom the Nittany Lions defeated. Under this plan, the rankings would have looked the same--
1. Alabama*
2. Clemson*
3. Ohio State
4. Washington*
5. Penn State*
6. Michigan
--but with Penn State jumping up and getting the edge. (Of course, given the way those teams played in their bowl games, we can retroactively say this maybe should have been the way it played out.) Thus, the semifinals would have likely seen Alabama vs Penn State in the Fiesta, and Clemson vs. Washington in the Peach.
Pros:
Places greater emphasis on conference championships by rewarding its winners
Allows for a natural tiebreaker between teams in situations like Penn St-Ohio St
Could help include a smaller conference champion where current format wouldn't (like a #6 Boise State or Houston, for example)
Still provides for situations where a non-champion could be included
Cons:
Does not guarantee the "Best 4 Teams" (at least in the eyes of the committee) in the playoff
In a similar vein: would not account for differing strength of conference; in other words, this year a #3 Ohio State would have undoubtedly been more deserving than a #6 Oklahoma
Still leaves at least one Power 5 conference champion on the outside looking in