Are you for playoff expansion from 12 to 24 teams?
(no message)
Replies to: “Are you for playoff expansion from 12 to 24 teams?”
No, 24 is just too many. 16 is a 33% increase, 24 is a 100% increase....big difference!!!!
(no message)
No. I'm good with 12 but not opposed to 16.
(no message)
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!
(no message)
Oh yes. More Forty to Zip first round games are what college football needs!
(no message)
Yes, if only to kill conf championships & get the SEC to bolt
(no message)
Like to see the top 16 ranked teams play, with home sites first two rounds
(no message)
And eliminate the useless conference championship games
(no message)
couldn't help it ----- i was a classics major.
No. College season long enough. Physical toll too much. I could live with 16. I don't think more
than 1 game at home. People think cold weather gives us an advantage but when you are the better team you don't want any possibility of flukey weather causing fluikey plays. That is what the underdog wants. I know both teams are on the same field but I believe we will be physically superior to almost any team we play and I want it to play out that way.
Agreed
We saw the effects of the 2024 season on our guys, where several of them needed time to recover during the 2025 spring camp and summer workouts.
During the season, they don't get to spend every day in rehabilitative therapy, treatments, etc., since they have to go to class as well.
Thankfully, by the fall camp, they were good to go, but asking them to play yet another game isn't reasonable, since they're not done growing and developing.
The fact that we had them ready to go is a testament to Coach Loren Landow's S&C program.
It's a different story when you're a 28 year old pro in the NFL, where your only focus is football, and you have all week to devote to recovering.
Wouldn’t more playoff games require less regular season or at least conference title games go away?
11 games and 4 playoffs seems reasonable but I don’t see that happening given the way TV money is.
Yes.
But no more, and contingent on eliminating conf champ games.
I would be for 16 only, but realistically the money has to be better than present system w conf champ games, or it won’t happen.
No. But it’s all about money. I would not be surprised to see it.
(no message)
Nope. 16 teams.
This purely from a standpoint of fundamental fairness...not because I like what's going on.
No teams deserve byes. Conference Championship games should be discontinued or made entirely "play at your own risk".
16 is the best number....
Top 8 host bottom 8 at home in first round, the rest plays out identical to 12 team playoff with no added weeks of play.
Seems like best solution
(no message)
My thoughts exactly.
I'd add two rounds of home stadium games starting 2 weeks after the conclusion of the "regular season".
I don't care what they do with the final four regarding the traditional bowls.
^^^^^^^^^.
(no message)
Fans want to talk meaningless bowl games? How about meaningless playoff games?
Teams that have no shot. Three loss teams that have favor because of recent history. Average teams from average conferences. This is a scam and fans fall for it all the time. One of the best teams was left out last year so how can we trust the children running the CFP to do it right the next time and the next time after that? More is not better. Eight team at the most. We all know who the best eight are without all this political maneuvering.
Doesnt what happened to ND last year..
give a good example of a team that has momentum and attest that eight is not enough?
Eight is enough because anyone with half a brain knew what the top 8 were.
They had to squeeze in those exulted SEC teams though.
Consent Management