College Football Playoff expansion discussions on deadline: Where will the debate go next?
With less than two months to go before a Dec. 1 deadline to decide on a format for the 2026 College Football Playoff, the realistic options are limited, and some leaders are seeking more input.
The situation hasn't changed much since summer regarding CFP expansion. Administrators overseeing the Playoff have been busy with various initiatives, including the launch of the College Sports Commission, the House v. NCAA settlement and revenue sharing, changes to NCAA governance, and activities in Washington, D.C.
A Big Ten plan for a 24- or 28-team playoff was revealed through media reports in August, but no serious discussions have followed.
The key outcome of a recent meeting of the CFP management committee in Chicago was Tony Petitti of the Big Ten suggesting a working group of athletic directors from the conferences to explore new format ideas.
The Athletic spoke to eight individuals involved in or briefed on the CFP discussions, some anonymously, to understand the current situation. The numbers 12, 16, and 24 are significant, though 24 is more of a range than a specific target.
Maintain the 12-team format
Commissioners have stated that sticking with the current 12-team format is an acceptable fallback if they cannot agree on a new format.
The odds of this happening increase daily. It's possible the CFP will announce no changes for 2026, continuing discussions on what's best for college football.
Some involved and fans support this idea, as the 12-team format is only in its second year. Despite complaints from SEC countries about final at-large selections and a lack of closely contested games in the early rounds, Year 1 was generally well-received.
A change in team seeding has already been made for this season, removing the requirement for top-four seeds to come from conference champions.
However, sticking with 12 teams delays expansion, providing a temporary solution for commissioners to re-evaluate options.
The core issue is dissatisfaction with the selection process. While the 13-member selection committee makes a good-faith effort, teams' evaluations are a concern.
Petitti suggests it's an impossible task, advocating for multiple automatic bids for power conferences based on league standings and play-in games. However, support for 14- or 16-team formats with multiple AQs waned within the SEC this summer.
The new CFP contracts grant the Big Ten and SEC final say over the format's future, requiring input from other conferences.
The CFP staff has introduced a new strength-of-record metric to enhance team assessment and emphasize schedule rigor, addressing selection process concerns.
Commissioners remain skeptical about the new tool's effectiveness, but monitoring its impact is beneficial.
Expand to 16 teams
The Big 12 proposed expanding to 16 teams with four additional at-large bids, limiting automatic qualifiers to the five highest-ranked conference champions.
The 5-11 format appealed to the SEC but not the Big Ten.
There's hope within the management committee that an agreement to implement the 16-team, 5-11 plan next season can be reached, especially after the SEC and ACC agreed to nine-game conference schedules, matching the Big Ten and Big 12.
The Big Ten is the lone holdout, with Petitti open to exploring new ideas incorporating more AQs.
While 16 teams might be better for the Big Ten, some believe Petitti would be cutting off his nose to spite his face.
Ideally, a decision should have been made earlier, but the CFP could still implement 16 teams for next year.
Challenges include scheduling extra early-round games and setting up the bracket. Plans include a two-game opening round on Army-Navy and Heisman Trophy weekend, with two teams receiving byes into the quarterfinals.
Calendar constraints limit game scheduling between conference championship weekend and Jan. 1, with quarterfinals, semifinals, and championship game dates already set for next season.
Even with a 12-team playoff, finding TV windows for first-round games without conflicts with the NFL or other games was challenging.
Larger fields are typically easier for conferences to agree upon, as they envision paths to include additional teams.
Decisions should ideally be made for 2026 and beyond, but the new ESPN contract starting next year may influence future expansion decisions.
Go beyond 16 teams
Expanding beyond 16 teams to a 24- or more team postseason tournament is complex. Even with support for the idea, implementing it next year seems impossible.
While the Big Ten originated this idea, Petitti and his team aren't alone in believing it's time for a significant college football postseason makeover.
Athletic directors and coaches nationwide understand the value of being part of the Playoff race late in the season.
The argument for more Playoff games, as Petitti advocates, is to keep fans engaged later in the season. The days of earning a spot in a Florida-based bowl game around New Year's Day are largely over.
A Power 4 athletic director stated, 'We're playing these games anyway, so why not make them Playoff games?'
The Big Ten's internal framework would eliminate conference championship games and provide each power conference with the same number of automatic bids, likely four.
This is appealing to the Big 12 and ACC but less so to the SEC, which views automatic qualifiers as limiting field teams.
The SEC's annual Atlanta game generates $100 million, making it challenging to eliminate.
Inertia seems to be winning the day for now, but significant work, collaboration, and focus among college football leaders are required for expansion.
