1. Let's start with the good. A 12 team playoff will eventually end and ultimately reverse the concentration of 5 star talent that has occurred at 3-4 schools. Make no mistake that a large reason why Alabama, OSU, Clemson and Georgia are stockpiling blue chip players at a rate unprecedented in college football history is not because of superior coaching or cheating, both of which were prevalent long before the playoff. Rather, the concentration is due to the fact that the blue chip high school talent correctly perceives that if you want to play in the playoff that you need to go to one of these schools. In this sense, the BCS was a better system. Excluding Saban's first year, there were six BCS title games--Alabama made it 50% of the time. There have been seven playoffs, and Alabama has been to 86% of the time. You are essentially guaranteed multiple playoff appearances if you go there. With a 12 team playoff, more schools can sell a realistic ability to be in the playoff. That will eventually dilute the talent which is a badly needed thing for the sport.
2. Now the bad. A 12 team playoff is going to likely end competitive non-conference scheduling. If you're in a major conference, you can rest assured that you will make the playoff with 1 loss, and more than likely, 2 losses. Anything more than that will lead to elimination (barring a conference title). I just don't see schools taking the risk of scheduling high-end competition when they know that 10-2 gets them into the playoff. Why take a chance with a game that may knock you out? I could see the non-brand names scheduling competitive non-conference games to garner momentum, but I think the days of games like Clemson-Georgia and Ohio State-Oregon are going to be past us.
3. The increased access to the playoff will assuredly shorten coaches' window to win, and increase hot seat pressure. If you're at a school with a top 20-25 tradition, you will be expected to make the playoff relatively early, and make it with regularity. The whole season will come down to whether you made the playoff for about 10-15 schools. For this reason, I think we're on an inexorable march to playoff expansion every 10 years or so. Coaches and athletic department administrators will demand it, as the value of the season will depend on a playoff appearance, they will push for more teams to make the playoff. Moreover, 12 teams will render the bowls further irrelevant. For schools like Michigan, maybe not a big deal. But what about the lower to mid level power five schools -- the Purdues, Indianas, etc. Even at 12 teams they may never come close to the playoff. And it's going to be really hard to sell these fanbases on the Alamo Bowl as a big deal. It would be equivalent to selling fans on making the NIT as the ultimate goal if we had a 32 team tournament. If we're at 12 teams now, we will be at 16 and then 24.
4. Do conferences do away with divisions and adopt the B12 model? If conference champs are getting an automatic bid, shouldn't the game feature the two best teams? If we keep the current format, then we could have years where we have 2-3 bid-stealers, to use a NCAA term, on Championship Saturday. Maybe that's not a bad thing.
2. Now the bad. A 12 team playoff is going to likely end competitive non-conference scheduling. If you're in a major conference, you can rest assured that you will make the playoff with 1 loss, and more than likely, 2 losses. Anything more than that will lead to elimination (barring a conference title). I just don't see schools taking the risk of scheduling high-end competition when they know that 10-2 gets them into the playoff. Why take a chance with a game that may knock you out? I could see the non-brand names scheduling competitive non-conference games to garner momentum, but I think the days of games like Clemson-Georgia and Ohio State-Oregon are going to be past us.
3. The increased access to the playoff will assuredly shorten coaches' window to win, and increase hot seat pressure. If you're at a school with a top 20-25 tradition, you will be expected to make the playoff relatively early, and make it with regularity. The whole season will come down to whether you made the playoff for about 10-15 schools. For this reason, I think we're on an inexorable march to playoff expansion every 10 years or so. Coaches and athletic department administrators will demand it, as the value of the season will depend on a playoff appearance, they will push for more teams to make the playoff. Moreover, 12 teams will render the bowls further irrelevant. For schools like Michigan, maybe not a big deal. But what about the lower to mid level power five schools -- the Purdues, Indianas, etc. Even at 12 teams they may never come close to the playoff. And it's going to be really hard to sell these fanbases on the Alamo Bowl as a big deal. It would be equivalent to selling fans on making the NIT as the ultimate goal if we had a 32 team tournament. If we're at 12 teams now, we will be at 16 and then 24.
4. Do conferences do away with divisions and adopt the B12 model? If conference champs are getting an automatic bid, shouldn't the game feature the two best teams? If we keep the current format, then we could have years where we have 2-3 bid-stealers, to use a NCAA term, on Championship Saturday. Maybe that's not a bad thing.
