From its inception, the creators of the College Football Playoff aimed for a memorable and catchy name, according to playoff executive director Bill Hancock.

One idea, “College Bowl,” was discarded to prevent confusion with the long-running quiz show. Another suggestion was “College Super Bowl,” which was also rejected for similar reasons.

When the name was officially revealed in April 2013, it initially faced ridicule — one joke suggested Hancock named his dog “Dog” — but it has since become synonymous with the sport.

“It’s about creating a simple, clear brand that reflects the essence of the organization,” Hancock stated.

The four-team playoff format, which began in the 2014 season, has paralleled a financial surge in college football, another wave of conference realignments, and significant changes due to new name, image, and likeness regulations. Amidst challenges off the field, the playoff has thrived by simplifying the pursuit of the national championship.

As of this season, the Bowl Subdivision will shift to a 12-team playoff, which may solidify its position as the second most significant sporting event in the U.S.

“Can the College Football Playoff ever be as big as the Super Bowl? No, that’s a unique event,” Hancock remarked. “Nothing compares to it globally. However, we’re in a strong position as a solid No. 2, and we just need to bolster that status.”

Achievements of the four-team playoff

For years, polls and bowl games determined the national champion of college football. The Bowl Championship Series (BCS), which started in 1998, was an attempt to approach this using a blend of computer algorithms and human rankings to identify the two top teams in the nation.

While a step forward from polls, the BCS had its share of issues. The ranking system faced criticism for being overly simplistic regarding strength of schedule and taking margin of victory into account. Following a failed attempt at an eight-team playoff in 2009, BCS leaders declared in 2012 that a four-team playoff had been agreed upon, which launched in 2014.

The playoff sparked immediate discussion: Ohio State surged into the top four after defeating Wisconsin at the Big Ten championship, excluding Baylor and TCU, both one-loss Big 12 co-champions. Interestingly, the Horned Frogs, who began the last weekend in third, dropped to sixth despite a commanding victory over Iowa State.

Nonetheless, the format generated impressive viewership, with over 28 million people watching both semifinal games and around 34 million for the championship match between Ohio State and Oregon.

This substantial interest stemmed from the playoff’s core attraction: it resolved years of debate over national championships, where various teams claimed the same title, establishing a clear answer for which team was the best each season.

After a minor controversy in 2014, the selection process faced little dispute until last season when Florida State was left out of the final top four as the first unbeaten champion from a Power Four conference.

The four-team playoff has also created a significant new revenue stream for FBS members, particularly within the Power Four conferences. The playoff allocated $82.16 million to each major conference and an additional $102.88 million collectively to the Group of Five conferences for the 2023-24 fiscal year.

“There’s no doubt that the playoff has elevated the sport overall,” Hancock added. “It’s certainly attracted fans to college football and has made November more exciting with more teams vying for participation.”

Over the past ten years, the playoff has become central to college football, dominating discussions around the sport.

“Honestly, we are in a much better situation,” said Craig Bohl, former Wyoming coach and executive director of the American Football Coaches Association. “Having a genuine playoff system is, in my opinion, the best approach we could have.”

Critiques of the four-team model

Right from the outset, the playoff faced scrutiny for altering the dynamics of the regular season.

In previous postseason structures, each regular-season game held heightened significance, as a single loss could lead to elimination. Even before the BCS era, narrow victories over underperforming teams could sway polls when evaluating the nation’s elite teams.

The four-team system has diminished some of that excitement, especially as teams like Ohio State in 2016 and Alabama in 2017 progressed to the national semifinals despite not even reaching.

*Note: The last sentence appears truncated; please provide the remaining text for a complete paraphrase.*

The upcoming conference championship game is generating significant attention.

This situation has sparked broader concerns regarding college football’s abandonment of its history and traditions amid rapid changes happening in the sport: from the postseason landscape to NIL regulations, widespread player transfers, and the shifting dynamics of conferences that even saw the demise of longstanding leagues like the Pac-12.

“Today, college football feels quite different from what it used to be,” remarked former Alabama coach Nick Saban. “We now have mega-conferences. Many traditions that fans cherished have faded away, including key rivalries. Bowl games don’t carry the same importance as they once did. It’s an altered landscape. I’m not suggesting it’s bad; it’s just different.”

Criticism has been particularly intense regarding the two primary factors influencing the expansion of playoffs.

The first concern revolves around the repetitiveness of the playoffs themselves. Alabama has reached the playoffs eight times in ten years and made six championship game appearances. Clemson has qualified six times, while Ohio State has done so five times. The four-team era saw just six champions: Ohio State, Alabama, Clemson, LSU, Georgia, and Michigan.

The second issue is the noticeable drop in viewer engagement. As the four-team era advanced, ratings waned significantly, culminating in only 17.2 million viewers for the Georgia vs. TCU title game at the end of the 2022 season. However, the viewership for last year’s playoffs and New Year’s Six bowl games was reportedly the highest in five years, according to network statistics released in January.

Impacts of the 12-team playoff format on college football

The introduction of a 12-team playoff format signifies yet another major transformation for college football’s postseason system. While a selection committee will still determine the bracket, the new structure will comprise the five highest-ranked conference champions and seven at-large teams.

The top four seeds will automatically progress to the quarterfinals, while the remaining eight teams will compete in the first round at the higher seed’s home ground. Quarterfinal matches will take place at one of the four New Year’s Six bowl venues.

This newly structured postseason will commence with first-round games on December 20 and conclude with the title contest on January 20, extending a format that used to be completed within just two weeks. This staggered scheduling is expected to give the playoffs a feel reminiscent of the NCAA basketball tournament.

“This is a clear opportunity for growth,” observed American Athletic Commissioner Tim Pernetti. “With more games, you have more spectators watching, so the numbers naturally increase. I believe it will evoke the excitement of a true tournament, presenting a journey beyond the previous four-team structure.”

With the Pac-12 now absent for at least the next two years, the inclusion of five conference winners guarantees that at least one Group of Five team can compete for the national title. During the previous four-team era, Cincinnati was the only Group of Five team to reach the semifinals, but it has since moved to the Big 12.

“I’m thrilled that this playoff expansion opens up more opportunities for Big Ten teams as the season progresses,” said Big Ten Commissioner Tony Petitti this summer. “This generates better atmosphere for fans on campus, allowing their teams to stay in contention longer. That’s what the fans want – keeping their teams alive in the hunt is essential. This format seems designed to achieve that.”

The new structure is also expected to be far more profitable for FBS. A six-year deal with ESPN was struck, valued at $1.3 billion per year—approximately three times the amount previously received in the four-team setup.

“It’s a major win for college football,” remarked LSU quarterback Garrett Nussmeier. “This enhances competitiveness and intensity, facilitating exciting matchups that might not have been possible before – like a night game between Penn State and LSU at Death Valley, or a matchup between Oregon and Texas.”

However, challenges still loom. The 12-team format may alter the dynamics of the regular season, potentially diminishing the urgency of pivotal end-of-year rivalries, such as the classic matchups between Ohio State and Michigan, since both teams might have already secured playoff positions. Additionally, it’s conceivable for teams like the Buckeyes and Wolverines to face each other three times in a season through regular matches, conference championships, and playoffs.

The revamped playoff will also continue to redefine success within Power Four programs. As 10-2 or even 9-3 records could qualify these teams for the playoff, will institutions become less tolerant of coaches and teams that fail to meet this new standard? Similarly, how will Group of Five teams evaluate a successful season with automatic playoff access now available?

“Previously, there was widespread criticism regarding the postseason,” Pernetti commented. “It was labeled a national championship without providing access for all to compete. Now, however, it’s delivering greater access to many teams.”

“Access is crucial for our objectives. Thus, we view the playoff expansion positively.”

Despite uncertainties surrounding the 12-team structure, one thing is certain: the new playoff system is set to draw even more attention to college football, a sport that already captivates millions.

“I believe we’ve barely begun to understand the potential interest that the playoff can generate for college football,” Hancock stated. “This is just the beginning.”