The 2024 collegiate football season marked a significant shift in the sport, mainly due to conference realignment and expansion. Fans were initially skeptical about the expansion, as many wondered how meaningful regular-season games would be now that more teams would clinch a postseason bid. But this season has shown the opposite — many games have been thrilling and unpredictable, giving fans more entertainment than in previous years.
Before the 2024 season, the College Football Playoff Committee expanded the playoff system and several teams changed conferences. The previous playoff system consisted of four teams in a two-round tournament, but now the format consists of a 4-round 12-team tournament. The top four conference champions receive a pass into the next round while a committee selects seven other teams. Other changes included disbanding the Pac-12 conference, where all but two teams split up into the other four power conferences, creating a more condensed and competitive four leagues that led to an increase of thrilling matchups throughout the season. As a result, the end-of-year decision to determine which teams qualified for the playoffs arguments and tension in the sports media world.
The committee ranks their top teams based on many metrics, including strength of schedule, quality wins and on-field performance. They also consider injuries, which caused a controversial decision last year when Florida State’s undefeated team was left out of playoffs because of their injured star quarterback. However, throughout the four-team era, the committee was questioned for their decisions, usually favoring the bigger-name teams and often showing bias towards the Southeastern Conference. This season, the committee took an unconventional route, selecting Southern Methodist University (SMU) for the final playoff spot over the University of Alabama, a household name. This decision showed an improvement in their metrics and how teams are ranked.
Additionally, upgrades to the 12-team playoff helped increase the sport’s fairness. In the four-team era, only one non-power conference team made the playoffs, leaving out many strong teams, including the then-undefeated University of Central Florida team in 2017. However, with the new system, a non-power conference team automatically gets the opportunity to participate in the playoff. The expansion also offers more opportunities for underdog teams to be represented. Teams like SMU, Arizona State, Indiana, and Boise State all benefited from the expansion and appeared in the playoffs. Some of these teams, such as SMU and Indiana, struggled in the playoffs. but others saw glimpses of success. Arizona State, a double-digit underdog, fell in overtime to UT Austin and gave themselves plenty of opportunities to win the game, justifying their spot in the playoff after entering as the second-lowest seed by the committee.
One of the biggest criticisms of the new playoff format was the field depth and concern that top teams would dominate, creating less entertaining games. However, top teams fluctuated throughout the regular season, with upsets causing teams to rise and fall. These fluctuations caused major change throughout the season, with Alabama, once ranked number one in the country, missing the playoff. Meanwhile, other highly ranked teams like Ole Miss and Miami also missed the playoffs. In the actual playoff, the top four seeds all fell in their first games, showing the importance of including more than just the four teams.
The 12-team playoff was a success but still showed one immense issue with the current system. The top four conference champions received first-round byes, meaning Boise State, ranked 9th in the committee’s final rankings, and Arizona State, ranked 12th in the final rankings, got first-round byes. These teams went into their games as double-digit underdogs, eventually falling to Penn State and Texas, respectively. This meant that Boise State and Arizona State, not part of the four best teams in the country, got seeded as if they were — and got byes as a result. Not only did both teams lose, but the committee’s rankings caused unfair matchups around the playoffs.
The Ohio State Buckeyes, the 8 seed in the playoff, faced off against the undefeated Oregon Ducks. Yet, they came into the game as the favorite and dominated from the kickoff, beating the Ducks 41–21. Oregon, the only undefeated team left in college football, should’ve been playing against a weaker team but instead drew the eventual National Champions in Ohio State. Meanwhile, Georgia faced the committee’s fifth-ranked team, Notre Dame, and was also beaten — meaning all four top seeds fell. If the committee wants to continue with the 12-team playoff and see success, they must ensure that the four best teams get the first-round byes, not the four best conference champions.
Overall, the 12-team playoff has helped the sport include more teams in the chase for a national championship and has done well in its first year. If the committee doesn’t make necessary seeding changes, it will become unfair for teams in the Big Ten and SEC who don’t win their conference but are stronger teams than other conference champions. But besides that, the 12-team playoff has created a tougher road for the champion and showed who the best team truly is. If this year had the same format as previous years, the two teams playing for the national championship wouldn’t have even made the playoff in the first place. The expansion was necessary to ensure that the national champion was indeed the best team throughout the season.
