By Luke Fletcher ｜ Atlanta, Georgia
Expanding the College Football Playoff to 24 teams might seem like another step toward eliminating college football’s traditions. But with the right calendar, it could actually preserve the bowl system, protect players, and give more programs an opportunity to compete for a national championship.
College football has been grappling with a crucial issue for nearly twenty years: how to fairly determine a national champion while keeping the sport’s cherished traditions intact. The transition from the Bowl Championship Series to a four-team playoff, which later grew to 12 teams, has already changed the landscape, and now there’s talk of expanding to a 24-team playoff. At first, this might seem like a threat to the traditional bowl games, as more playoff spots could mean fewer teams participating in iconic events like the Gator Bowl or the Holiday Bowl, which have been staples of college football for years. However, what if a 24-team playoff, paired with the removal of conference championship games, could actually lead to a more sustainable postseason that honors both the quest for a national title and the bowl game experience? This is the direction college football leaders should consider, focusing not just on increasing playoff teams but on rethinking the entire postseason structure.
Conference Championship Games Have Become the Calendar’s Biggest Obstacle
Conference championship games have played a crucial role for many years, helping to crown league champions and determine playoff contenders. However, with the recent shifts in conference alignments, their significance has changed. The Big Ten and SEC have expanded significantly, while the ACC and Big 12 have seen major changes, leading to the decline of traditional divisions and the rise of uneven conference schedules. As a result, these championship games often serve as just another high-stakes matchup for teams already in the running for national titles, especially with the introduction of a 24-team playoff format. This setup raises concerns about the physical toll on teams, which could face up to 18 games in a single season without a break. Removing conference championship games could lighten this load, allowing for better scheduling that prioritizes player safety and academic commitments while also freeing up the first weekend of December for rest and playoff prep. Instead of relying on these games to determine champions, regular-season standings and tiebreakers could take their place, ultimately providing more flexibility for a postseason that benefits a wider range of teams beyond just the top contenders.
A 24-Team Playoff Makes the Regular Season More Important for More Programs
One major concern about expanding the playoffs is that it might lessen the importance of the regular season. However, there’s another perspective to consider. With a 12-team playoff, teams can find themselves out of the championship race by early October, as just a couple of losses can severely limit their chances, even if they have a solid squad. A 24-team format could change that dynamic significantly. For instance, a team with a 6–2 record in November would still have a viable shot at making the playoffs. Rivalry games would gain more weight, and conference standings would remain competitive well into the season. Additionally, finishing in the top eight would become crucial, as those teams would earn first-round byes, allowing them to skip an extra game and gain more prep time. Meanwhile, teams ranked 9 through 16 would host first-round matchups, adding another layer of motivation to climb the rankings. Just picture the excitement of December playoff games in places like Blacksburg, South Bend, Athens, or Ann Arbor, complete with snow, enthusiastic student crowds, and the entire college community coming together for a postseason showdown, an atmosphere that neutral-site games just can’t match.
What a 24-Team Playoff Could Have Looked Like in 2025
To illustrate the possibilities, consider the following hypothetical 24-team field using the proposed seedings from the 2025 season.
This is a model for discussion, not an officially adopted College Football Playoff bracket. The field also illustrates why the selection process would need clearly defined rules for conference champions and at-large teams.
First-round byes
| Seed | Team | Conference |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Indiana | Big Ten |
| 2 | Georgia | SEC |
| 3 | Texas Tech | Big 12 |
| 4 | Miami | ACC |
| 5 | Ohio State | Big Ten |
| 6 | Oregon | Big Ten |
| 7 | Ole Miss | SEC |
| 8 | Texas A&M | SEC |
These eight teams would advance directly to the second round, where they would host playoff games on campus.
First-round matchups
| Matchup | Location |
|---|---|
| No. 24 North Texas at No. 9 Oklahoma | Norman, Oklahoma |
| No. 23 Iowa at No. 10 Alabama | Tuscaloosa, Alabama |
| No. 22 Georgia Tech at No. 11 Notre Dame | South Bend, Indiana |
| No. 21 Houston at No. 12 BYU | Provo, Utah |
| No. 20 Tulane at No. 13 Texas | Austin, Texas |
| No. 19 Virginia at No. 14 Vanderbilt | Nashville, Tennessee |
| No. 18 Michigan at No. 15 Utah | Salt Lake City, Utah |
| No. 17 Arizona at No. 16 USC | Los Angeles, California |
These matchups could bring a fresh twist to college football by introducing exciting postseason games at campus stadiums nationwide. Imagine Georgia Tech heading to Notre Dame in December, or Michigan making a trip to Utah, and North Texas getting a shot at Oklahoma. Such games would definitely spark huge interest both regionally and nationally. In the second round, the eight winners would then face off against the top eight seeds, resulting in 16 thrilling playoff games held on campuses during the first two rounds. After that, the final eight teams would move on to the classic major bowl system.
The New Year’s Six Would Remain the Centerpiece of the Playoff
The expanded tournament would not need to abandon college football’s most recognizable bowl traditions.
Instead, the six major bowls could continue serving as the final stages of the national championship race.
Illustrative 24-team playoff structure
| Round | Games | Proposed sites |
|---|---|---|
| First round | 8 | Campus sites |
| Second round | 8 | Campus sites |
| Quarterfinals | 4 | Cotton, Rose, Orange, Sugar |
| Semifinals | 2 | Fiesta, Peach |
| Championship | 1 | National championship venue |
This model keeps the Rose Bowl as a key spot for national championship hopefuls, while the Sugar Bowl stays a significant postseason event. The Cotton, Orange, Fiesta, and Peach bowls will still hold their prime TV slots. With a total of 23 playoff games instead of just 11 in the 12-team setup, there’s a big boost in TV inventory, all while maintaining the legacy of these bowl games. However, to fit in the extra round, adjustments to the calendar might be necessary, like scheduling earlier opening-round games, using midweek slots, or shifting the championship date. This brings us to a major opportunity that often gets overlooked.
The Real Winner Could Be the Traditional Bowl Season
The discussion around bowl games has often leaned towards the negative side, with critics highlighting issues like player opt-outs, coaching changes, dwindling TV ratings, and the belief that non-playoff games lack significance. However, this criticism overlooks the core value of bowl games. For most college football teams, making it to a bowl is still a significant achievement. It offers extra practice for younger players, a chance for seniors to cap off their careers on the field, national exposure, and an opportunity for fans to rally behind their teams. For a team finishing with an 8–4 record, a December bowl game is a notable milestone, while a 6–6 team that earns a postseason spot can see it as a sign of progress. Additionally, for Group of Six programs, bowl games present a rare chance to face off against teams from different regions and conferences. It’s a mistake to think that just because 24 teams are vying for a national title, the rest of the bowl-eligible teams don’t deserve a postseason. A revamped calendar could help maintain these opportunities, and while removing conference championship games might offer some scheduling flexibility, it wouldn’t be a cure-all for every bowl’s survival. The NCAA, conferences, broadcasters, and bowl organizers would still need to work together on scheduling, team participation, and TV deals. Ultimately, the aim should be to create two complementary postseason systems: a national championship tournament for 24 teams and a traditional bowl setup for all other qualifying teams.
The Bowl Games That Could Be Saved
Using the 2025 season as a hypothetical example, college football could preserve an attractive slate of traditional bowl games featuring teams outside the expanded playoff.
These games would not have to compete directly with the playoff for their identity. Instead, they could provide a different kind of postseason experience, with conference bragging rights, regional rivalries, and opportunities for winning seasons.
Proposed Power Four and independent bowl matchups
| Bowl game | Hypothetical matchup |
|---|---|
| Gator Bowl | TCU vs. Clemson |
| ReliaQuest Bowl | Missouri vs. Pittsburgh |
| Alamo Bowl | Kansas State vs. Washington |
| Pop-Tarts Bowl | Louisville vs. Iowa State |
| Pinstripe Bowl | Duke vs. Minnesota |
| Music City Bowl | Tennessee vs. Illinois |
| Liberty Bowl | Arkansas vs. Baylor |
| Holiday Bowl | SMU vs. Washington State |
These are illustrative pairings rather than confirmed games. All participants would need to satisfy bowl eligibility and the applicable selection agreements.
The value of this system extends beyond the traditional football powers.
Group of Six Programs Have the Most to Gain From Preserving Bowls
While the spotlight often shines on the SEC and Big Ten in national media, the traditional bowl system plays a crucial role for programs in conferences like the American, Sun Belt, Mountain West, MAC, and Conference USA. For many of these institutions, receiving a bowl invitation goes beyond just playing another game; it serves as a recognition of their hard work throughout the season. These bowl games offer valuable benefits such as enhancing recruitment efforts, engaging alumni, increasing television visibility, and providing extra development time for players. Although a 24-team playoff could expand access to the national championship, most Group of Six teams would still find themselves on the outside looking in. Therefore, it’s essential for these schools to have a significant postseason opportunity.
Consider a hypothetical bowl lineup featuring Group of Six programs from the 2025 season.
Proposed Group of Six bowl matchups
| Bowl game | Hypothetical matchup |
|---|---|
| New Mexico Bowl | San Diego State vs. Fresno State |
| New Orleans Bowl | Western Kentucky vs. Southern Miss |
| Boca Raton Bowl | Liberty vs. Northern Illinois |
| Gasparilla Bowl | Memphis vs. Georgia Southern |
| Bahamas Bowl | Buffalo vs. Sam Houston |
| Famous Idaho Potato Bowl | UNLV vs. Toledo |
| Arizona Bowl | Miami (OH) vs. Western Michigan |
| 68 Ventures Bowl | Louisiana vs. Jacksonville State |
| Fenway Bowl | Army vs. UConn |
| Hawai’i Bowl | UTSA vs. Coastal Carolina |
| Myrtle Beach Bowl | East Carolina vs. Marshall |
| Camellia Bowl | Texas State vs. another eligible program |
These matchups are just ideas for now and would need to confirm team eligibility and availability before they can turn into a real bowl schedule. The key point here isn’t about the specific pairings but rather ensuring that the college football postseason offers chances for teams beyond just those vying for the national championship. Teams like a 9–3 Memphis, an 8–4 Toledo, or a seven-win Sun Belt squad shouldn’t lose their postseason chances just because the playoff system has expanded. In fact, college football could enhance these bowl games by fostering stronger conference partnerships, setting up regional matchups, and providing bowl organizers with more reliable scheduling options.
The Financial Argument for Keeping Bowl Games
One compelling reason to preserve the traditional bowl season is the financial aspect. College football heavily relies on media rights, conference payouts, and institutional funding. While an expanded playoff could bring in significant revenue, it also prompts discussions about how that money will be allocated. Reports indicate that a 24-team playoff model might kick off in 2027, potentially including 19 at-large bids, four champions from the Power Four conferences, and the top Group of Six champion, with the possibility of scrapping Power Four championship games.
As of mid-October 2026, the College Football Playoff’s official stance was that talks with ESPN were ongoing, and no final format had been confirmed. A larger playoff shouldn’t mean sacrificing the financial and community advantages that smaller postseason games offer. Bowl games boost tourism in host cities, benefiting hotels, restaurants, local businesses, and charitable initiatives. They also give national visibility to schools that typically don’t get the spotlight like the championship contenders do. While a December bowl game between two eight-win teams might not attract the same viewership as a national semifinal, it still holds significant value for the schools, communities, and conferences involved. The focus should be on safeguarding these games through strategic television scheduling and conference collaborations instead of viewing them as disposable.
The One Problem College Football Still Has to Solve
Expanding the playoff from 12 to 24 teams inevitably means that 12 more programs will be cut from the traditional bowl lineup. Simply getting rid of conference championship games won’t fill that gap, so keeping the current bowl inventory intact will require more than just adjusting the calendar. College football will need to assess how many teams qualify for bowls each year, how many games can realistically be hosted, and if the current bowl framework needs a revamp. Additionally, there’s a key difference between a 24-team playoff based solely on rankings versus one that includes automatic qualifiers. For instance, in the final 2025 CFP rankings, James Madison was ranked 24th while North Texas was 25th, showing how different selection criteria can change the playoff landscape.
If the new system guarantees a spot for a Group of Six champion, the committee will have to factor in that automatic qualifier before filling the remaining slots. While these specifics are important and can be worked out, the bigger hurdle lies in getting conferences, TV networks, and bowl organizers to see the postseason as a cohesive whole instead of a collection of competing entities.
The Best of Both Worlds: A National Tournament and a Traditional Bowl Season
College football can embrace both modernization and tradition without sacrificing either. A 24-team playoff would open the door for more schools to vie for the national title, while campus playoff games would create electric atmospheres, keeping the New Year’s Six bowls relevant. By scrapping conference championship games, teams would gain scheduling flexibility and potentially face fewer games in their pursuit of the championship. Additionally, maintaining a traditional bowl system would allow many programs to celebrate their achievements. This approach could lead to a postseason that serves two key purposes: one focused on crowning the national champion and the other on rewarding teams that have earned the chance to play one more game. This distinction is crucial, as college football has always been about more than just the national title; for many programs, success is defined by reaching the playoffs, winning conference titles, beating rivals, achieving a certain number of wins, or simply returning to bowl games after tough seasons. These milestones are significant and should be reflected in the postseason structure.
Final Thoughts: Expansion Should Save Traditions, Not Destroy Them
There are valid worries about a 24-team playoff system, with some people fearing it might lessen the importance of the regular season, while others are concerned about player safety, academic schedules, and the ongoing commercialization of college sports. These discussions are definitely worth having. However, expanding the playoffs doesn’t have to mean the end of the classic bowl season. If conference championship games were to fade away, college football could reshape its December schedule to create a more inclusive postseason experience. The initial playoff rounds could feature exciting matchups at campus stadiums, while the New Year’s Six bowls could still showcase the top championship contenders. Plus, traditional bowls could still serve as a reward for teams that qualify for postseason play without making it into the playoffs. Ultimately, not every team needs to chase a national title for their season to hold significance.
The greatest success of a 24-team playoff would not simply be giving 12 more teams a chance to win a title. It would be creating a postseason where the pursuit of a national championship and the celebration of a successful season can coexist.
College football should expand its championship opportunities without abandoning the traditions that helped make the sport great and if the sport gets the calendar right, the 24-team playoff could become the very thing that helps save bowl season.
Leave a Reply