College Football Playoff expansion is just the latest example of why ‘growing the game’ isn’t always healthy
Developed over time first seen 5 hours ago
College football plans to expand its playoff from 12 to 24 teams, a move the article argues is the latest effort to broaden the sport’s audience at the expense of what makes it distinctive. The writer says a larger postseason could weaken the importance of the regular season and push college football towards the NFL’s model.
The article traces playoff growth from the four-team format to 12 teams and now a proposed 24, and questions where expansion would stop. It also points to conference realignment and the transfer portal as changes making the sport more like professional football. The writer acknowledges the financial incentives but argues that prioritising growth and revenue risks alienating loyal, regionally focused fans.
- College football is planning a 24-team playoff.
- The writer warns expansion could diminish the regular season.
- The article argues growth may come at a cost to loyal fans.
Full account
A proposal to double the College Football Playoff from 12 teams to 24 has renewed a debate about what expansion would give college football and what it might take away. Reports suggest the larger field could begin with the 2027 season, but the change has not been formally confirmed. The playoff remains at 12 teams for the 2026 season, while its organisers continue discussions about the format and the broadcast rights that would support it.
A larger field would give more teams a route to the national title and bring more postseason games to campuses. It could also extend the commercial reach of a competition that has already grown substantially: the playoff began with four teams and moved to 12 in 2024. Supporters see wider access and more meaningful late-season opportunities. Critics question whether doubling the field would make some regular-season defeats less consequential, particularly for established programmes that could still qualify after several setbacks.
Former Alabama coach Nick Saban raised a different concern during ESPN’s College GameDay. He argued that 24 places would exceed the number of teams capable of winning the championship and suggested that further expansion could diminish traditional bowl games. He also pointed to the possible loss of conference championship games as organisers make room in the calendar. Speaking on the SEC Network, former Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow focused on the weekly stakes of the regular season. In his view, a bigger playoff would put greater weight on reaching the tournament and finding form at the right moment than on sustained performance across the autumn.
Those concerns sit alongside a broader dispute over college football’s direction. One OutKick commentary links playoff expansion to conference realignment, player movement and the pursuit of television revenue, arguing that the sport risks weakening the regional loyalties and distinctive schedule that built its following. That is an argument about the likely effects of change, rather than an established outcome. The practical question for those designing a 24-team format is whether broader access and additional games can coexist with a regular season, bowls and conference contests that supporters still consider valuable.
Where outlets differ
Both supplied reports are from OutKick and oppose expansion, but they emphasise different reasons. The first is a broad opinion piece about commercial growth and college football’s identity; the second centres on Saban’s concerns about the quality of a 24-team field, bowls and conference title games, and Tebow’s concern about regular-season stakes. Their descriptions of expansion as settled go further than the official position: a 24-team format remains under discussion.