Scuttlebutt has it that the B1G and the SEC are seriously considering a 24-team playoff and are working with ESPN, the ACC, and the B12 to see if the CFB calendar could be changed to make this happen in 2027.

I am not here as an advocate, only as an informant. But I do note that if the NCAA had managed the 'Division 1' postseason years ago, the playoff field would have had a 24-team field.

Four teams from the ACC, B1G, B12, and the SEC would be in the field. Two teams from the G6 would be included, along with six at-large teams.

Using the PO committee's latest ranking, this would be the PO field.

The top eight seeds would host a second-round playoff game.

1. Ohio State vs. 17 USC at 16 Texas.

2. Indiana vs. 18 UVA at 15 Michigan.

3. Texas A&M vs. 19 Tennessee at 14 Vanderbilt

4. Georgia vs. 20 ASU at 13 Utah

5. Texas Tech vs. 21 SMU at 12 Miami

6. OREGON vs. 22. Pitt at 11. BYU

7. Ole Miss vs. 23 Tulane at 10 Alabama

8. Oklahoma vs. 24 JMU at 9 Notre Dame.

Other than for 'The Good of the Game', I see no reason why any conference, and Notre Dame, would not favor this format.

Put the Dawgs Down in Seattle!

Let's get there already. All the crap there used to be about how there are only really 4 teams capable of winning it all each year, and yet now that the playoff size has grown, so has the field of contenders.

Look at Texas Tech. Would they be investing like this with a 4 team playoff? Heck no. Poor risk-reward. But if that money can get them in the playoffs every other year it pays off.

If you expand the playoff field you'll expand the number of contenders, and levels the competition at the top.

A field of 24 covers every ranked team minus one, which has been the threshold of relevance for a very long time. If you are relevant enough to be ranked, then you are relevant enough to play in the playoffs.

Edited 48 minutes ago48 min by Solar

Anything to mitigate the beauty contest that still exists. If there was a “perfect” way to get to 8, it would probably be enough, but there isn’t.