By Jay Berry
The first-ever 12-team college football playoffs are underway, and there are already corrections that need to be made.
Strength of Schedule and Uneven Schedules Has Been a Problem
In the first game, Notre Dame dragged Indiana up and down the field, especially with the Irish offensive line in the run game.
The final score was 27–17, just a 10-point win for Notre Dame. However, they had a 24-point lead late in the fourth quarter. They were up 27–3 before Indiana got some garbage-time points.
The second game of the playoff, featured Penn State hosting SMU, and also proved to be a significant blowout. Penn State controlled the game 38-10 lead.
https://twitter.com/PennStateFball/status/1870542255486107673
Indiana made it to the playoff with a record of 11–1, but they played a weak schedule. The only good team they played was Ohio State, and they were no match for the Buckeyes. The Hoosiers’ best win was against a 7-5 Michigan team.
More Sports News
SMU made it by playing a better schedule, but still not an impressive one. They finished with one loss to BYU and a conference championship game loss to Clemson. Many fans didn’t want to see a three-loss SEC team get in. Unfortunately, those fans will have to deal with something like that next year.
The goal of the college football playoff is to feature the best teams, especially given the significant amount of money involved. TV ratings are crucial for this process. If the current format continues next year, the first-round games may suffer from poor ratings. Should TV ratings dictate the playoff? No, but it may be a reality.
The Texas-Clemson game, in which Texas was a two-touchdown favorite wasn’t much closer. Texas was up as many as 21 points in the second half, although Clemson fought to make it a seven-point game in the fourth quarter, but it never felt like their defense would get enough stops to pull away with a win. As of writing, the score is 38-24 following a goal-line stand and Texas is running out the clock.
Clemson earned their spot by winning the ACC, which is commendable. However, they were boatraced by Georgia in the season opener and lost to 9-3 South Carolina in the season finale. With that, this year might demonstrate the need for a more balanced schedule.
The first round might not be the only issue the playoff committee needs to address next year. We are still unsure how teams like Arizona State and Boise State from weaker conferences will perform, especially since they had byes in the first round.
Again, it’s very early, but they will need some tweaking. What happens if Arizona State and Boise State get demolished in the second round? If that happens, we’ll see teams like that not get a bye next year.
What should the Playoff do in the future?
Teams should not be penalized for losing in the conference championship game, especially when teams that didn’t even reach that stage are allowed to enter the playoffs. However, to ensure the highest level of competitiveness in the playoff system, we can’t solely select teams based on their win-loss records. That does not mean that a team with four or five losses should qualify; however, when there is a significant difference in the opponents’ strength, teams with three losses may be the better option. There were teams with three losses that would likely have defeated the Hoosiers convincingly.
One thing that has worked so far is having the early-round games on campus. The atmosphere is fantastic, and it’s pure college football.
If the playoff is formatted correctly, it could attract huge ratings and fanfare. This year’s experiment was valuable for understanding what works and doesn’t.
One thing is for sure: fans will complain no matter what the system is and who was snubbed. But at this point, expanding to a 16-team playoff would be excessive.
