Expanded CFP leads to more parity?

Expanding the CFP will make college football more fun, but it will not increase the parity in the sport. I’ve heard people say pretty consistently over the last few years that the CFP needs to expand in order to increase parity so that a handful of programs don’t have a stranglehold on the sport. Some people point to the NCAA tournament as an example of parity in sports.

But when you look at the number of schools who have won the men’s NCAA tournament in my lifetime (i.e since the 1984-85 school year) and compare it to the number of schools that have AP football national titles, the numbers are identical.

Since 1984-85
Schools with a Mens NCAA tourney title: 19
Schools with an AP national title: 19

It may not lead to parity, but at least it would give more teams a fair chance to win it all.


It isnt about parity… It is about opportunity…and increasing the number of teams and number of games is going to increase the difficulty for everyone…


Here’s a counterpoint to what you’re saying: Even though St Peter’s didn’t win an NCAA title (and will probably never come close to doing so) their season will live in the minds of their fans and college basketball fans everywhere forever. Why? Because they had a shot, and won a couple unlikely upsets. That is what expanding the playoff does. It gives non-blue bloods a shot. That can increase the likelihood that they are able to retain some decent players, and more importantly, give their fans something to hope for beyond the Chuck’s Bail Bonds Bowl in lovely Toad Suck, Arkansas.

(No offense intended to any residents of Toad Suck)


It’s about money. The appearance of fairness helps, but not the driver. Every college football fan can find at least one team to follow or despise in a field of 12 teams (or even 8 teams). Cincy had to check every box, and get some help from the losses of others to finally crack the glass ceiling. They would have easily made an expanded playoff.

Whatever the income projections are for a 12-team playoff, they are probably too low.


Here’s the thing.

What if the CFP never expands beyond four?

If that’s the case, then can we completely disregard the whole PAC-12 thing?

They haven’t qualified a team in a long time. We’d never want to join a conference like that, right?

1 Like

If my team has no chance to make a playoff, I have no vested interest in the playoff as a fan.

This is basically the majority of college football fans right now. Their team does not have a legitimate chance, at all, of even making the post season field so there is little reason to care about who wins the 4 team invitational. As soon as your regular season is over and/or your bowl game then its on to other sports or other leagues that have a legitimate process of crowning a champion.

Why are you so obsessed with the PAC12? You constantly bring it up.
The cfp is about money. This is the only reason why it was created in the first place. It has nothing to do with sports merits. It is about the cartel keeping the money. The most money that is. The cfp expansion is on pause. Why do you think that is?
Media rights dictate college football. There are a few coming up. When these are updated i expect some movement into a possible cfp expansion.

You didn’t work in Disney. You must be having an off day.

I’m obsessed with it because other people here are. All I hear from the same 2-4 people is “we’re going to jump to the PAC-12 as soon as we have the chance,” or “the Big 12 is the new Big East,” yada, yada, yada…even though those statements are bogus for obvious reasons, and UH going to the PAC-12 would be a far worse deal than the Big 12 for obvious reasons.

If the CFP never expands beyond four teams (and that sure seems like a legitimate possibility), then we’d be stupid to even consider moving to a conference that hasn’t qualified a team for it since 2015. That’s the LAST P5 conference that I’d want to be a part of…and quite frankly…I can’t understand anyone else thinking/advocating otherwise.

I want to be in a conference that ALWAYS has a football and men’s basketball team in national title contention…you know…like the Big 12.

1 Like

I agree is about opportunity and allowing more teams to sell that to recruits and fans.

The level of interest of fans of a G5 team in a playoff system with a guarantee G5 spot is widely different, regardless of chance of making it or of being able to win at all.

To me that is main thing with the playoff, to make sure they don’t alienate fans. I think is important to keep fans of the App States, La Techs’ type of teams part of the system.

If the day comes where Houston is no longer part of the same system as the Alabamas I will lose interest. Right now I will watch any game when on , but they will lose fans like me.

I’m disregarding the PAC-12 thing simply because the PAC-12 (like the Big 10 and ACC) had the 8 remaining big 12 schools as well as all of the G5 schools on a buffet line and said “no, thanks”.

“Following consultation with our Presidents, Chancellors and Athletic Directors, the Pac-12 Conference has made the decision to not pursue expansion of our membership at this time. This decision was made following extensive internal discussion and analysis, and is based on the current competitive strength and cohesiveness of our 12 universities. It is also grounded in our confidence in our ability as a conference to best support our student-athletes and to grow and thrive both academically and athletically.”

1 Like