The AFCA’s push for a 24-team CFP may actually help college football

NCAAF College Football News, Photos, Stats, Scores, Schedule & Videos...

Although many fans have been against the idea for quite some time, it would appear the momentum towards more College Football Playoff expansion is building.

According to a report on Tuesday from Ross Dellinger of Yahoo Sports, the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA) voted last week to recommend the implementation of a CFP with “the maximum number of participants,” along with a few other key changes to the college football schedule.

The other recommended changes included the elimination of conference championship games, keeping the Army-Navy game in a standalone spot on the schedule, and finishing the season by the second Monday in January.

Dellinger notes that although the AFCA’s Board of Trustees doesn’t actually have authority over the NCAA or the CFP, the group does include several prominent coaches who do have the ear of key decision-makers such as conference commissioners and university presidents.

The most notable development here would be the expansion of the CFP. The 12-team format over the last two seasons has received some mixed reviews from fans. Most negativity has been centered on the lack of competitive first-round matchups and the fact that it pushes the season into late January. Dellinger notes the biggest struggle on this topic is between the SEC (a proponent of a 16-team model) and the Big Ten (a proponent of the 24-team model), although the momentum has started to shift in the direction of the 24-team field.

While many fans (myself included) have been opposed to more CFP expansion, combining it with the other rule changes the AFCA proposes might actually have some underlying benefits that make the change worthwhile.

For starters, conference championship games currently aren’t providing as much value as they once did. Even in the 12-team format, most Power 4 conference championships are between teams that are likely already CFP-bound. The Big Ten’s championship game in 2025 was between Indiana and Ohio State, the teams that ended up being the top two seeds in the CFP anyway. So what’s the purpose of making teams play an extra game that, at most, only impacts seeding?

Furthermore, the elimination of conference championship games would allow the playoff’s start date to be moved closer to the end of the regular season. This would ultimately allow the season to end earlier, allowing players to get a longer offseason’s worth of recovery, and coaches the ability to construct their roster — and deal with any staff turnover — in a timely manner. This would potentially put an end to the in-season roster and coaching staff instability that’s plagued some playoff teams (most recently, Ole Miss) over the last two seasons.

This could also help prevent the long layoff between the end of the regular season and the start of the CFP, potentially preventing the interest of casual fans from waning during a time when there are no games on the schedule.

The AFCA’s push comes on the heels of the NCAA’s FBS Oversight Committee also recommending standardizing the schedule so that all teams would play their first game during what’s currently Week 0, allowing all teams to play 12 games and have two bye weeks by the last weekend of November.

As it relates to the CFP itself, perhaps the 12-team format’s problem isn’t that it’s too big; maybe it’s that it isn’t big enough. Before I tell you what I mean by that, here’s a look at what the 24-team field would have roughly looked like in 2025 based on the CFP rankings at the end of the regular season.

Expanding the CFP to this size could solve a few issues. Currently, teams that don’t make the CFP end up playing in bowl games that have become glorified scrimmages at best. By ensuring these teams have a CFP game on their schedule instead, it would give them something greater to play for, potentially putting an end to opt-outs and the blatant lack of effort we see during bowl season.

And even though this format’s first round might still lend itself to some blowouts, there could still be some rather competitive games that would replace backups playing against backups in your average bowl game. My apologies to the Pop-Tarts Bowl enthusiasts.

Additionally, the 12-team format has been the sweet spot for weak non-conference scheduling. Under the four-team format, teams would take risks scheduling matchups with marquee non-conference opponents to boost their resumes. In the 12-team era, teams have taken on a mindset that seeks to win 10 games at all costs, knowing only a handful of Power 4 teams are able to do that each year regardless of the strength of their schedule.

By expanding to 24 teams, teams may be more willing to schedule tougher opponents since individual losses won’t have such a crippling effect on their playoff outlook. The chance for the networks broadcasting these games to make money should only sweeten the pot more.

While the constant clamor for playoff expansion from the higher-ups that benefit financially has become an annoyance for many fans, it appears the AFCA is onto something by pushing to expand the CFP alongside other changes to the calendar. For purists like myself, the value of the regular season had taken a hit with the expansion to 12 teams, but perhaps expanding to 24 teams and implementing other rule changes could help bring about a postseason that’s much more meaningful, fast-paced and convenient for programs.

More at NCAAF College Football News, Photos, Stats, Scores, Schedule & Videos