The case for an 8-team College Football Playoff

Let’s be clear on the eight teams: The “Power 5” division champs, two at-large teams, and then the highest-ranked non-Power Five team. Based on the committee’s final rankings, the non-Power Five team would be Memphis* (ranked 17th). The Tigers were 12-1, and narrowly ranked ahead of 12-1 Boise State and 12-1 Appalachian State.

*Spare me the debates here, anti-playoff people. Yes, the three were close, but Memphis had the edge in strength of schedule, FPI, and has three wins over teams that were ranked at the time of the game.

That would mean, in my book:

No. 4 Oklahoma vs. No. 5 Georgia

No. 3 Clemson vs. No. 6 Oregon

No. 2 Ohio State vs. No. 7 Baylor

No. 1 LSU vs. No. 8 Memphis

The logistics are up for debate, although the first round almost certainly has to feature home games for the higher seeds. So Memphis would be seeded 8th and play at high-powered LSU, a matchup Colin Cowherd told me he wouldn’t watch if “they played in my kitchen.”

Made-for-TV it’s not, but, it does accomplish one thing, which happens to be the other big reason I want an expanded college football playoff: 

When the college football season begins for 130 teams in August, 90% of the country has zero chance of getting to the college football playoff. Zero. There’s something inherently wrong with that. It’s elitist and frankly, dumb.

What’s the point of starting the season with 0.0% chance of making it to the playoff and playing for a National Championship, regardless of what you accomplish?

Nobody thinks a non-power five team can win the title — they’d almost certainly be 4-TD underdogs against the Clemsons and Ohio States of the world — but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t get to see them try. I tried explaining this to Cowherd on “The Herd” last week; that’s when he said he wouldn’t watch the 1 vs 8 matchup in his kitchen. 

And, truth be told, I used to think that way.