Ohio State Football: Expanding playoff discussions heating up

For the second-straight season the Ohio State football team missed out on making the College Football Playoff Invitational when it deserved a shot to play for a national title.

Over the last two weeks, several prominent influencers in the game have publicly spoken about starting the discussion around expansion. Jim Delaney, Bob Bowlsby and Barry Alvarez carry a lot of weight in the game and their comments have started a flurry of debate in the national media.

It is about time.

Many will say I am just an Ohio State homer and disgruntled that the Buckeyes were left out again. That accusation is accurate, but I’ve been banging the drum for a true playoff before the BCS was created. My belief in expanding the playoff has little to do with Ohio State.

For the record, I also think Baylor, TCU and Penn State had legitimate arguments when they were left out. The current system is flawed in many ways and must be fixed.

At the top of the list is the guidelines that are followed by the Committee change from season to season. Conference championships were emphasized in 2014 to justify leaving out Baylor and TCU. Of course Ohio State winning the title seemed to justify the Committee’s decision that year but we don’t know how TCU and Baylor would have done.

In 2015, the Buckeyes were the defending champions and suffered a last second 17-14 loss at home to eventual Big Ten champion Michigan State.  Its best player, Ezekiel Elliott, spent part of the week in the hospital and was not 100-percent for the game.

Looking at the makeup of that team, I find it hard to believe anyone would think it was not one of the four best teams. That is why I think in 2016 conference championships were de-emphasized and the Committee started moving toward the eye test.

Based on the way the teams were playing at the end of the year in 2016, I think Penn State deserved a shot over Ohio State, especially after winning the head-to-head.

For the last two years the narrative has centered on getting the four best teams in regardless of winning a conference championship. This requires using an eye test because there is no reasonable way to determine which teams are better when most of the time the teams selected don’t play each other during the regular season.

The Committee was fortunate in 2016 and 2017 because the Sooners and Buckeyes played in September, but having that type of proof point will be rare. I do think the Committee got it right in 2017 by reversing the rules it applied to Ohio State in 2015.

Alabama was given the benefit of the doubt with the loss to Auburn and for lacking a conference championship due to injuries. This year I don’t have an issue per se with Notre Dame, Clemson, Alabama and Oklahoma.  All are worthy of a shot.

I could just as easily make a case for the Buckeyes, UCF and Georgia if the actual goal is to include the four best teams.

Many have pointed to Ohio State’s loss to Purdue and said that was enough justification to keep the Buckeyes out.  No one is arguing the severity of the loss, it was ugly.

My issue is the singular focus on one point across an entire season as the basis to differentiate who gets to play for a title.

The Buckeyes dealt with so much adversity this year.  The suspension of Urban Meyer, losing the best defensive player in college football and having other significant injuries on that side of the ball.

Ohio State still managed to win the Big Ten, the second-best conference in college football, and don’t get a chance at another national title.

The other major flaws in the current system are the unbalanced scheduling between the Power 5 conferences, Notre Dame not playing in a conference and too much time between the end of the regular season and the playoff games.

The pushback against expansion is equally fierce and understandable. Protecting the sanctity of the regular season, symbolically the soul of the sport, is paramount.

For this group, allowing more than four is equivalent to awarding participation trophies. I am not advocating more than eight so I find it difficult to buy that argument.

Besides, how is giving a team(s) that lost only one game an opportunity to play for a national championship a “gift” or protecting the regular season.  I would also argue that given the imbalance of scheduling, there is a strong chance that two-loss teams are better anyway.

These young men pour countless hours into achieving their goals and we allow an absurd system to potentially deny them a chance at something special because of arbitrary rules that are applied unevenly from year to year.

Done correctly, moving to an eight-team playoff will enhance the regular season and the postseason. For example, top 4 seeds host the quarterfinal.

Then there is the six-team only crowd. I suspect they believe that four is not enough, but most seasons there are only six teams with a legitimate chance to win the title.

If we are going to add to the number of teams included in the playoff it is best to go to eight. There are already a handful of logistical issues to resolve, it makes no sense to complicate the system with byes.

Furthermore, the efforts to improve the system over the last 30 years have always fallen short of what should have happened. The Poll era, Bowl Coalition, Bowl Alliance and Bowl Championship Series did not accomplish anything except more controversy.

More from Ohio State Football

• Ohio State Football: How Denzel Burke has bounced back so far this season
• Ohio State Football rolling into form at the perfect time
• How Ohio State football has done historically versus new Big 12
• Ohio State Football: We need to see “Killer Ryan Day” at South Bend
• Ohio State Football vs. Notre Dame Prediction, Odds, Spread and Over/Under for College Football Week 4

I am amazed that those who wield power are fueled more by protecting a flawed system with archaic excuses instead of implementing a real playoff that every other sport seems to manage rather easily.

With that in mind, if I were in charge here are the changes I would make to the existing system:

• Hire a FBS Commissioner.
• Raise the amount of playoff teams to eight.
• Start the season one-week earlier.  Quarterfinals are played one week after conference title games and semifinals are two weeks later.  Eliminate the four-week gap between title games and playoff.
• No FCS games after week two.
• Nine conference games for every Power 5 team.
• No automatic qualifiers.
• Top 4 host quarterfinal.
• Semifinals and final are played at existing playoff locations.

Other changes may be necessary but I would start with these. At least we can call it a playoff instead of an invitational.  That would be progress.