Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

CFB Analyst Calls Out James Franklin and CFP in Controversial Tweet

CFB analyst calls out James Franklin's coaching failures while questioning the CFP's credibility in rankings.

Not everyone is on board with the recent expansion of the College Football Playoff (CFP) to 12 teams. Following some lackluster performances in the opening games, critics are starting to voice their concerns about whether this many teams should be competing for the National Championship.

Criticism of the expanded playoff format

One notable critic is Jon “Stugotz” Weiner from the “Dan LeBatard Show with Stugotz.” He took to social media to express his discontent, stating,

“If James Franklin is winning playoff games, you have too many teams in the playoffs.”

This comment not only targets Penn State’s head coach, who has struggled to secure victories in high-stakes situations, but also serves as a critique of the expanded playoff format itself.

Franklin’s record against AP top-10 teams is a staggering 3-17 during his decade-long tenure at Penn State. Despite this less-than-stellar track record, the Nittany Lions managed a convincing 38-10 victory over SMU in the first round of the playoff. However, that win won’t help Franklin’s overall record against ranked opponents, as the Mustangs were ranked No. 11 at the time.

Debate over playoff inclusivity

The conversation around whether SMU even deserved to be in the playoff spotlight has also emerged. After a loss to Clemson in the ACC Championship Game, the Mustangs (11-3) dropped to No. 10 in the CFP rankings, just ahead of Alabama (9-3). While SMU had one fewer loss than Alabama, they lacked any wins against teams ranked in the top 25, raising questions about their legitimacy as a playoff contender.

As we reflect on the performances of SMU and the ninth-ranked Indiana Hoosiers, it becomes clear that strength of schedule will likely play a more significant role in future selections. Yet, the idea of reducing the number of teams in the CFP seems improbable, especially with the current momentum behind the expanded format.

What would a smaller CFP look like in 2024?

To understand the implications of a smaller playoff, we can look back at the previous four-team format that existed from 2014 to 2023. Under that system, conference champions weren’t guaranteed a spot, leading to instances where two teams from the SEC made the playoffs. This structure created a competitive landscape where teams like Oregon would face off against Penn State, while Georgia would go up against Texas for a shot at the title.

But what if the playoff had remained at eight teams instead of expanding to 12? If we were to use the current CFP rankings without guaranteeing spots for conference champions, the matchups would look like this:

  • (1) Oregon Ducks vs (8) Indiana Hoosiers
  • (2) Georgia Bulldogs vs (7) Tennessee Volunteers
  • (3) Texas Longhorns vs (6) Ohio State Buckeyes
  • (4) Penn State Nittany Lions vs (5) Notre Dame Fighting Irish

This hypothetical scenario raises an interesting question: Would the playoff landscape be perceived differently if it featured only eight teams?

Looking ahead: The future of the CFP

Despite the concerns raised by critics and the uneven performances seen in the early playoff games, the likelihood of the College Football Playoff expanding to 16 teams seems more plausible than reverting back to a smaller format. The appetite for inclusivity and the excitement generated by the playoff system may drive further expansion in the coming years.

As college football continues to evolve, the debate surrounding the playoff format will remain a hot topic among fans, analysts, and players alike. The question of how many teams truly deserve a shot at the championship will fuel discussions, and the impact of strength of schedule will undoubtedly shape future selections.

In the end, whether you support the current 12-team format or long for a return to a more exclusive playoff system, one thing is clear: college football is as thrilling and unpredictable as ever. The passion of the fans, the intensity of the games, and the stakes of the championship chase will continue to captivate audiences across the nation.

As we look forward to the next round of playoff games, the excitement is palpable. Will the Nittany Lions continue their surprising run? Can underdogs like SMU prove their worth? The drama of college football is just getting started, and we can’t wait to see how it unfolds!

X
Facebook
WhatsApp
Telegram

Today´s Best