My proposal to improve CFP Bowl Schedule

Submitted by Sambojangles on January 5th, 2024 at 12:03 PM

This is based on previous discussions, proposals, and opinions that the Rose Bowl should be the permanent host of the CFP Championship game. Brian and Seth have advocated for it on this blog, back to the BCS days in Brian's case, and many other talking heads have said the same thing. Of course, they are all correct in their opinion, but unfortunately, they have little to no impact on the people that make these decisions - the management of the CFP, which is itself made up of representatives of each conference plus Notre Dame. Those people, plus the power brokers for the bowl games and host cities themselves, are the ones whose needs need to be addressed to improve the current system. 

TL;DR: My proposal would be for the Championship game to alternate between the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, and Sugar Bowl in New Orleans, starting in 2027 (2026 season) and going on indefinitely. 

The SEC, ACC, and Big 12 have no historical affinity toward the Rose Bowl Game, and mostly would not care to have the championship permanently moved away from their regions. I think the ACC and Big 12 can be safely ignored since they don't have much power in these things, and collapse the opposition down to just the SEC, the opposite pole to the B1G in CFB power going forward. I believe hosting the game in NOLA, the bowl to which they have a historical tie, could be enough to get them on board. 

I'm assuming the Big Ten and Rose Bowl committee, plus SEC and Sugar Bowl would all be in favor, and push it through opposition from other conferences, as needed. 

The Sugar Bowl is the second oldest bowl game and nearly as prestigious as the Rose Bowl, and the CFP indicated as much by pairing them to start the semi-final rotation ten years ago. Having alternate co-hosts for the championship games would elevate the bowl games again above the rest. Obviously New Orleans is a great host and is perfect for having a championship game there semi-annually.

Hosting the final should take both sites out of the semi-final rotation, which should be fine as it guarantees they can stay in their traditional New Years Day slots for the quarterfinals every year, as they are set up to in the next two years. The Rose Bowl submitting to schedule changes was reportedly a sticking point in getting to the 12-team agreement. Based on the current rotation, in 2027 the Rose and Sugar Bowls would be moved a week later and played in the evening, taking both away from the traditional parades etc. on New Year's Day. In this proposal, they would not have to. 

The other four of the New Years Six bowls would be happy to accept alternating between quarters and semis, I would think, rather than the 3 year rotation they are currently on. I assume in semifinal years they could host an additional low-level bowl around New Year's Eve to continue to drive tourism traffic at the holiday season.

With the demise of the Pac-12, there are now 4 power conferences and 4 byes into the CFP quarterfinals. It seems like an ideal setup for the winners of each conference to be all but guaranteed placement in their affiliated bowl: Big Ten in the Rose, SEC in the Sugar, ACC in the Orange/Peach, and Big 12 in the Fiesta/Cotton. I think it would be a positive Return to Tradition to more closely align the conferences and bowls, and bring back some of what made CFB great in the days before the BCS and CFP. 

This is speculation, but I think it might be good for the bowls to have some more predictability in terms of which conference is coming. The pastel suit guys can show up to the SEC championship game, knowing they're locked into inviting the winner, and same with the B1GCG, etc. Fans of Michigan, as an example, can know exactly where they're going if they win, without having to have contingency plans for Arizona vs Atlanta (2022) or Miami vs Dallas (2021). You can put a Rose in your mouth after beating OSU or winning the Big Ten championship game, but it doesn't look as cool to bite down on a "qualified for the playoff" ticket.

What this plan does do is shut out any other venue from bidding on and hosting the championship, which eliminates the power of the committee who rules on the bids from Houston, LA, and Indy, to name the last three. So the selection committee can't extract from the host committees anymore, there are no wine-and-dine city presentations and bribes to influence the selection. Boo hoo, I say. Neither NRG nor SoFi stadiums have any significant college football history, so it's dumb for them to get the crown jewel event. I'll acknowledge, however, that this is likely the biggest reason this won't happen - making sites bid to host the final was a way for the CFP admin to create a lot of power for themselves, and it's hard to make them give that up if they don't have to.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk. While many agree that the ideal case would be a permanent host at the Rose Bowl, I think this is the next best thing, and a clear improvement over the plan for the first two years of a 12 team playoff. And if you squint, it seems plausible within the rules and confines of our current situation, if the right people advocate in favor. So I'm starting my campaign here. 

bamf_16

January 5th, 2024 at 12:10 PM ^

Rose Bowl likely not going to be happy with the championship game being played ~3 weeks into the new calendar year, even with a lesser important game being played closer to New Year’s Day.

Kentucky.maize

January 5th, 2024 at 12:13 PM ^

In my opinion it should rotate between Sugar, Rose, a new “bowl” in Indy and New York. Having it in the same two cities provides too much of an home field advantage for the schools located in that geographic area.

Junior18

January 5th, 2024 at 12:44 PM ^

Fine by me, too! But like you said and I always thought, the powers that be seem intent on removing the weather from influencing the game. 

It's my understanding that the venues for the first games of the 12-team playoff will be selected by the lower-seeded team. It should be interesting to watch the seeding shenanigans to help SEC teams avoid having to play in cold weather stadiums. 

Blau

January 5th, 2024 at 12:25 PM ^

Definitely a diary post and as Walter would say, I don’t think the venue/location is the issue here, dude.

While the Rose Bowl will always be the Grand(Mac)daddy of them all, I don’t think the players or coaches care where the NC game is played as long it’s not in someone’s backyard. The expanded playoff format finally allows everyone the same opportunity to truly determine the best team. If you can’t make the top 12, tough shit. If you’re on the outside looking in, there is probably little chance you could beat the #1, 2, 3 and 4 seeds anyways. Again, location is only an issue to those outside the program.

If you want to tackle a more pressing issue, I would look at the other 324 uneventful, weird-ass bowl games and their proud mayonnaise/mortgage company sponsors. If anyone can tell me what a “Famous Toastery” is without googling it, I’ll get you a nice, shiny nickel.

Blau

January 5th, 2024 at 12:57 PM ^

Correct. But that’s part of the playoff structure, no? Furthermore, it incentivizes teams to strive for the best seeds possible similar to the NFL. If you’re LSU, do you really want to play Wisconsin in Madison mid-December? Probably not, so you should probably try to for the best seeding possible. Vice versa, if you’re Penn State, you probably don’t want to play Florida in the swamp if you can avoid it.

As an alumni or fan, you’ll need to check your dedication if you’re seriously considering attending away or neutral site games as well. I applaud, and admittedly am jealous, of the folks who can drop a dime on hotel/airfare/tickets/etc on the Rose Bowl and then turn around and do the same for the NC game in Houston. But if there’s the possibility Michigan plays at home, now we can talk even if it’s for a first round game.

othernel

January 5th, 2024 at 12:34 PM ^

Pushing the season later will lead to more opt-outs because players would have to transfer and enroll in a new school by mid-Jan.

If semi-finals and finals are being played in mid-late January, then they would have no option than to stop playing if their team made it that far, or risk their transfer.

Blau

January 5th, 2024 at 1:05 PM ^

If your team is in the 12-team CFP regularly and playing meaningful football, wouldn’t you have less opt-outs? See: FSU and OSU for reference.

How many major opt-outs from the 4 CFP teams did you hear about prior to the semifinal games being played? While players certainly want the opportunity to make an on-field impact and play, I think they’re more likely to stick with their team under the promise of playing for a championship than chasing a bag. If they are chasing a bag, let ‘em go, right?

othernel

January 5th, 2024 at 1:31 PM ^

Less opt-outs until the transfer portal opens and players need to start enrolling in other schools for the following year.

Malik Murphy at Texas said he didn't want to leave before the playoff, but the timing of the portal left him no option.

If i'm a coach who is recruiting a transfer portal player, I'm not committing exclusively to a player who might still have 2-3 games left and could potentially get hurt.

We need to just play the expanded playoffs earlier, in Dec. Not push it out til late Jan.

schreibee

January 5th, 2024 at 4:37 PM ^

Malik Murphy was not a good example, as he'd dropped to 3rd on the depth chart by the time of the Sugar Bowl, and had zero chance of a real competition for the QB role in '24. He had no compelling reason to stay with Texas through the playoffs vs find a new NIL offer & get started with his new school. 

Something is going to happen between the '24 season & the '26 season, when they can revisit the cfp schedule. As it stands now, conference title games, bowl practices, the portal opening and early signing day are all happening within about 10 days-2 weeks of each other. 

That's simply not sustainable in the long term - so which one drives the least revenue of all those? That'll be the one to go first. So no more December signing day soon.

Then, in all honesty, the whole portal thing is driven by the academic calendar rather than revenue. Does anyone believe that'll be allowed to continue? They're either going to start letting players join classes late, or participate in Spring practice before they're even students - which is what happens in Bowl practices already, no? 

Once all the things that don't drive revenue are cleared from the path, then a sensible college playoff schedule can be enacted. One that doesn't cause too many conflicts with the NFL playoffs, keeps the games somewhat approximate to the current Bowl system, and wraps in time to close the home stretch on crootin.

But '24 is gonna be somewhat chaotic! 

JoeFink

January 5th, 2024 at 12:39 PM ^

I suggest that all future CFP final games be held at The Big House.  Largest stadium, most intelligent fan base, and home of the all-time leader in wins, our Michigan Wolverines!  Seems like a no brainer.

ST3

January 5th, 2024 at 1:56 PM ^

I don’t like having 12 teams. It should have been 8 (with conference championship games) or 16 teams (without conference championships).

Now we’re going to have debates about 4 vs. 5 seeds. And why are we giving a bye to the top 4? That implies we know who the top 4 are with enough certainty that they get the advantage of the bye*. If we know that, just have a 4 team playoff. 

8 teams treats everyone as equal (same number of playoff games) with an advantage to the top 4 for having the best season. 
 
*Is the bye really an advantage? Probably, but one team (the 5 seed) gets to knock off the rust against a 12 while the 4 sits at home.

DennisFranklinDaMan

January 5th, 2024 at 2:42 PM ^

I think it's exactly the opposite. We don't know who the top 4 are with enough certainty to exclude everyone else, so we're giving them an advantage, but not denying the next 8 teams of an opportunity altogether. 

Under these rules, with the circumstances in effect at the end of this year, FSU might still be pissed, but would not be apoplectic. 

Makes sense to me. In fact, it incentivizes continuing to play hard in, among other things, the last game of the year, even if you're undefeated, to fight for that first round bye.

(Oh, and in response to your question about whether a bye is an advantage: Yes. The No. 5 team could also lose to the No. 12 team — or, even if they win, have key players go down with injuries. I'd take the bye 10 times out of 10).

schreibee

January 5th, 2024 at 4:53 PM ^

I don't think there's any debate about the top 4 - it'll be the B10, SEC, ACC & B12 Champs. They'll still debate the seeding of the B10 or SEC Champ, but that's only when there are multiple teams with the same record. But who's in the top 4 is set.

Now the real debate will #8 vs #9. 8 hosts 9 in the 1st round, so that's now the single most important seeding in the entire tournament! 

And I agree that I'd rather be seeded 5 than 4. 5 hosts a game vs the 12-seed, while 4 sits a week and then faces the strongest remaining team that just won their game, but at a neutral site - likely that 5-seed.

That will be interesting over the next few years. I predict 5 beats 4 more often than not!

GRBluefan

January 5th, 2024 at 12:46 PM ^

Nothing wrong with your ideas.  But the question you need to answer is…how will this make more $$$$s for the schools and other non-player stakeholders?  If the answer is, it won’t…you’ve got a non-starter.  

brad

January 5th, 2024 at 12:59 PM ^

Are you suggesting to have the second round of the playoff games in the Sugar Bowl, Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl and Cotton Bowl, and then also have the championship game rotate between just the Rose and Sugar bowls two weeks later?

I think the idea to have the first round of off-campus playoff games (quarter finals) at the four historic bowl sites on New Years Day is good.  Forcing the championship game to be in the Rose Bowl again on some monday night in mid-January wouldn't result in the same majesty.  However, if it can be done at 2pm local time on a Saturday, that could be something.  The setting and the transformation of the scene in-game is a lot of what makes the Rose Bowl special.

 

ST3

January 5th, 2024 at 2:01 PM ^

Having all 4 bowls in the southern part of the country is a huge disadvantage for the Big10. It made sense when you are playing a postseason bowl game as a reward for a great season. Now that it’s part of a championship playoff, northern sites (with indoor stadiums) definitely should be in the mix. Indy and Chicago should definitely be included. Perhaps add Seattle, New York, Detroit or Minneapolis. Phoenix and Vegas have arguments to be included too.

Vasav

January 5th, 2024 at 2:16 PM ^

I wholeheartedly think that one of the QF "bowls" should be "the winter wonderland bowl" hosted in Detroit, Minneapolis or Indy and then there should be a "Pacific Bowl" hosted in Vegas/Seattle

if we have to stick with neutral site QFs, that is

ShadowStorm33

January 5th, 2024 at 1:09 PM ^

I feel like if you look past the nostalgia for the tradition of the Rose Bowl, logistically it's really not very good for us, being on the other side of the country (three time zones away) and with the potential to be a virtual home game for teams like USC.

Honestly, I'd say the NFL model would probably be the best (not that it would ever happen), with home games for the higher seeds and a championship game that rotates around the country (including to the Midwest, like Indy and Detroit)...

MMBbones

January 5th, 2024 at 1:18 PM ^

"I feel like if you look past the nostalgia for the tradition of the Rose Bowl, logistically it's really not very good for us, being on the other side of the country (three time zones away) and with the potential to be a virtual home game for teams like USC."

Eh. The nostalgia means quite a bit. We've been in the Rose Bowl since the nineteen-aughts. Michigan travels as well as any school. USC and UCLA have notoriously weak fan bases in spite of having a great market in LA. 

I agree with the argument the dollars don't make sense for the networks. But for pretty much every team in the B1G, having cake by the ocean every New Year's can work quite nicely. (Yeah, I know I'm twisting the meaning of the song lyrics)

Squad16

January 5th, 2024 at 7:14 PM ^

Disagree with this. 

We have a huge alumni base on the West Coast; it is bigger than any other Midwestern Big Ten School or any SEC school. We also travel well from the rest of the country due to that tradition/nostalgia. This is why we were nearly 2:1 over Alabama fans in this week's game, who travel very well. 

UCLA's football fans are a non-factor. USC is really the only only one who would be advantaged by a permanent Rose Bowl slot. 

Goggles Paisano

January 5th, 2024 at 1:14 PM ^

How about some common sense and let's not play the championship game on a Monday night.  WTF sense does that even make?  The game should always be on a Saturday night.  

ST3

January 5th, 2024 at 2:05 PM ^

The 2nd playoff game ended almost past my bedtime and I live on the west coast. Why does television think that games ending at 1am east coast time on a week night is a good idea? I can’t believe that the ad $$$ justifies that. Is it really necessary to wait until 6pm west coast time for us to get home? As a west coaster, I appreciate the current situation, but it’s horrible for East coasters.

kalamazoo

January 5th, 2024 at 3:13 PM ^

Im a little unusual for a west coaster, but I did not watch the second game at all since I didn't want to get sucked in. Have kids, go to bed around 9pm pacific (midnight est) and i get up early.

Its fun in the moment, lots of magic at night, my preferred while in college, but harder on the masses with work and responsibilities. Not to mention bleary morning drivers and car accidents.

Baseball, basketball no different though. The viewers will view. They wont outright avoid like i might.

MichiganiaMan

January 5th, 2024 at 1:51 PM ^

I don’t think the schedule will ever allow for championship weekend to occur on New Years. With the expansion to 12, you’ll need four weeks to play the games. You could knock out the first two rounds in December, and then have the semifinals on New Years. With that set up, you could play the Orange, Peach, Cotton, and Fiesta quarterfinals on the last weekend before Christmas, then keep the Rose and Sugar on NYD. 
 

I generally loathe proposals to move the start of the season up. Will just mean more early season games played in front of empty stadiums, and the loss of a post-Thanksgiving rivalry week (which considering extant travel patterns around that holiday, makes absolutely no sense).

BlueHills

January 5th, 2024 at 2:11 PM ^

I agree with the sentiment - there is no more beautiful setting than the Rose Bowl for football - but even if the idea would fly with the powers who decide these things, it might be unfair to the many people who can't afford the travel expense of going out to the west coast every year, but who might swing a ticket to see an NC game in person if it's not too far away. New Orleans is nice, too, but it's not going to work out financially every year for lots of folks in, say, the Northwest, or the upper Midwest.

Rotating the venue among several locations gives more people the opportunity to see an NC. That is not a bad thing. I shouldn't be meant only for wealthy or UMC people, or professional writers/photographers/commentators who can justify the business expense.

I was in LA with my family only a month ago, and ignoring for a moment the airfare, Ubers, hotel charges, etc., the cost of a one-hamburger-plus-pie dinner for four at one of LA's historic diners was $120 plus tip, no alcoholic beverages or soft drinks ordered (yes the burgers were great, but that was a little over the top). I knew what I was getting into in advance, but it's still a fact of life that the cost of doing ordinary things in LA can be a little challenging for lots of people.

I believe that everyone in the country should have a realistic opportunity to be within a one-day drive to see an NC game, every few years. Just my egalitarian two cents.

 

Vasav

January 5th, 2024 at 2:12 PM ^

I think the key is either - the Rose is played on NYD as the championship, or the Rose and Sugar are played on NYD as SFs

Honestly, I think the Sugar and Orange should take the FCS final from Frisco, TX and create a "G5" tournament for the G5 teams that don't make the CFP Tournament (of Roses).

The schedule is the big thing here - and as CFB is all about "more games = more money" we're going to get these less important conference title games, neutral site QFs and SFs, and they'll all kill the grand nature of NYD being championship games for the CFP, G5 and FCS. If you got rid of conference 'ships and started the playoffs on current championship weekend, you could host all 3 rounds with a minimum of 10 days between the semis and NYD. (This year is near the maximum time off you'd get - it was 16 days, 17 days would be the max). I'd even say expand the CFP to 16 teams (way too many in my opinion) if it would convince networks to kill the conference titles. Otherwise, move the conference titles to thanksgiving weekend.

But end the season on NYD, with a G5 title at noon in Miami or NOLA, and an "after dark" FCS title in the other - and the Rose Bowl in between.

Squader

January 5th, 2024 at 2:21 PM ^

Not a bad direction. I'm intrigued by your idea of tying the earlier round bowls to conferences again.

But if it were up to me we'd pare it down to just three bowls (let's say Rose, Sugar, Orange) and rotate those as the semifinals on NYD or the championship a week later (Rose Bowl just has to suck it up some years). All other first/second round games are on campus. Stupid that the teams with a bye don't get to play a home game, and I expect this will get corrected after a couple years.

northmuskeGOnBLUE

January 5th, 2024 at 4:26 PM ^

For me, being East Coast time zone, the championship game needs to be on a Saturday. I haven’t watched a CFP championship game in ages. I have to get up at 5am for work, and 12:30am Monday night finishes don’t work for me. 
 

I will be watching this year (of course) but am planning to take Tuesday off. 
 

Oh, by the way, 2/3 of the US population lives in the Eastern TZ.