Playoff expansion effects on Michigan's natty chances

Submitted by mgeoffriau on January 3rd, 2023 at 9:08 PM

Taking a break from our regularly scheduled TCU game woes and Harbaugh-to-NFL angst.

I've been thinking about the playoff expansion to 12 teams. Specifically, I've heard/seen more than once that next year's playoff berth probably just rides on the OSU/UM game again, unless Michigan manages to drop a game to a seriously bad opponent. But then after that...maybe we're a nearly-perennial playoff team? I think this thought was even expressed on the podcast.

But if the goal is a national championship, are we actually better off with the expanded format? I get that more berths equals more opportunities, but I'm not convinced it actually increases our chances of winning the whole thing.

Michigan seems to be in this slightly awkward second tier position, behind the first tier normally occupied by Georgia, OSU, Alabama, and Clemson (accounting for the fact that one, maybe two, out of those four may have a "down" year here and there). Yes, we can play with them on our best day, but there's little-to-no margin for error. But we're not good enough to take victories over the Cincinnati's or TCU's of the world for granted, like it seems the elite tier usually can.

In that sense, I think an expanded playoff might make things more difficult for us. We'll have more games to play, exposing us to additional matchups against lower-ranked but still dangerous teams, and eventually we will still have to play at least one, if not two, games against one of the elites.

I don't know if the 4 team format is ideal for our chances, but it might be. We don't have to finish in the top 2 every year to have a shot, but if we get a decent draw in the semifinal (cough), then we have a puncher's chance in the championship.

Agree? Disagree? Am I overlooking some aspect of a 12 team playoff format that will boost Michigan's chances at bagging a championship?

MGoBoard
Football

RickSnow

January 3rd, 2023 at 9:12 PM ^

You can’t win the playoff if you’re not in it. I don’t understand the argument that a 4 team playoff increases our chances 

Joined: 08/10/2017

MGoPoints: 8142

The Deer Hunter

January 4th, 2023 at 12:28 AM ^

This is probably the best take IMO given the next expansion for the CFP. For some teams the 12 team playoff is advantageous and that includes Michigan. With the four team scheme, Bama, Georgia, OSU & Clemson, for example, have a real advantage where 12 teams make you prove it a little more. 

Now we are in pretty good shape next year due to our roster & schedule to make the "final 4". After that I will welcome the 12 team CFP. 

 

Joined: 05/21/2020

MGoPoints: 3503

BoFan

January 5th, 2023 at 4:37 AM ^

If you run the odds, 12 easier to get in but much harder to win the championship. There are more chances to lose in a 12 team format with all the best teams.
 

 If you are one of four teams you have a much better chance than if you are one of 12 teams. Of course you have to factor in perhaps a 90% chance of making a 12 team playoff vs 30% chance of a 4 team playoff.  Lots of factors.  I would bet a simulation would favor the 4 team. 
 

Another way to look at it is if you are a top 4 team you get in either way, but your odds of winning everything go down significantly with 12 teams. 

Joined: 03/09/2012

MGoPoints: 19943

Karbaugh

January 3rd, 2023 at 9:13 PM ^

I think the biggest thing that the expanded playoff does, in addition to the portal and NIL do(in theory) is allow for the talent pool to be less concentrated. The reasoning for this is that with more teams able to get into the playoff you don’t have to go to one of 4 or 5 top tier schools to have a shot at a natty. Remains to be seen if it works out this way and we have more parity in college football finally. 

Joined: 01/17/2017

MGoPoints: 94

M-GO-Beek

January 3rd, 2023 at 9:37 PM ^

I agree with the parity idea (also as stated, in theory, we will see how it works in practice).  But also it gives Michigan more chances at a national championship because it increases the margin for error to play in the playoff.  Say UM is a young team who drops a game early, improves throughout the year but then loses close to OSU (on a horse shit ref job, I'm sure). Then they are a good team that will get to play in the playoff.  As it is now, the season essentially comes down to beat OSU or not. In an expanded playoff, then a second loss or a loss to OSU is not the death kneel it currently is.

Joined: 02/03/2015

MGoPoints: 5638

Ernis

January 4th, 2023 at 7:34 AM ^

Agree. Just think how big an impact the BCS had on the teams that were top of the game at that time. When only 2 teams got “meaningful” (per the arbitrary powers that be) postseason play, that concentrated top recruits into the handful of teams that made it to that level, during that span, for over a decade after.

ok, I haven’t done any analysis on that, but that’s the impression I get. Maybe I’m wrong.

Joined: 09/23/2008

MGoPoints: 11480

ska4punkkid

January 3rd, 2023 at 9:15 PM ^

Next year will be our best shot for a while. It’s the last year where you only need to win 2 playoff games to win the national championship. Plus, with a TON of young talent coming back, esp JJ growing and developing, we have to get it done in 2023

Joined: 07/09/2015

MGoPoints: 11926

Kilgore Trout

January 3rd, 2023 at 9:16 PM ^

I think you're on to something, but it depends what kind of season Michigan is having. 

If it's something like the last two years, the 4 team playoff is definitely better because teams like Alabama and LSU don't get a mulligan. 

If it's something like 2016 where Speight getting some time to heal up would help, the 12 team would be nice. 

All in all, you have to be able to beat at least 2, and maybe 3 or 4 really good teams to win the 12 team playoff, so it feels like the truly great teams will win more often. But, it will be easier to stay in the top tier in the bigger playoff. 

Joined: 02/20/2009

MGoPoints: 13178

lhglrkwg

January 3rd, 2023 at 9:29 PM ^

We will be worse off as the field expands for the reason you noted- Michigan is not built of elite talent and that will make it very hard to string together multiple games and win it all.
 

I think this season was one of the few shots Michigan will really have at a football title in my lifetime. Sucks that we blew it. Next season may have a shot but who knows if you can reloaded Bama or Georgia instead of a weakened Georgia like we had this year

Joined: 07/03/2008

MGoPoints: 87967

HailHail47

January 3rd, 2023 at 10:44 PM ^

Georgia, Bama, Clemson, LSU, and USC are all going to be serious contenders going forward because they’ll have the coaching and talent. We caught them in a year where only Georgia is great. The others seem poised to improve. Heck, TCU might even become a powerhouse in the Big 12, Sonny Dykes is a great coach. 
 

As far as the 12 team playoff improving our chances… I think it stays about the same. It’s going to depend largely on matchups. I think we obviously make the playoff more often, probably even most years. But having the 8th or 9th best team win it all is quite unlikely because the top 3 or 4 teams tend to be far superior to the rest. We will see. 

Joined: 10/07/2017

MGoPoints: 5305

lhglrkwg

January 4th, 2023 at 6:37 AM ^

Its gonna be unpopular at the moment, but I think Dykes is more likely to be an Orgeron or a Tucker than a guy who suddenly figured out how to be an elite coach. He had the stars align with a great college QB, an older team, and a horseshoe up his backside that would make 2011 Brady Hoke blush.

Joined: 07/03/2008

MGoPoints: 87967

MgoHillbilly

January 3rd, 2023 at 9:30 PM ^

I think we'll do better without the bye. We suck in bowl games. Less time between the end of the season and the next game, the better, and preferably with a home game to warm the team up again.

Joined: 01/04/2017

MGoPoints: 24361

dmgoblue08

January 3rd, 2023 at 9:39 PM ^

We've won back to back big ten championships and outscored OSU by 50 pts in the last two games. I don't care what tier we're in but OSU is there with us.

Joined: 08/27/2009

MGoPoints: 1478

NittanyFan

January 3rd, 2023 at 9:48 PM ^

The NCAA basketball tournament isn't a perfect analogy, but from the start of the 64-team tournament through last year, a 1-4 seed makes the Final Four 82.4% of the time (1-2 seed 62.1% of the time).  5-8 seed is 12.8% of the time.  9-12 seed is 4.8% of the time.  (no 13-16 seed has made the Final Four)

(think of making the Final Four being similar to winning a 12-team CFB playoff)

Adjusting those stats directionally to estimate %s for a 12-team CFB playoff:

  • An individual college basketball game is more variable (IMO) than an individual college football game, in terms of the actual better team winning,
  • but the 1-4 seeds in the CFB playoff may not be the actual teams that would be seeded 1-4, if not for the conference championship stipulation,
  • 5-8 seeds in the CFB playoff would get a 1st round home-field advantage that their counterparts in basketball don't get,
  • 1-4 seeds in the CFB playoff have a literal 0.0% chance of losing in the 1st round (at least one of them loses in the 1st round in ~ 20% of all regional basketball brackets).

I'm spit-balling here, but accounting for the above I think a 1-2 seed wins the CFB playoff ~ 70% of the time, a 3-4 seed 12% of the time, a 5-6 seed 12% of the time, a 7-8 seed 4% of the time, and a 9-12 seed only 2% of the time.

I don't know if that really answers the question - you'd have to estimate Michigan's general seed line.  But even in an expanded playoff, I expect the elite teams will continue to win at a high rate.

Joined: 12/04/2012

MGoPoints: 43136

MeanJoe07

January 3rd, 2023 at 10:05 PM ^

There will be even less parity in CFB with the expanded playoffs. Get used to seeing the same teams in the final 4 and championship game forever. We'll be begging for the BCS or 4 team playoff again I guarantee it. You'll never see a Cincinnati type in there ever again. It will be a SEC circle jerk with a few one or two teams from the other conferences sprinkled in occasionally.  CFB is fucked now and I can see why Harbaugh wants to leave TBH. Teams with deep rosters full of 4 and 5 stars will dominate. Injuries will become more of a factor like the NFL.  The lower tier schools will need an insane amount of luck to be able to beat several higher tier teams in a row. Upsets will have less meaning when there's another fully operational NIL reinforced 5 Star battleship ready to mow you down right afterward. There's huge gaps in talent between teams unlike in the NFL.  Lots of teams cluster together in the 9-3 range and it will be a shitshow deciding who gets in. Nobody is considering the downsides to this. Everyone thinks more football will automatically be better. The powers at be will get rich though so there's that.

Joined: 09/15/2013

MGoPoints: 73271

bighouseinmate

January 3rd, 2023 at 11:13 PM ^

I don’t think so. As tcu proved this year, a good team can beat a better team on the right night if things go their way. I expect it to look much like the nfl playoffs do, with some years having the top four blow through everyone else, but in many years having one or more lower ranked teams get on a roll and beat the better teams. 

Joined: 12/19/2008

MGoPoints: 4995

NittanyFan

January 3rd, 2023 at 11:57 PM ^

Based on the final CFP rankings --- TCU would have been seeded number 5.  (UGA, U-M, Clemson & Utah the top 4 seeds)

They would have drawn Tulane and then Utah (there will be no re-seeding in the 12-team tournament).  Georgia would have been their SF draw, but that's not as challenging a path as it could be to make the Final.

#5 and #6 seeds --- e.g., the best of the non-conference champions --- are actually going to be fairly well-positioned in future years.  They'll get a home game versus a double-digit seed, then they'll play one of the lower-ranked conference champions, which in some years is a team that may not even be a Top 10 team in terms of actual strength or talent.

------------

Michigan would have had a much tougher draw (to make the SF) versus TCU --- first-round bye but then Alabama (#7 seed, would have beaten #10 USC) in the QF.  No small task there.

Joined: 12/04/2012

MGoPoints: 43136

uminks

January 3rd, 2023 at 10:10 PM ^

I don't care if we are 2nd terr. Making a 12 team playoffs would be more exciting than a dumb bowl game. Even a 2 loss Michigan team could make the playoffs. Some years we may lose to OSU and to one of the other B1G teams like PSU or a surprise loss to Sparty, Iowa, Purdue, or IL.

Joined: 11/10/2009

MGoPoints: 32049

sleeper

January 3rd, 2023 at 10:17 PM ^

Depth will be a major factor in who wins the championship once expanded to 12 teams. Just basing it off the two games from Saturday, each team had starters leave with injuries and not return, with a few who would probably be out for at least the next game.

Joined: 11/02/2013

MGoPoints: 5721

JamieH

January 3rd, 2023 at 10:34 PM ^

Simple.  If we're 12-0. then a 12-team playoff makes things a bit harder.
If we're 10-2, a 12-team playoff makes things MUCH, MUCH easier.

We've gone 12-0 TWICE in the last 50 years.  

Joined: 09/05/2009

MGoPoints: 28331

wolvorback

January 3rd, 2023 at 10:48 PM ^

I don’t know what timeline for the games are with the 12 team format, but I’d expect there to be less time off after the regular season games.  Less time off seems like it may benefit Michigan 

Joined: 11/01/2008

MGoPoints: 4580

bighouseinmate

January 3rd, 2023 at 11:07 PM ^

Chances are better, imo, whether Harbaugh stays or goes. Michigan should be one of the top b1g teams every year, giving them a great chance at making the playoffs nearly every year. What the expanded playoffs WILL do is cut down on the layoff time between either the last game with OSU, or the b1g championship game, and the first round playoff game. That is less time for rust to set in, and a more focused team for that first game. After that the next game should be easier to prepare and get up for, hopefully leading to a much sharper and competitive team playing. Just my two cents. 

Joined: 12/19/2008

MGoPoints: 4995