Brett Yormark’s Surprising Verdict on 16-Team CFP Expansion Sparks Heated Debate
So here we are again—rumbling through the chaos of college football’s latest playoff debate. A 16-team College Football Playoff? Sounds like a dream for fans starved for drama, but unwrap the layers, and it’s like trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle with pieces from different boxes. The Big Ten throws out this dizzying 4-4-2-2-1-3 format, each conference clutching guaranteed spots like prized tokens. Meanwhile, the Big 12 and ACC are waving a different flag—the 5+11 model—where conference champs and top performers earn their way, no handouts. And smack dab in the middle stands the SEC, weighing options and schedules like a kid deciding between dessert or dinner. Amid the noise, Brett Yormark of the Big 12 isn’t just whispering; he’s shouting from the rooftops that fairness and rewarding grit should be the compass guiding the playoff expansion. But what really ticks fans off—is it the format, the politics, or just the perpetual tussle over who calls the shots? If college football’s playoff expansion feels like a chess game with no clear king, you’re not alone in wondering whether this evolved format will truly reward merit or just stir the pot more. Want to dive deep into the showdown shaking the turf? LEARN MORE.These last few days, much has been made about what a 16-team College Football Playoff would look like and what the power conferences want to do. The Big Ten wants a 4-4-2-2-1-3 format with each conference guaranteeing a certain number of teams. The other format gaining traction recently is a 5+11 format for every conference champion, the highest-ranked Group of Six Champion, and then 11 at-large teams.
Related Posts
Post Comment