Where Ohio State AD Ross Bjork stands on College Football Playoff expansion
The conversation surrounding the expansion of the College Football Playoff (CFP) has been a hot topic in college athletics for several years. The current four-team format, which has been in place since the CFP’s inception in 2014, has come under scrutiny for its perceived lack of inclusivity and fairness. Many argue that the four-team field, dominated by powerhouses like Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio State, leaves out deserving teams from other conferences, particularly those that may have had standout seasons but didn’t earn a spot due to conference championships, schedule strength, or other factors.
In the midst of this debate, Ohio State Athletic Director (AD) Gene Smith has emerged as one of the key voices on the subject. As one of the most prominent and influential athletic administrators in college football, Smith has had a front-row seat to the evolution of the CFP, its impact on the Buckeyes, and the broader implications of playoff expansion for the sport as a whole. With the potential for a larger playoff field on the horizon, understanding where Smith stands on this issue provides valuable insight into not just Ohio State’s interests, but also the perspectives of the top-tier programs who may be most affected by these changes.
This article will explore Gene Smith’s stance on the College Football Playoff expansion, the factors influencing his opinion, and the broader implications of this ongoing debate. We’ll also examine the potential changes coming to college football’s postseason and what that might mean for Ohio State, its competitors, and the future of the sport as a whole.
The Argument for College Football Playoff Expansion: Equity and Inclusion
Before delving into Gene Smith’s stance, it’s important to first understand the broader context surrounding the debate over expanding the College Football Playoff. The CFP was originally conceived to create a more equitable postseason for college football, replacing the BCS (Bowl Championship Series), which many critics believed was flawed and didn’t properly determine a true national champion.
The current four-team playoff structure has been lauded for creating a postseason that features the best teams in the country, but it has also faced significant criticism for its exclusion of other deserving teams. The system often favors Power Five conference champions and teams with the strongest schedules, which, in many cases, leaves out teams from Group of Five conferences, as well as teams that may not have won their respective conferences but have demonstrated strong performances throughout the season.
Supporters of expanding the College Football Playoff argue that a larger field would bring more fairness to the system. An expansion would allow more teams from different conferences to compete for the national championship, particularly Group of Five schools, which historically have had little chance of making the playoff. Moreover, it could bring a new level of excitement and unpredictability to the postseason, benefiting the sport as a whole.
In a potential expanded system, there are many possibilities—ranging from an eight-team field to a 12-team bracket, which is the model currently being discussed. Under these expanded formats, automatic berths for conference champions, at-large bids for high-ranked teams, and the inclusion of more deserving programs would make the postseason more inclusive and give more teams a legitimate shot at the title.
However, the expansion of the playoff raises many questions about the balance of competition, financial ramifications, and the future structure of college football, all of which have sparked differing opinions among stakeholders.
Gene Smith’s Perspective on Playoff Expansion
As Ohio State’s AD, Gene Smith has a unique perspective on the issue of College Football Playoff expansion. The Buckeyes have been one of the most successful programs in the CFP era, having made multiple playoff appearances and winning the national championship in 2014. As a result, Smith’s views on the expansion of the playoff are shaped not only by Ohio State’s success but also by broader issues of fairness, inclusivity, and the long-term health of college football.
While Smith is a supporter of college football’s postseason structure being more inclusive, his stance is more nuanced than simply calling for an expansion. Let’s break down some of the key factors that inform Smith’s views on playoff expansion.
1. Protecting the Regular Season’s Importance
One of Gene Smith’s main concerns regarding the expansion of the College Football Playoff is the potential devaluation of the regular season. As it stands, the current four-team playoff format places significant emphasis on conference championships and regular-season performance, making every game matter and giving teams a sense of urgency throughout the season. A move to a larger playoff field could, in theory, reduce the weight placed on regular-season games, especially those in the final weeks of the season.
Smith has expressed concern that expanding the playoff to 8, 12, or more teams could lead to more teams being content with simply qualifying for the playoff, rather than aiming for a top-four spot or striving to win their conference. With more teams qualifying, some of the natural competition that drives the intensity of the regular season might diminish, particularly in leagues where a team is almost assured of making the playoff regardless of its final regular-season record.
Furthermore, Smith believes that a larger playoff field could lead to teams resting key players in the final weeks of the season to prepare for the postseason, thereby diminishing the overall competitiveness of the late-season games. The current four-team structure places a premium on every game, and Smith has been vocal about preserving that level of competition in college football.
2. Financial Considerations and the Potential for Increased Revenue
Another critical factor in the debate over playoff expansion is the financial implications. For schools like Ohio State, which already has a large fanbase and significant revenue streams from postseason play, a larger playoff could bring substantial financial benefits. More teams in the playoff means more games, which would translate into more television rights, sponsorship deals, and ticket sales.
Smith has acknowledged the potential for increased revenue, but he has also raised concerns about how this expansion could affect the current bowl system. College football’s bowl games are a major source of income for many schools, and the expanded playoff format could lead to the devaluation of some traditional bowl games that aren’t included in the playoff field. This, in turn, could result in less overall revenue for schools that find themselves outside the playoff but still have a meaningful postseason appearance.
From a logistical standpoint, there’s also the question of whether Ohio State and other schools would need to adjust their schedules to accommodate an expanded postseason. The additional games would likely place an even greater physical toll on players, who are already balancing their academic commitments with the demands of a grueling football season. Smith has been cautious about how the expansion could impact the well-being of athletes, noting that any expansion must ensure that players are not overwhelmed by the demands of a longer postseason.
3. The Need for Inclusivity and Fairness
While Smith has concerns about the potential downsides of an expanded playoff, he has also recognized the growing need for inclusivity and fairness in college football. With the rise of the Group of Five conferences and the increasing talent parity across the country, the current system has come under criticism for leaving out deserving teams. In recent years, teams like UCF (University of Central Florida), which had an undefeated season in 2017 but was left out of the playoff, have sparked calls for a more inclusive system.
Smith has expressed support for a playoff system that allows for automatic spots for conference champions, ensuring that teams from the Group of Five have a legitimate chance of competing for a national title. He has also noted that a more inclusive field could lead to more diverse matchups, which would bring new fan bases into the mix and enhance the overall appeal of college football’s postseason.
However, Smith is careful to note that inclusivity should not come at the expense of the sport’s competitive balance. He has emphasized that any playoff expansion should be done in a way that ensures the best teams in the country are still given the opportunity to compete for the national championship. In this sense, Smith has advocated for a system that strikes a balance between inclusivity and maintaining the prestige of the postseason.
4. The Potential for a 12-Team Playoff: Smith’s Preferred Model
While Smith is not opposed to playoff expansion, he has made it clear that he prefers a model that aligns with the idea of having a competitive field without compromising the integrity of the regular season. A 12-team format, which has gained traction in recent years as the likely future of the playoff, is a model that Smith has expressed support for. This format would include automatic berths for the Power Five conference champions and a number of at-large teams, with the top four teams receiving a bye in the first round.
Smith believes that this model strikes the right balance between inclusivity and maintaining the importance of conference championships and regular-season games. By including the top-ranked teams, while also allowing for some flexibility with at-large bids, the 12-team format provides an opportunity for deserving teams from outside the Power Five to get a shot at the championship. Moreover, the top-four teams receiving a bye preserves the significance of conference titles and overall performance during the regular season.
This format would also provide additional postseason revenue, both for the schools involved and for the sport as a whole, without completely overwhelming the existing bowl system. Smith has been vocal about the need to preserve the essence of college football’s postseason while expanding the playoff in a way that benefits the sport.
