In partnership with
Vo. 1, No. 37
This week in Ohio State football, the topic is once again College Football Playoff expansion.
I stated my preference last week, but the topic raged again this week because the Big Ten held meetings in California.
That created a platform for its representatives to say all kinds of stuff about a 24-team CFP that is silly and/or wrong.
That includes Ryan Day, Dan Lanning and Mr. Baseball himself, Tony Petitti, going on the record, but the most embarrassing point was made by a former Jim Tressel graduate assistant of all people.
Men, You've Been Misinformed
Men's skin is about 25% thicker than women's, but thicker skin doesn't mean better aging. It means delayed collapse. For years, your skin looks resilient. Then collagen declines, and when it does, it drops hard: deeper wrinkles, heavier under-eye bags, more dark spots showing up all at once.
Most men were never taught to get ahead of this. Women were. And by the time the signs show up, you're playing catch-up.
Particle Face Cream was built precisely for this. One 6-in-1 formula engineered for men's skin — reduces eye bags, dark spots, and wrinkles, restores firmness, hydrates deeply, and revives dull tone. No complicated routine. Over 1,000,000 men already use it. Try it risk-free with a 30-day money-back guarantee.
Ryan Day supports move to 24-team CFP
I’m not mad at Ohio State’s coach for coming out in favor of doubling the size of the playoff, but I am disappointed.
To his credit, Day told reporters expanding the CFP might not be good for his team, “but it’s certainly best for the conference and great for college football in general.”
The stated reason for the latter is engaging more fanbases.
That sounds nice, but it was also the main reason to expand from four to 12, right? So when does that stop? And have we engaged enough fanbases as it is?
I would argue yes since even that very mid Michigan team of 2025 entered Week 12 still faintly alive for the 12-team playoff despite losing to both teams it had played with a pulse to that point.
More is better… to a point. Because not only can we not give EVERYONE a trophy, but there is give and take.
As CFB aims to “engage” fans of teams not even in the top 25, it risks giving people less reason to watch the teams in the top 10 (even when they play each other) because the only outcomes that really matter for those teams will be in the playoff.
That is a huge shift for the sport if it comes to pass.
As for the Buckeyes, well, yeah having to win more games to claim the ultimate prize is not ideal.
“When there was four, you just had to win two games,” Day said. “Now there’s more games to be played, there’s a bigger pool, a bigger field. But when you take a step away from it, you’re always going to be late in the season, playing for an opportunity to be the highest seed that you can be.”
Oregon coach Dan Lanning also endorsed expansion, incorrectly indicating college football should follow the lead of much less popular college basketball by debasing its regular season:
“What's happened because of the College Football Playoff is every bowl game has been devalued, the end of the season looks completely different. You're a failure as a coach if you don't make it to the College Football Playoff.
"It's going to create more opportunity. Just like March Madness is great in the spring for basketball, it'll be good for our sport.”
How misguided is this?
What about winter basketball?
March Madness is the only thing 99% of the public cares about as far as college basketball, and that is absolutely terrible for the sport.
College football being mostly about the regular season instead has always been viewed by a majority of fans as a feature, not a bug. Three months of meaningful football is more enjoyable than three weeks of it.
On top of that, some non-playoff bowls have actually seen an uptick in popularity the last couple of years so Lanning is 0-2 there.
Lanning also said seeding would be important enough to keep all of his team’s games relevant, but that’s a tough sell if you actually look at who would be teams 17-24.
One of them will be the overmatched G5 (now G6 with the Pac 12 returning this fall) champ while the others will be a combination of middling Big Ten and SEC teams who lost to all the good teams they played in the regular season, have a bad loss or possibly both. I’d give them all a puncher’s chance, but not one more than the other so it doesn’t matter much if you’re No. 2 or No. 8 as long as you get that bye.
Beyond that, does anyone really cheer harder for seeding? I don’t really think so. It’s nothing compared to playing for an actual spot in the field.
Perhaps even more noteworthy, Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti also finally articulated his reasons for pushing a 24-team playoff instead of 16 (other than getting more clout for his masters at Fox).
My main takeaway is this guy is even more out of touch with college football than I thought.
“For some reason, I think we’re up against some older traditions. Like college football’s the last place where every team in the postseason has to be a stone-cold lock, legit chance to win the championship. And that’s not the way playoffs work in every other sport — including the NCAA. But football’s hung onto that.”
Yes. Proudly in fact! Because it makes all three months of the regular season more fun and interesting rather than creating the feeling that many teams are biding their time for the games that really matter in December.
“A lot of that national [conversation] that goes on with you guys and others is focused on the best places all the time,” Petitti said. “I don’t get why we can’t have a Minnesota-Iowa game have real impact every so often, like every year actually. Why can’t we do that?”
Hey buddy, we can!
People who like college football understand Iowa-Minnesota is already a big game that appeals to the fans of those teams and beyond.
If they were playing for the No. 22 seed, would that add some juice?
Yeah, I’m sure, but what are we really talking about? Would the emphasis on the game go from an 8 to a 9? Are more outsiders going to tune in on a full day of CFB?
More importantly, does that game really need more juice?
Both teams were 5-2 when they played at the end of October last year, and Iowa blew the Golden Gophers out in front of a sellout crowd at Kinnick Stadium to stay alive in the playoff hunt.
Seems like it’s already a big deal…
According to SportsMediaWatch.com, 1.6 million people watched on CBS. That ranked eighth among games that day, but it’s hard to see that number improving if a third-rate playoff spot were on the line since all the other games in the top 10 would also feature “bubble” teams.
Speaking of Minnesota, Golden Gophers head coach P.J. Fleck shared the his perspective in an embarrassing bit of candidness that confirmed why his old boss in the sweater vest tended to keep his opinions to himself.
“I don’t think we like the 24-team playoff; we absolutely love the 24-team playoff, especially at the University of Minnesota. It allows us to have a way better chance to be able to play in the College Football Playoff every single year, based on the resources that we have and the challenges that we have.”
So he’s embracing the 24-team playoff specifically because it wouldn’t actually require them to get better to make it.
Doesn’t that sound like a great deal?
Talk about tone deaf.
I am not certain we will ever have another Indiana run like the last two years, but the Hoosiers left no doubt it is at least possible without changing anything about the postseason format.
All they had to do was get a better coach, better players and play better.
What a concept!
5,000+ PE professionals. One 8-week program.
Build an MBA-caliber network and earn a Wharton Online certificate in 8 weeks. Join the next Private Equity Certificate Program starting June 8.
Use code SAVE300 to save $300 on tuition.
If you’re still not convinced, advanced stats man Bill Connelly of ESPN is on the case, and the aforementioned 2025 Michigan team is among his examples.
The Wolverines would have been able to go to 0-3 against good teams on the season, lose to its hated rival and still have everything to play for in December because apparently the first 12 weeks didn’t determine anything.
(Another example: The Iron Bowl would have gone from being an elimination game for Alabama to probably not even costing it a home game if it had lost to Auburn.)
I'm a big believer in rivalry games and the general college football experience. Your team's games are personal to you no matter what extra meaning they might or might not have to the rest of the world. Michigan's 2024 upset of Ohio State will always delight Michigan fans, after all. But a 24-team playoff with no conference title game stakes would drain most of the excess meaning from college football's biggest weekend. Maybe this is fine -- maybe we'll never lose interest or stop watching or take a week off here and there. But I don't really want to find out where the line is.
Connelly also suggests a solution to the conference championship game dilemma (which seems to be more of a concern for accountants than fans, but still): Instead of that being a 13th game for two teams, use a flex scheduling model to pit the top two teams in the ninth game of the conference schedule and come up with opponents for everyone else while you’re at it. That maintains the revenue the Big Ten and SEC get from their championship games while also reducing the championship game participants’ season by a game.
Speaking of revenue, The Athletic’s Stewart Mandel has some potential good news: It might not be there for a 24-team playoff.
He found an anonymous person at ESPN who shared my belief the impact on regular season ratings would actually be a net negative.
“If you get to 24 games, are there additional teams in November games where their fan bases now have a reason to be more interested? Yes, that’s mathematically true,” an ESPN source said. “But there’s going to be less interest in what has traditionally been the top end of the sport. The negative impact of those outweighs whatever positive impact you’re going to get from the (lower) games.”
Mandel also notes we have already seen college leaders want to expand a tournament only to be rebuffed by the networks, at least for a while.
The NCAA Tournament could have gone to 96 teams 15 years ago if they could have gotten enough money for it.
Instead, they ultimately had to settle for a move to 68 that held steady until this year.
Rather than create whole new round, the basketball tournament added three teams and two extra nights of programming for the media partners, who did not want more than that and got other concessions to help them better monetize the games that already existed.
Does that mean 16 is where this lands?
I still think 12 is more than enough, but 16 would be far preferable to 24, and it might make some sense despite Petitti dismissing it…
OK, that’s all for this week, but thanks as always for reading Cus Words Sports!
If you’re tapped out on this subject, I understand. The SEC has meetings next week, but hopefully the only thing to come from that is Greg Sankey confirming they are still not on board.
Beyond that, maybe we can talk a little football — opponent previews, depth chart reviews and who knows what else!
If you have any requests, you can always send them along!
Have a great weekend…
(Like what you see? Please share a link on social media or send someone this link so they can sign up for free!)
Looking for more to read? Blow on the Cartridge celebrates video games time forgot, but you never did! Check it out here.
Planning a summer vacation? Daily Drop helps over 1 million travelers learn how to travel hack their way to free trips in less than 5 minutes a day. Click here!
DISCLAIMER: I may get commission if you click an ad or newsletter recommendation.