Do fans actually want 24 teams in an expanded College Football Playoff?

SALT LAKE CITY — College football leaders appear to be getting closer to expanding the College Football Playoff to 24 teams.

But there's one potential problem: Not everyone watching the sport is sold on the idea.

A new survey from The Athletic breaks down what fans really think about expanding to 24 teams. Turns out, 70% are against it, and only 30% are on board.

The poll's results arrive at a pivotal moment for the CFP, with discussions over a potential 24-team format moving forward and the big bad SEC signaling a willingness to consider expansion after months of resistance.

While some of the sport's biggest conferences continue to push for a larger postseason, questions remain about whether expansion would actually make college football better for fans. And based on the poll results, that answer is no.

Nevertheless, the proposal is gaining momentum.

SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey said Wednesday at the conference's basketball media days that the league is open to expanding the playoff, adding that a decision could come "probably sooner rather than later."

"I think there's an openness to playoff expansion on our part," Sankey said, adding that attitudes and perspectives can change over time.

The SEC's willingness to consider the idea could be a major step toward an agreement, particularly with the Big Ten continuing to push for a larger field.

Why a 24-team playoff is gaining traction

The CFP expanded from four teams to 12 in 2024, giving more programs a chance to compete for a national title.

But now, conference leaders are discussing what could come next. The Big Ten has advocated for a 24-team field, with the ACC and Big 12 also supporting expansion.

"I've said it before, more access is needed as too many great teams are still left out," said Commissioner Brett Yormark at Big 12 football media days. "I've also said before, we still need to work through the economics and scheduling, and address any unintended consequences."

The SEC had previously favored a smaller increase to 16 teams, expressing concerns about scheduling, player workloads and the impact on the regular season.

Now, that resistance appears to be easing.

One of the biggest sticking points has been scheduling. The Big Ten has indicated that its schools would be required to schedule a Power Four nonconference opponent under a 24-team format, addressing one of the SEC's concerns about the strength of teams' schedules.

For supporters, a larger playoff would mean more teams entering December with something meaningful to play for. Programs that might otherwise be eliminated from championship contention could have a realistic path to the postseason.

But that raises more questions: If more teams can afford to lose a game or two and still make the playoff, does the regular season lose some of what makes it special? And what happens to bowl games? Do more teams in the CFP reduce the importance and prestige of those?

Not everyone is convinced

Some prominent voices in college football have pushed back against the idea of a much larger playoff. It's getting to be a long list but names such as Josh Pate, Paul Finebaum and Rece Davis really stand out.

Pate has questioned the direction of the sport's leadership and the push to keep expanding the postseason, saying he "hates" the idea.

"When you went from BCS to four-team, there was supermajority public support behind it," said Pate. "When you went from four to 12, there was supermajority public support behind it. And one of the most disingenuous things, maybe even just one of the flat-out most ignorant approaches that I've seen over the past year is — I hesitate to call them leaders, but the movers in college football even going so far as to acknowledge publicly, 'Well, we know that fan sentiment is against this.'"

Critics of the proposal argue that college football's regular season is already one of the most consequential in sports, and a larger playoff could take away some of that urgency.

The concern is fairly straightforward. When a loss can end a team's championship hopes, every Saturday matters. With 24 spots available, more teams could remain in contention despite multiple losses.

That could create more postseason opportunities, but it could also make some of the biggest regular-season matchups feel less important. Finebaum has said adding more teams is going to straight up "destroy" and "devalue" the regular season.

There are also questions about how a 24-team bracket would affect conference championship games and the overall postseason schedule. Adding more playoff games would require college football to make decisions about timing, player availability and the value of its existing events.

For opponents of expansion, the goal shouldn't simply be to add more games. It should be to make sure the games already on the schedule continue to matter.

The money behind the expansion debate

Of course, the conversation isn't just about what fans want. There's also a major business component.

A 24-team bracket would create more games to sell to television networks, more advertising inventory and potentially more revenue for the conferences and universities involved.

ESPN's current CFP media rights agreement is worth approximately $7.8 billion over six seasons. The network also has the first opportunity to negotiate for additional playoff games, making the financial terms of an expanded format an important part of the discussion.

More games could mean more money, but the equation isn't quite that simple.

A larger playoff could force changes to the college football calendar, including the possibility of eliminating conference championship games. Those events generate their own television revenue and provide conferences with valuable opportunities to showcase their teams.

The Big Ten has argued that a 16-team playoff might not provide enough additional games to offset the financial and scheduling challenges associated with removing conference championship games. A 24-team format, meanwhile, could offer a more attractive business proposition.

There's also a potential benefit for schools that don't regularly compete for national championships. More playoff access could help programs build momentum with recruits, generate excitement among fans and strengthen their overall football brands.

The question is whether those benefits outweigh the possibility of weakening the regular season.

Could expansion happen soon?

Despite the questions surrounding the proposal, the discussions are moving forward, and fast.

ESPN's Pete Thamel reported Thursday afternoon that the CFP is close to wrapping up a deal to grow to 24 teams starting in 2027. Things should be officially locked in soon, assuming it gets the final green light.

College football leaders faced a Dec. 1 deadline to finalize format changes for the 2027-28 season, giving the conferences a limited window to work through the remaining issues.

But the Athletic survey raises a question that conference commissioners and television executives will have to consider: How much does fan opinion truly matter?

A bigger playoff would give more teams a chance to compete for a championship and create more inventory for broadcasters. Those are great benefits for the sport's decision-makers.

Still, adding more teams doesn't automatically mean creating a better product for fans. No one wants to see teams getting blown out in the early or second rounds like has been the case for years.

College football has built much of its appeal around the importance of the regular season, the pressure of rivalry games and the idea that every loss can change a team's season.

Whether the changes make the sport more compelling for the people watching is a different question — and one that the latest survey suggests shouldn't be overlooked.

Related topics