Since the start of the College Football Playoff in 2014, the four-team format has been a catalyst for endless online and in-person arguments, filling hours of talk radio and television debate. In 2016 discussion has moved toward talk of an eight-team playoff.
It’s not hard to imagine litigation in the near future.
In the interest of saving time and legal fees, the following mock pretrial arguments transcript is provided as a public service.
Pretrial Arguments Transcript: The Playoff Zealots (Zealots) v. The College Football Playoff (CFP)
Zealots: Your honor, this season demonstrates without question the need to expand the college football playoff from four teams to eight
Judge: Isn’t this just the third season with a playoff? After 145 seasons without one don’t you think it might be a bit hasty?
CFP: Exactly your honor.
Zealots: But times change quickly. This year two Power 5 conference champions were left out and one non-champion is in.
CFP: That is not without precedent. In 2011 Alabama was one of two teams in the BCS Championship game and didn’t win the SEC.
Judge: What exactly are the criteria for the playoff committee to make their selections?
Zealots: That is the problem. Saying the criteria is vague would be an insult to vague statements everywhere.
Judge: How does the defense respond to that?
CFP: We respectfully suggest that the goal is not vague. The 12-person committee picks the top four teams and fills the other New Year’s 6 bowl slots with good games.
Judge: 12 person committee? Sounds like a jury. Who is charge of committee selection?
CFP: I am not at liberty to say.
Zealots: Probably the Freemasons or Yale’s Skull and Bones Society. My clients also request an open televised committee selection and the ability to strike certain people. Or have an election.
Judge: Yes, we all know that elections erase all controversies……
CFP: Can we stick to the issue at hand? Can the Zealots outline how their proposed eight-team playoff would work?
Judge: Using the current playoff standings, walk me through what it would look like.
Zealots: We’d utilize the New Year’s 6 Bowls to create a series of quarterfinals: No. 1 Alabama vs. No. 8 Wisconsin in the Sugar Bowl; No. 2 Clemson vs. No. 7 Oklahoma in the Cotton; No. 3 Ohio State vs. No. 6 Michigan in the Orange and No. 4 Washington vs. No. 5 Penn State in the Rose. The quarterfinals would be on January 9 in the Peach and Fiesta Bowls with the National Championship in Tampa on January 16.
Judge: So you’re just adding another week? Seems simple enough to me.
CFP: To quote the philosopher king Lee Corso “Not so fast my friend,” Teams playing in a conference championship game and in the National Championship game would play 16 games. You’d be playing your National Semifinal bowls on a Monday night doubleheader to avoid conflict with NFL playoffs.
Zealot: We could move the first round up to just before Christmas with the semifinals on New Year’s Day and still finish on January 9.
CFP: Your honor, can you imagine playing the Rose Bowl on December 24? With this bowl-linked scenario you’re asking players, their families and fans for a team like Clemson to travel three times in three weeks — to Dallas, Phoenix and Tampa. Most fans don’t have that kind of cash.
Judge: A fair point with the travel and the expense for fans. Is there another solution?
Zealot: We could play quarterfinal round games at on-campus sites.
Judge: How would that work?
Zealot: No. 1 Alabama hosts No. 8 Wisconsin; No. 2 Clemson hosts No. 7 Oklahoma; No. 3 Ohio State hosts No. 6 Michigan; and No. 4 Washington hosts No. 5 Penn State. They play the week after the conference championship games — this year it would’ve been December 10.
Judge: Isn’t that how the FCS division operates?
CFP: Yes, but they don’t have a bowl system.
Judge: Maybe that’s a good thing.
Zealots: Maybe it is.
CFP: Without a bowl system when would university administrators get their free bowl trip under the guise of entertaining the school’s donors? Plus fans love bowl trips — they’re like spring break for adults.
Judge: What’s wrong with spring break?
CFP: Did your honor take three a year in college or law school?
Judge: Point taken.
Zealot: All spring break memories aside, to answer your question, after the campus game site round the winners would go to the Peach and Fiesta Bowls and then the championship game.
Judge: So what happens to the teams that lose in the first round? Are their season’s done?
Zealot: They’d go to a bowl game.
CFP: So the Sugar and Rose Bowl would end up with first-round losers? That’d really get fans excited and sell tickets.
Zealot: No one said it was perfect.
CFP: Now you’re using our argument.
Zealot: Well the current system isn’t fair to all the conference champions.
CFP: Let’s say Virginia Tech had beaten Clemson in the ACC title game. Would they get that conference’s automatic bid with a 10-3 record?
Zealot: Yes. But Clemson could get an at-large bid.
CFP: But then a more deserving team like Michigan or Wisconsin gets left out of the equation based on one good night by Virginia Tech. The great thing about college football is that the whole season counts.
Zealot: But the conference championship games should matter in picking the playoff teams. There should be an automatic bid.
CFP: Look, your honor, I don’t want to say this publicly but conference championship games are designed to create another week of college football, more television programming and make money for the conferences. They weren’t designed to be playoff qualifiers. We really don’t want fans to know that.
Judge: I get it. This is all driven by money and television. That settles it. I deny the motion for a College Football Playoff injunction. Just give it time. Money and television will sort this out for the greater greed…or good.
