Would NIT-Like Playoff Tournament Work for College Football?

It's only a matter of time before college football's new postseason changes. Because we are a people who want the next thing before what we have now, the days of a four-team playoff are already limited. 

Look at it this way: We're entering year two of the College Football Playoff and already alternatives are being tossed around. 

TCU head coach Gary Patterson suggested implementing a six-team playoff. (B/R's Barrett Sallee took a closer look at the feasibility of a six-team tournament.) ACC commissioner John Swofford said months ago that an eight-team playoff would be better for college football—and that was before anyone knew what the first four-team field would look like. 

"In terms of the number of teams, [eight] would probably be ideal," Swofford said, via Shawn Krest of The Herald-Sun. 

The inevitability of playoff/bracket creep, in which the playoff naturally expands (because of money), is real. However, it is also exaggerated. A 32-team playoff isn't happening. 

The thing is, we may have been looking at it all wrong. What hasn't been discussed in detail is a viable alternative: expanding the playoffs by creating a separate four-team playoff from the one that already exists. In other words, if the College Football Playoff is the NCAA tournament, then create the National Invitation Tournament (NIT) for college football.

Would it dilute the product already in place? Hardly. The four-team playoff has created compelling storylines and tension throughout the season. That wouldn't go away. The impact of the regular season has been retained in the playoff era, and there would still be a heated battle for position among the top four. 

A college football NIT only adds to the number of top-end teams playing one another at year's end. 

The demand for college football inventory is at an all-time high, and this would be a quality product. If last season's CFP rankings were used to determine the NIT field, Baylor, TCU, Mississippi State and Michigan State would have made up the field. 

TCU could have played with, and perhaps beaten, anyone last season. Maybe the Frogs could have settled the Baylor debate once and for all. Michigan State had just two losses last year, and they came at the hands of the teams that ended up playing for the national championship. 

No. 1 seed	Baylor (11-1)
No. 2 seed	TCU (11-1)
No. 3 seed	Mississippi State (10-2)
No. 4 seed	Michigan State (10-2)

Oh, yeah. That's some good stuff. 

Every week during ESPN's playoff rankings show, producers could dedicate one segment to teams "on the bubble." If the season ended today, which four teams would be in and which would be NIT bound? To take it a step further, which four teams would be the "first four out" of the NIT?

It would check off the major boxes. College athletics admins have cited concerns over how an extra three games in an eight-team playoff would stretch players physically and academically. Whether or not those concerns are valid is a debate for another day. 

Either way, those roadblocks are cleared by creating the college football NIT. It's more precious inventory without a single team having to play more than 15 games throughout the season. 

Like the CFP, the television rights to those games would be up for grabs. All of the major networks would have a chance to bid on the right to broadcast the games.

If you've stumped for on-campus playoff games in the past, you may get your wish yet. Because just like in college basketball, college football's NIT would have on-campus games. Only the championship would be played at a neutral site. 

But that also leads to the one chief question: How would the NIT fit in to the already-existing postseason? Power Five conferences have long-term contracts with the six major New Year's Eve/Day bowls. Last season, all four of the would-be NIT-bound teams played in the New Year's Six bowls. Baylor and Michigan State squared off in the Cotton Bowl, Mississippi State played Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl and TCU faced Ole Miss in the Peach Bowl. 

Those bowls can still have conference tie-ins and at-large selections. Nothing would change there. The NIT would be a separate tournament, and the tradition of bowl season would be untouched. This would be a welcome alternative considering that bowl execs and conference commissioners squirmed at the notion of the bowl system going away in the playoff era. 

The NIT would operate on its own island, yet be a part of the new, compelling postseason format that has taken college football to another level. Want to expand the playoffs? Open up another tournament. 

Ben Kercheval is a lead writer for college football.