[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Expanding the playoff to including too many teams (8 or even some people say 16) is just far too many. It would make the regular season much less important.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it would make the post-season much more exciting; and it's not as if a 16 team playoff lets in that many teams, especially if it's limited to the 11 conference winners and 5 at-large teams. For a BCS school, getting into such a playoff would likely mean: 1) winning their conference, which I think most all of us agree should be rewarded or 2) getting an at-large spot, which would probably mean losing no more than two games.

I fail to see how this makes the regular season irrelevant, since it's entirely possible that under the current BCS system, a 2-loss team might find itself in the national title game if WVU and Mizzou both lose this weekend. And a 16-team system that awards spots to the Conf. champions plus 5 at-large teams would put a premium on being seeded highly to ensure a 1st round matchup against the Sun Belt or WAC champion.

In other words, if a playoff would make the regular season irrelevant (despite the fact it would almost naturally exclude non-conf. champ teams with more than 2 losses), then isn't the current BCS system making the regular season similarly meaningless, since a two-loss team like Georgia could conceivably get into the national title game if Mizzou and WVU lose this weekend? It is, of course, a matter of degree; the current incarnation of the BCS makes the regular season very meaningful, yes. But I don't think that a playoff would markedly depreciate the value of the regular season so drastically that we shouldn't consider the benefits.

I think everyone agrees that the #5, or #8, or #16 team doesn't have a legitimate gripe or claim to the national title; but I don't think that's what playoff advocates are arguing.

I think the claim is that 8 or 16 team playoff would be orgasmic for a college football fan, and would make the 3 or 4 weekends that it was held on the greatest weekends of the year, rivaling or surpassing the NCAAB basketball tournament.

Bowl season has its charm, no doubt. But I think a CFB playoff, if done correctly, could become the premier sporting 'event' in the country. My interest in a playoff isn't to "crown the best team as the legitimate national champion" -- I'm not sure there's any system that can do that, given the natural sample size problems college football presents. But at least a playoff would provide 3 to 4 weeks of college football awesomeness everyone could appreciate.

The chances of this getting done are so small. There's so much guaranteed bowl money floating around, and everyone is getting a piece that even if all parties agreed a playoff would generate more TV and sponsorship revenue, diving it up in a way that doesn't scare everyone in the process would probably be impossible, given that the bowl system is still a huge guaranteed cash cow for a lot of the power players involved. The current 'system' may be broke for fans looking to anoint a 'real' national champion, or a 13-0 Auburn program that doesn't get to buy rings, but I suspect it's "working" for a lot of athletic departments who are swimming around in the bowl monies. Northwestern (sorry iron) doesn't have to pour too much money into it's athletic department to make the Motor City Bowl and then split the BCS monies with the rest of the conference; will a playoff divide up the money the same way? Is that conceivable? What about home gates and ticket monies? Surely, a 16 team type system that involved playing the playoff games at neutral sites would be logistically difficult; there would be a lot of pressure to play a round or two on campuses. How does gate revenue get divided? Does it get divided? Who owns the broadcast rights? I'm not saying these are impossible hurdles, but they're difficult ones.