HOWEVER ...
The four-team playoff still has one potential major flaw (there are many minor flaws, but I'll focus on the major one here) that I see: A smaller conference team still has almost no hope of making the national title game. Northern Illinois, for instance, was undefeated but only ranked No. 14 before their MAC title game loss.
You can say a lot of things about the schedule the Huskies played or the way they beat inferior teams, but almost any amount of non-conference scheduling wouldn't make up for the weak schedule NIU played this season. And you can't have teams switching conferences all the time like they have the past few years. It's unsustainable.
That's why I still like the 16-team model proposed by my former editor at the Washington County Daily News, Mr. Larry Hanson. It keeps the regular season and conference championships every bit as meaningful as they are now (except for maybe a few teams, which we'll get to in a minute), while also giving every team that a reasonable person would say *should* have a shot.
The model is also very simple: Each conference champion gets in plus at-large bids to the top-ranked BCS teams that *did not* win their conference.
Here's how that would look this season (BCS rankings listed first, when applicable):
1 ACC: Florida State (13-0)
2 SEC: Auburn (12-1)
4 Big Ten: Michigan State (12-1)
5 Pac-12: Stanford (11-2)
6 Big 12: Baylor (11-1)
15 American: UCF (11-1)
20 Mountain West: Fresno State (11-1)
MAC: Bowling Green (10-3)
C-USA: Rice (10-3)
Sun Belt: Louisiana Lafayette (8-4)
3 Alabama (11-1)
7 Ohio State (12-1)
8 Missouri (11-2)
9 South Carolina (10-2)
11 Oregon (10-2)
12 Oklahoma (10-2)
Part of me thinks the the conference champions should get higher seeds (i.e. Bowling Green is seeded eighth and hosts Rice, while UCF is seeded sixth and hosts Alabama), but let's be honest: That wouldn't fly, and really, it doesn't make a lot of sense. So, I would seed this based on the actual BCS standings, and seed teams based on their overall conference strength if they're not in the BCS top 25.
To wit, here's the first round (my projected final scores in parentheses after the matchup) to be played on Dec. 14:
#16 Louisiana-Lafayette at #1 Florida State (52-6 FSU)
#9 South Carolina at #8 Missouri (35-27 Missouri)
#12 UCF at #5 Stanford (31-17 Stanford)
#13 Fresno State at #4 Michigan State (28-20 Michigan State)
#14 Bowling Green at #3 Alabama (35-10 Alabama)
#15 Rice at #2 Auburn (40-20 Auburn)
#8 Missouri at #1 Florida State (42-17 FSU)
#5 Stanford at #4 Michigan State (21-14 Stanford)
#6 Baylor at #3 Alabama (31-30 Alabama)
#7 Ohio State at #2 Auburn (38-31 Ohio State)
Third round (neutral on Dec. 28):
#5 Stanford vs. #1 Florida State (35-17 FSU)
#7 Ohio State vs. #3 Alabama (28-24 Alabama)
Title game (neutral on Jan. 6):
#3 Alabama vs. #1 Florida State (28-20 FSU)
I'm the first to say that my predictions are likely too bullish for Florida State -- after all, Alabama was just a 10-point favorite *at* Auburn, and now Florida State is an 8-point favorite on a neutral field against Auburn, so Vegas may even have Alabama favored over Florida State -- but it sure would be nice to find out about FSU for sure.
I don't think that highly of Auburn at all -- personally or from a numbers perspective -- so if Florida State does indeed win the title, you could make a very strong case that they "proved it" less than any champion I can remember. Clemson and Auburn are two deeply flawed teams, in my opinion, but those would FSU's two signature wins. Not great.
This 16-team system would have required wins over Missouri, Stanford and Alabama. There would be no free lunch in this system. Granted, it's just like the NFL playoffs where the best team doesn't always win (ahem, Ravens last year), but at least this system would a) give everyone who possibly deserves a chance that chance, and b) require everyone to beat the best teams to win it at all.
Four teams next year will be a nice change of pace (this year, it would have been Michigan State vs. Florida State and Alabama vs. Auburn again ... not all that exciting, but again, even that one extra game against elite competition would make me feel better about it), but I'll still cling to this 16-team model for quite a while.
