I would be on board with scrapping the conference championship games in favor of an eight-team playoff.
It would take a major shake-up in tradition to scrap the old and move forward with the new -which is probably where college football needs to go. Being that I am an individual steeped in tradition, this is not an easy thing for me to accept -but I can see the benefits. Someone earlier, in another thread, put together a listing of four super-FBS conferences -ee8384 above mentions going to eight. Either way, the foundations of traditions, conference affiliations, rivalries, would in some cases be shaken to the core. Look to the NHL for an example.
Look at the progression of the ACC since Tech has been a member -from Tobacco Road and the 4 dwarfs to being scattered from Miami to Boston. I was not a fan of the ACC expansion, or at least some of the teams that were invited to join, so I would have no problem blowing up the conference and starting anew. I can see the same mindset with fans of the Big 12's 14 teams. However, fans of the SEC and Big Ten's 12 teams would probably have a big problem with this approach.
The only problem with expanding the playoffs to eight is teams nine and ten will feel they got the shaft, so "we need to expand to 12 with the top four teams getting a bye," would be the next cry. This is how it has gone in college basketball over the past several years with the stupid play-in game and crap like that. In terms of college basketball, I have always been of the mindset that every team IS in the tournament, with the conference tournaments serving as the first few rounds.
With four, or eight, power conferences you could simply take the conference winner and let then duke it out in a four/eight team playoff. If the move is to four conferences then do you limit the playoffs to conference champions or do you include four wild cards? Be careful if you do because wild card teams #5 and #6 will feel left out.
It's all conjecture at this point because of so many obstacles beneath the surface, money being the #1 obstacle with TV contracts, revenue sharing, bowl tie-ins, etc, not to mention the basketball aspect of doing something like this. But it is intriguing to discuss it.
Conference realignment wouldn't be that traumatic, although it would be played up as such. If you essentially go back to the first round of major conference realignment you aren't that far off. The most recent rounds are what skewed it. The Pac 12 and Big 12 used to have 12. B1G was at 11, so throw ND in there. The NE is where things got most hosed, with the Big East football going away. Put Pitt, PSU, MD, BC & Cuse back together, chuck in VT, UVA, WV, UConn and you are close.
You would need 2 (maybe three) of the 8 conferences in the South (Virginia ain't South). In FL you have UF, FSU, UCF, USF, Miami. GA you have UGA, GT, GSU?. SC you have Clemson, USCe. NC you have NCSt, UNC, Wake, Duke, ECU? App St?. In TN you have UT, Memphis, MTSU?. Bama, Auburn, MSU, Ole Miss, LSU.
LA and MS may need to go with states of TX, OK, AR.
Geographically it's challenging in Upper Plains and NE due to lack of power schools. You'd also never hear the end of a BSU getting in for winning their weak conference over a 2nd place, 1 loss finishers in the Southern conferences.
In the short term going to all Power 5 conference champs, 2 wild cards and 1 G5 team (if it meets certain criteria) is the easiest path. Getting rid of conference championships opens the door to an undefeated Bama, undefeated UGA and 1 loss Auburn/LSU wanting 3 SEC slots. Then undefeated Wisconsin and undefeated OSU want 2 B1G slots. Unbalanced conference scheduling is a big issue.
