Rose - USC vs. Michigan
Fiesta - Oklahoma vs. Utah
Sugar - Auburn vs. Texas
Orange - Virgina Tech vs. Cal
National Semi-final games could either be static i.e. Rose winner vs. Fiesta winner, Sugar vs. Orange, or seeded (to give the computer geeks something to do).
Why is this so hard for the NCAA to figure out?
I have a better scenario using 27 of the current 28 bowls:
The top 28 teams get into a playoff system with the top 4 teams receiving a first round bye. This leaves teams 5 thru 28 playing in 12 first round games utilizing "minor" bowls. The 12 winners would join the top four teams as the Sweet 16, and would play the second round games in 8 "mid-range" bowls. This would determine the Elite 8 teams to advance to the third round (quarter-finals) in four of the second-tier bowls (including one of the current BCS and three slightly off-BCS level bowls, Cotton and Peach for example). The Final Four would come from this round and would play in the fourth round (semi-finals) in two of the current BCS bowls. The championship game would then be the fifth week in this true Bowl Championship Series. The semi-finals, championship game and quarterfinals could rotate among the current BCS bowls. Under this system, the top 28 teams would get at least one bowl game (compared to 56 teams under the current bowl system in which just about everyone that manages to get to .500 is bowl eligible). Under this system all of those 28 teams have a chance to play for the national championship. The other beauty of this system is that all of these currently meaningless bowls would become meaningful because they would determine who advances in the playoffs. As such, the ratings appeal for all the minor bowls will be increased tremendously, and even the mid-range and upper tier bowls will become more important. Such a playoff would rival March Madness in the fan interest and intensity it would create.