"I would think that going with the 6 BCS conference champions and the rest of the 10 would be ranked according to a very good computer ranking system that has been shown to be very accurate when ran against historical data. Some of the computer polls are just bizarre now."
Why only the BCS conference champs? Why is there such a bias and an elitist attitude against the 5 non BCS conferences? In my humble opinion, the only true playoff would include the winners of the MWC, WAC, MAAC, C-USA, and the Sun Belt.
"I don't mind the BCS rankings. Just grab the top 16 from that and do the seeding. Now, those results would be good games!"
Once again with that setup, the MWC, WAC, MAAC, C-USA, and the SunBelt are left on the outside looking in. I think every conference champ deserves a shot at the big crystal football.
Because the teams from the BCS conferences have the vast majority of the talent. Compare the recruiting rankings for the BCS conferences vs the others. Also check out the number of players that each conference sends to the NFL. The talent disparity is huge.
Even the BCS has criteria set for the ACC and Big-East conferences to maintain it's automatic birth.
I wouldn't have a problem with setting a conditional criteria on an automatic birth for conference champions though. Maybe all of the conferences would receive an automatic birth initially, but the conference champion must win at least one game every 4 years or stay within a certain point difference to maintain it's automatic birth.
I think a 16 team field would be hard to pass without shortening the season by a game or two. To do that teams would have to eliminate some conference games or some out of conference rivalry games like UF-FSU or UGA-GT.
College fans would rather preserve these games and use an 8 team field made up of the BCS conference champions and 2 at large teams.
I wouldn't have a problem, though, with all