Here’s how - you have the top 2 of each conference go to the playoffs. There are 12 conferences, that gives you 24 teams. Add 8 floating bids (perhaps a tossed bone to the AP/ESPN polls), and you have 32 teams. At most, a team would have 5 rounds of playoffs. Yes, that’s 5 to 6 weeks. Of course, bowl season lasts nearly that long as-is!
For conference schools, go by the conference record; use head-to-head conference wins to break any ties. For the independents, go by overall record.
For example, the PAC-10. Say USC is unbeaten, Oregon, Stanford and UCLA each have one conference loss. During the season, Stanford beat UCLA. Oregon beat Stanford. UCLA didn’t beat Stanford or Oregon. Oregon’s only loss was the USC - the conference champion. Thus the top 2 would be USC and Oregon.
Note this also makes the non-conference games not important in terms of the playoffs. There’s no reason to just schedule patsies for you to beat up on, to pad your season start. Scheduling a few “big boys” as non-conference, but sweeping your conference still gets you in. That’s got to be better than what we have now, with a lot of the perennial powerhouses (I’m looking at Nebraska and Ohio) from scheduling nominal Div I teams (teams that really belong in Div II).
I think it would work well to encourage teams to win every game - if you don’t place in the top of your conference in record, you’re not in the playoffs. Make your non-conference games about excitement and fans and rivalries - it doesn’t hurt in terms of your standings (like preseason games in the NFL).
I think it would work better than what we have now, which is a bunch of professional beer-drinkers (known as sports writers) and friends (coaches) voting for what they think is best. At least there’s a semblance of sanity in there with the computer rankings...
That would be great, but it won’t happen.
What might is a “plus one” scheme. How often is the best team in the country not in the top 4? NEVER. So run the bowls, designate 2 as playoffs, and then have the winners play for the title. Really don’t get why they won’t at least do that.
A Championship of Champions would be better. Take the top 6 Conferences SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big East, SWC, Pac 10 and two at large and have an 8 team Championship. Then every game of the season is actually a tourney game making an unbelievable season.
Go Ducks
It’s not a matter of how long the season would be, it’s a matter of money and logistics.
First, the money. Little known secret. Most teams that go ‘bowling’ lose money. Only the top few bowls pay enough for the teams to break even or even make a bit. You’ve got too many games in your playoff so most of the earlier games will lose money. Try and convince an athletic director to sign up for three losing games before he makes a profit.
Second, logistics. You won’t get any fans to travel to any of the games. Suppose your team plays in round one. You want know they’re going to round two until late on game day round one. Now, they’ve got to make reservations, buy tickets, find an airline. Then there’s round three... Even if your team makes it into the championship game, you’ll have the same problem.
Need I mention the logistics of moving the teams around? Fly to the game site for round one on Friday. Play Saturday. Return on Sunday. Rest on Monday. Practice on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. Repeat four times. Any idea how tired the teams would be in the last two rounds?
About the biggest playoff that would work is eight teams.
Now, you could have four super-conferences of sixteen teams in two divisions. That’s eight teams. Four conference championship games. The four winners go to a playoff.
Of course, that would require massive conference realignments so that’s out.