Replies

One of the elements of the current bowl system is the ability for 50+ programs to continue their practice sessions well into December, if not beyond.

What a playoff would do is end that extra month of work for all but the elite 16 (I see 16 teams in the original graphic so I assume Sports Illustrated started with 16 teams).

While the money for the 16 team playoff would likely be astounding, in most respects, the current 28(!) bowls already provide an astounding payday. Money really isn’t the issue, except perhaps the distribution of it.

In the playoff system proposed by SI, the WAC, Mountain West and all the non-6 BCS conferences would have a single team participating (and perhaps receiving the dough). As it is now, there are, by my count, 15 teams receiving a payday.

This is one of the main reasons a Div 1A playoff is really not any closer to occurring.

Teams outside the 16 could still participate in the current smaller bowls. Typically, only the fans of those teams watch the games or travel to them so the pay-off shouldn't be any less.

Some of the money from the play-off could be distributed to non-participating teams in a profit sharing scenario.

There is no need to eliminate the non-BCS bowls. They go on as usual.

The eight BCS team could play in the first round of playoffs in the Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, and Rose Bowls on New Year’s Day. The surviving four teams play two more rounds of playoff ending with the college championship game the “dead” weekend before the Super Bowl.

Everybody would win with this system!