Serious question. If these teams are really amateurs, playing for recreation and the positive life-lesson benefits of competition (what college athletics was at one time and what the NCAA Monopoly claims it still is) why is it so damn important who the 'champion' is?
Now if the NCAA drops the facade of armature athletics and simply admits that these Div 1 schools programs are football factories designed to bring revenues to the schools and begins to pay the players commensurately to the revenue they generate, I'd say have a playoff system that runs till February just like the NFL. Sort it out on the field however they choose.
But if these players are supposed to be students, they should be in class more than they are on the practice field (doubtful for any Div 1 schools) and I don't really give a damn who is the champ. It is unimportant who's the 'best' if you think they are student athletes. If they are pros, then who wins matters.
Which is it?
This "student athletes" stuff is a fantasy. I have known people at colleges who said football stars are given extensive tutoring, are routinely given inflated grades and could retake tests until they passed. If their amateur and "student" status is so important, then why are players permitted to enter the draft before they graduate? The NCAA is simply the minor leagues for the NFL. Shawne Merriman was a Psych major at the U of Maryland. Would you care to ask him questions about Sigmund Freud? Give me a break.