I wrote to Kirby Hocutt and advocated for a 6 team tourney. The committee would use their current (however flawed) criteria to rank them #1---#6. #1 and #2 would get a bye.
#3 would play #6 while #4 would play #5. Their next opponent would either be based on a ranking system, with the higher ranked winner playing #2 in the semis and the lower ranked winner playing #1. Or for travel and fan convenience the bowl designees would be pre-determined each year so the fans would know beforehand where their team might land.
The winners would be the two teams playing in the Championship Game. I showed him how in every year of the playoff there would have been broader geographical representation and greater national interest. This year for example the system would have produced the following teams: 1.Clemson, 2.Oklahoma, 3.Georgia, 4. Alabama, 5.Ohio State 6. Wisconsin.
Clemson and Oklahoma would have had byes. Georgia would have played Wisconsin. Alabama would have played Ohio State. Winner of UGA/Wis (UGA) would play Clemson. Winner of Alabama/OSU (Alabama) would play Oklahoma. Those winners then would have played in NC game. Might still have been UGA vs Alabama, but maybe not.
This 6 team approach would give two other bowls (TBD) a compelling playoff game a week before New Years Day while still dedicating two of the New Years Day Bowls as Semi-Finals. It would broaden fan interest, and unlike the other 8 team, 12 team or "even more" team models being proposed by some, this plan would keep the total number of playoff games at a manageable and safer level, better satisfying those who object to expansion on both academic and player welfare grounds.
