I would like to see an 8-team play-off - I think there is room for it, there is money to be made, but I know it will cause problems as people mentioned about players/coaches opposed to adding another game. I also know that I hardly watch many bowl games unless VT is in it or it involves the play-offs. I am trying to think of a way to still incorporate bowls into this.

My thoughts are to have the 8-team play-off w/ the P-5 Champs, the best G-5 Champ, and 2 at-larges (you could incorporate they have to maintain a minimum ranking to qualify). You can have the quarterfinals at the better seed's home field, then have the semis and finals at neutral sites.

All other bowl games are moved, however, to the week before Labor Day and including Labor Day of the following season. Have a few bowls a day leading up to Labor Day weekend where half of the Bowl Games are played. The four losers from the quarterfinals are also put in these bowl games.

The teams that make it to the semis are allowed to do the following: Sit out that week (Labor Day), try to play versus one of the other semi teams, or play one of the teams that did not make a bowl - they can choose it to be a neutral site or a home game - whatever they work out. Teams can still turn down bowl invites, but as with other non-bowl teams, they are not allowed to play during this week unless chosen by a semis team or trying to fill empty bowl slots.

This makes the bowls mean something now that they would be part of the regular season. They are not in addition because counting these bowl games, the most games teams can still play would be 12 (regular season). Thus, you are losing regular season games, but I feel more eyes would watch these games at the beginning of the season when they mean something instead of after the season has wrapped up.

This would lift OOC scheduling to play a meaningful OOC game for a number of teams, even though you would still take champions (and I would raise the minimum conference games to 9 for everyone).

I know the biggest issue would probably be from the bowl locations losing possible tourist revenue during Dec/Jan, but I would still see more fan excitement if the bowl games open the football season. Plus, teams that make bowls get to open their practices earlier in the summer to accommodate this (make up for practices going into late December). It would also open up more places to play - i.e. up north where the weather would be nicer in Aug/Sep than in Dec/Jan. Another issue could be the heat of the summer during practices - but a lot of schools have indoor facilities nowadays so I don't think that would be a problem.

Yes, teams could still play 15/16 games - but those teams are allowed to dictate how their following season starts if they warrant they are playing too many games - or allow them an "easy" game to start off the season. You could include all 8 teams to have this option, but I would think at least having the four from the quarterfinals would improve the bowl game line-up. Another thing could be that some teams could end up with only 11 games so not sure if everybody would be happy with that.

I would think that this would not affect any TV contracts - I think it would still give them enough high-profile match-ups during the regular season, and bump up late August networking, though it would diminish ESPN late Dec viewership for people who really love bowl games during that time.

To wrap up - if this goes through, I don't see much of any conference realignment - maybe a random team here or there since everyone could now have a legit shot (unless Texas really irritates some people).