16-Team College Football Playoff Proposal Makes Sense

Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson is proposing a 16-team playoff that would generate more than three times the amount of money the Bowl Championship Series, according to a report.

Thompson sent his proposal to the 10 conferences in the Football Bowl Series, as well as Notre Dame and BCS executive Bill Hancock, according to CBSSports.

The proposal calls for a human committee to rank the Top 30 teams at the end of the season and seed the top 16 accordingly. There would be a maximum of three teams per conference and would generate at least $650 million -- substantially more than the $182 million the BCS generated in 2010.

A proposal that would generate significantly more money and eliminate the current drama of undefeated schools not getting an opportunity to win a national championship makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

The sad thing is it has about a good of chance of being accepted as I do of landing a date with Scarlett Johansson.

The 16-team playoff would satisfy football fans' cravings of a more fair system in college football, but the power players continue to resist changing the BCS.

The ACC and SEC have championed a plus-one playoff format for years, but the Big 10 and Pac-12 have refused to change the status quo. Opponents to a playoff have cited the end of long-standing bowl games, loss of importance of late-season games, and every under reason under the sun.

But as Yahoo Sports columnist Dan Wetzel deftly pointed out in his book, Death to the BCS: The Definitive Case Against the Bowl Championship Series, the majority of those reasons are completely asinine.

Thompson's plan would generate a lot more money, while also incorporating bowl games like the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl into the playoff. Those bowls would serve as sites for playoff games giving the organizers money and giving happiness to fans.

It would also drum up significantly more interest in the latter half of the season. By mid-way through the season it becomes apparent that schools are completely out of the picture for a national championship, even if that school had only lost one game.

But a 16-team playoff would make each game count for even more and allow more schools and fans to follow the season to the very end. One could argue that it'd diminish the hype and intensity of the upcoming Nov. 5 matchup of Alabama-LSU, but even if it was, it'd still be worthwhile.

Would it be hyped like a Super Bowl? Perhaps not, but it'd still be an extremely important game that would draw in millions of viewers.

More importantly, the loser of the game would likely still have an opportunity to win a national championship.

Additionally, a playoff would actually add more important games. Right now the only game that really matters is the national championship game.

Fans root for strong matchups and good games for Rose Bowls and Sugar Bowls, but the games have no actual meaning. That clearly wouldn't be the case with a 16-team playoff -- fans would be delighted by multiple games that actually have meaning.

Wetzel recently speculated in an interview that the movement is gaining steam ahead of the BCS's agreement ending in 2014, but still feels that a playoff won't happen. If conference administrators were smart -- especially Big East commissioner John Marinatto -- they would enthusiastically and wholeheartedly support a playoff.

Why wouldn't a conference like the Big East, which could lose its automatic qualifier status in a few years, support a playoff?

Or why wouldn't every single commissioner from a smaller conference support an opportunity to actually get your schools an opportunity to win a national championship?

It's puzzling why there isn't widespread support for a measure that would promote more equality and more money for practically everyone involved.

Thompson's proposal calls for the national champion to earn as much as $95 million, while the BCS national championship earns a relatively paltry $28.4 million.

Why wouldn't every single conference want an opportunity at such a massive payout?

It's mind-bogglingly until you remember that the people making these decisions are the same ones leading the mostly idiotic conference realignment carousel.

It's time for college athletics administrators to finally wise up and actually make a move that makes sense in every possible way.

Want to reach this writer? You can email John Talty at j.talty@ibtimes.com or follow him on Twitter at @jtalty.