How about this:
A 16 team playoff. Each conf champion gets an auto-bid, then that leaves 6 up for the next best teams in the rankings. The top teams get to host the games at their stadiums (thus ensuring schools actually make money) with the P5 conf champs hosting the L5 conf champs to open and the other three games are the open qualifiers playing each other.
SEC vs MWC
PAC vs AAC
B1G vs CUSA
BXII vs MAC
ACC vs SBC
open vs open
open vs open
open vs open
Play one game elimination, and this would create a bit more excitement for CFB. The L5 teams get a chance for an upset, and there is enough space open to handle at least 6 teams after conf champs to deal with any undefeated problems. this is just the opening weekend of the 16 team playoff for my format.
What do you guys think?
I also think that conferences with a ccg should get preference over teams w/o ccg. (example: 10-2 Florida St. over 10-2 Texas Tech) This also encourages conferences to have a ccg and thus hold onto at least 12 schools.
The SBC really needs to add one more, and I think that U. Tennessee - C. is going to get the nod when they are ready. I have no proof to back this up, but I believe that the SBC has put off getting a 12th member because the Mocs have probably told the SBC that they can be ready for an invite next year.
I like the direction and order for inclusiveness you presented; however, as we know, extensive separation from the Go5 is the big initiative now, and the Power 5 have no intent to be more accommodating than they were. Power conferences and TV executives will view the first five matchup games you listed as basically unnecessary and less appealing, having comparatively less viewership for TV because it is not all big names. For example, if an 8-team playoff, the powers that be, hypothetically for the example, would rather market B1G champ Ohio State vs PAC12 tied for runner-up Oregon, rather than Ohio State vs Rice (C-USA champ with a 12-1 record). The 'Cinderella effect' works at times to varying degrees for NCAA tournament basketball, but for higher stakes football with precious few slots, the system will dictate the power names.
The Power 5 will continue to leave one access option to the group of 5. But that remains an extraordinary hurdle. Even a strong, undefeated Go5 team will have a tough time making it in with the current 4 spots. Strength of schedule and high quality wins will be much valued. Go5 schools are going to have even less future options in scheduling Power 5 teams for the regular season to demonstrate "high caliber wins of proof".
Another issue in the Power 5 will be the varying conference sizes and CCG concerns. The SEC will continue to push for the "4 best" while some other power conferences will demand a guaranteed rep (which your model affords for all). And we know that politics, the media, broadcasters, pollsters, etc., are going to get Notre Dame placed in there as an independent if they look to being anywhere close as the selection process draws near.
I really respect the idea of fairness. But they will claim fairness for only the 'chosen' among the elite. Big money and power and control drives all this. Personally, I don't like Go5 and FCS schools and conferences being sidelined more they have been.
NCAA reforms are sorely needed. Focus needs to be made about bringing greed under control; as much as they focus on defining whose allowed to be greedy.