- It's unfair - How do you pick the best 2 of 5 undefeated teams? I don't know. How do you pick the best 16 of 20 teams? I don't care. No crying here if you're marginally top 16 - your claims to a national title are tenuous, at best.
- Bracket Creep - there's really no need to go beyond 16 teams. 2- and 3-loss teams have little to complain about if they fail to make the tournament.
- It would forever change the Bowl system - I think the BCS has done enough to water down and dilute the bowl system as it is. I fondly remember the days of maybe 10-12 New Years Day bowls - it's now, what, 2? And the national championship is a week after that? Ugh...
- A 'weak' team can get hot and win the whole thing - Um, if they can get hot and knock off 3 or 4 of the top 16 teams in the land, they deserve the title. In 1996, the Michigan hockey team wasn't the best in the land, but they knocked off 5 of the top 6 teams in their last 5 games to win the title.
- How do you select teams? Well, as I've already stated on a couple of other posts, the BCS selects its 2 teams by opinion poll. When the sample size is 2, there's an awful lot of room for, shall we say, unscrupulous voters to have a huge influence. When the sample size is 16, that influence is limited to the last few eligible teams.
- It'll reduce the importance of the regular season - Not really. You still have to perform well to be in the top 16-20 at the end of the year. 3 losses is unlikely to be good enough.
- EDIT: My favourite: "If you could resolve all that would everyone be satisfied? NO!!"
EDIT: After multiple comments, removed incendiary political comment. Lesson learned - sorry.
Bring on the playoff. Find a way to get it done. Stop making excuses for excluding teams from non-BCS conferences who continue to show that they can play with the BCS teams.