I’ve always thought there was a better way of doing the bowl selections that would make it more interesting and exciting. The selection show would be so much more fun and fans would have much more opportunity to enjoy a variety of locations and teams from conferences we never get to see.
Now it’s not perfect because the tie ins allow fans to kind of book ahead of time because you have a general idea where you are going. And there would be an issue of the same teams/brands getting selected first for the best bowls, so you would certainly have to put qualifiers in there.
One way you could do it is assign each bowl a certain level of prestige. So in the same pot is the Alamo Bowl, Citrus Bowl and Outback Bowl or something like that and they have to pick from only the second place teams from the power 5. That way fans still have an idea of where they can start booking their trip but it has more variety each year and is still performance based. Obviously if you have a team make the CFP it moves everyone up in your league so maybe that would have to be addressed. But you get the idea.
Some good ideas there. I didn't think about keeping some semblance of tie-in for fan planning purpose. Relevant realistic point.
The vision I've had since they went to 4-team playoff (and actually, even when it was BCS): once the CFP is set, make the bowl selections based strictly on CFP ranking among remaining teams, down to, say, #16, top non-P5 gets auto bid (and is placed as close to its ranking level as possible. Exceptions would be avoiding rematches and perhaps intra-conference pairings. Top 4 games are the NY Day showcases. That guarantees we're seeing the best matchups (at least most likely, on paper).
There would be a pecking order of bowls, with the traditional NYD/CFP semifinal rotation we currently, have. Then could rotate the next tier of bowls (Outback, Alamo, etc.)
Below that, bidding process with perhaps some tie-in for planning.