OK - just for shits and giggles lets say the top 8 pan out as above.
That's 2 ACC teams, 2 Big 12 Teams, 3 SEC Teams and 1 PAC 10 team.
Just putting on the parochial hat of the Big 10 for the moment - how does this help the Big 10 reel in its "share" of bowl money, let alone the Big Least champ - should they maintain an adequate ranking.
See, that is the one of two (and the primary) flaw with the arrangement you propose.
Money.
And the inequitable distribution of the same.
True, these things DO even out over time, so you could have years in which the PAC10 and Big 10 dominate at the expense of other conferences. But the fear of being left out in the cold vs a guaranteed pay-off would stop the Conference Commissioners dead in their tracks. The Commissioners would probably couch this in high sounding language defending the rights of the hard fought champion of a Conference not in that slate of 8 to get a look in with their guaranteed bowl berth. But that's largely a smoke screen, its really about dollars and cents, follow the money.
Which brings me to the second, lesser flaw. You have created above a set of secondary bowls, leading up to the bigger semi-finals and championship game. In a situation where one region or two dominates that top 8 this makes for less interesting viewing of the bowl games themselves - not for obsessed fans such as those on boards like these, but rather for the holiday viewing traffic that boosts ratings. Which of course has an impact on many factors, including TV revenues, which leads back to, money.
There probably is a way to overcome that fear factor in the minds of the Commissioners, but it isnt going to be an easy sell.
