Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

But my point was supposed to be that every system is flawed...and when you try to re-invent the flawed system you usually end up with unintended consequences.  Remember the original BCS formula?  They tweaked it every year, because they didn't like the outcome.  Some argue that the playoff committee should use some variation of the BCS formula.  But the whole reason they do it by committee is because the formula was flawed...sometimes.  

Original Formula...Humans pick the winner, remember we didn't want a "playoff" champion. 
Version 1.1....A computer (spreadsheet) picks the two best teams, because we didn't have the two best playing a the end of the year.  1990 GT/CU and 1997 Michigan/Nebraska says hello. 

Version 1.2 2003 LSU/USC split title.  Oops.  

Version 2 BCS + 1 MNC (am I hallucinating this?  I can't seem to remember much about it.  )

 V3 CFB playoff-4 team edition. 

V4 CFB Playoff-12 team.  

a - no one gives a shit about Oregon St
b - you're comparing a situation where a 1-game worse Purdue gets in over a 9-2 ND with the example I gave of a sub-.500 team hosting a 12-5 team?  Mkay.
c - Also, ND would be in the same division as Purdue, so.....idk what to tell you

If you have a division-winner with a subpar record, they'd be the 8 seed and have to play @ the #1 team. 
Also, if you're one of those teams on the outside looking in, and you didn't win your division AND weren't one of the top 2 at-large teams, no, you don't get to bitch about anything.

Winning a 10-team division is A LOT different than going 8-9 like Carolina in a 4-team division, and you know this.
I'm afraid you're not doing a good job of really putting yourself in my proposed format. 

It's tough to put myself in your scenario because it doesn't exist, and thus I'd have to create a hypothetical which would then be easily shot down. 

But I do think "unworthy division winner getting in on a down year for that division while worthy runners-up from stronger divisions are left out" would generate uproar in a 6+2 format. As we saw this year with Texas and Notre Dame. 

And I tried to qualify the fact that I was comparing a 3-loss CFB team (or a 4-loss team if you used 2025 Duke) to a ~0.500 team in the NFL because of the lack of parity in CFB. Especially since the reason you want to keep it at 60 teams and keep the weak P4 teams is so the helmets still have enough patsies on their schedule that they can beat up on. 

I know, but he went there, so...

It's tough to put myself in your scenario because it doesn't exist, and thus I'd have to create a hypothetical which would then be easily shot down.

But I do think "unworthy division winner getting in on a down year for that division while worthy runners-up from stronger divisions are left out" would generate uproar in a 6+2 format. As we saw this year with Texas and Notre Dame.

And I tried to qualify the fact that I was comparing a 3-loss CFB team (or a 4-loss team if you used 2025 Duke) to a ~0.500 team in the NFL because of the lack of parity in CFB. Especially since the reason you want to keep it at 60 teams and keep the weak P4 teams is so the helmets still have enough patsies on their schedule that they can beat up on.

I'm not sure why you're shedding a tear for a team that in my format didn't win their division AND wasn't valued as one of the 2 best non-winners of a division.  The response to those teams is the same as the message to ND this year:  tough shit.  Except that in my scenario, every team can earn their way in on a level playing field.

And yes, I do what to keep a large number of teams for that nice, spread-out bell curve.  I believe elite teams should have elite records.  But yes, some years there'd be an 9-3 division winner, but they'd be playing a road game in the playoff.  And none of the other teams in its division has any room to complain.  

What does the frequency have to do with the validity?

Because it’s unusual. An anomaly. 

Because it’s unusual. An anomaly.

But with 4-team divisions playing a 17-game schedule, it's also inevitable.