I'm with the rest of the country right now as far as getting rid of the BCS. Here's what the BCS has done to us: it's eliminated decent OOC games with few exceptions, and it's done everything BUT solidify who the DEFINITE national champion is (I will go to my grave saying USC has been most deserving of the National Championship the last two years a SEC team has won it).
But unlike the rest of the country, including President Barack Obama, I am not for a playoff. Do I think college football SHOULD have one? Probably. Wouldn't there NOT be a definite champion? It's true, I won't deny that there will almost always be controversy as to who the national champion REALLY is if a playoff isn't instituted. But here's what you have to understand. My big thing is completely selfish, and has nothing to do with "the good/integrity of the game". I like there being 32 or however many bowl games. New Year's Day is one of my 3 favorite days of the year for this reason. I like there being a football game almost every day for a month, and talking about it with other people. I like joining pools trying to pick the bowls. I really enjoy talking smack, be it online or to a buddy's face about the different bowls and conferences.
How could an eight or sixteen team playoff compare to this? I think things should be done the way they always were (and by "always" I mean the several years before the BCS, but definitely not going back too fa) when the AP gave out a national championship and the Coaches' Poll gave out a championship. That way it would encourage teams to schedule tough non-conference game (something a playoff STILL doesn't solve), and the regular season means more.