[CTcard]

well the hard part will be who gets left out and what options they have.  If the non-Power 5 are still to "have a chance" to enter the play-offs then what I outlined will never happen.
...
At the end of the day the CFP will work to maximize revenue, other considerations will have little impact on what plays out.

I think the issue isn't what is the hard part, it is whether there is any particular motivation to move in this direction.

It may be that a larger playoff would lead to larger revenue. However, that is unclear, especially as it would seem to be accompanied by greatly reduced attention to all the bowls. My guess is that the largest financial driver is to maximize programming for TV - and it may be that a bajillion bowls does that better than an 8 team conference playoff.

Perhaps just as important as more revenue is who gets the revenue. That will cause lots of wrangling as various folks (particularly those with clout) try to figure out which system puts them in the best relative position. 

The next question is why an 8 team playoff (or 16, or 32, or any number) necessarily means four conferences all laid out the same way. A large NCAA tournament for basketball has not done so. I also don't think the conference realignment we have recently seen was motivated by any particular desire to make a smooth playoff system - it was each individual conference trying to figure out what what would give them the best television contract.

So, my guess is that in several years, but not so soon, we will see an expanded playoff, but it will be coupled to a mishmash of conferences and rules qualitatively similar to what we have now. I think that is the direction you were going with your second option.

[CTcard]

well the hard part will be who gets left out and what options they have.  If the non-Power 5 are still to "have a chance" to enter the play-offs then what I outlined will never happen.
...
At the end of the day the CFP will work to maximize revenue, other considerations will have little impact on what plays out.

I think the issue isn't what is the hard part, it is whether there is any particular motivation to move in this direction.

It may be that a larger playoff would lead to larger revenue. However, that is unclear, especially as it would seem to be accompanied by greatly reduced attention to all the bowls. My guess is that the largest financial driver is to maximize programming for TV - and it may be that a bajillion bowls does that better than an 8 team conference playoff.

Perhaps just as important as more revenue is who gets the revenue. That will cause lots of wrangling as various folks (particularly those with clout) try to figure out which system puts them in the best relative position. 

The next question is why an 8 team playoff (or 16, or 32, or any number) necessarily means four conferences all laid out the same way. A large NCAA tournament for basketball has not done so. I also don't think the conference realignment we have recently seen was motivated by any particular desire to make a smooth playoff system - it was each individual conference trying to figure out what what would give them the best television contract.

So, my guess is that in several years, but not so soon, we will see an expanded playoff, but it will be coupled to a mishmash of conferences and rules qualitatively similar to what we have now. I think that is the direction you were going with your second option.