Count me among the minority. Where most observers favor a playoff in Division I-A college football, I prefer the bowls.

While a playoff would indeed erase any controversy over the crowning of a national champion, it would fail miserably at resolving the real problem in college football — the division between the haves and have nots.

In fact, a postseason tournament might just widen the gap between the two.

No question, the Bowl Championship Series is both flawed and unfair. That's to be expected from an arrangement that is designed to further line the pockets of the already well-to-do.

From that angle, you can rest assured that if a playoff were to replace the current big money bowls, it also would be driven by the same principles that steer the sport today — power and greed.

Until the power structure is distributed more evenly among all Division I-A conferences, neither a playoff nor another tweak to the BCS formula will level the playing field.

"It's extraordinarily exclusive," Tulane President Scott Cowen said last November. "And there are ways to make it looser to provide more access. That's all we've asked for all along, and I think that's in everybody's interest."

But a playoff isn't the answer.

Considering the modus operandi of BCS school presidents, it's doubtful that a playoff would suddenly establish the notion of fair competition. Any eight or 16-team configuration likely would be designed to ensure that the overwhelming majority of bids are reserved for the six self-appointed power leagues.

In other words, an 8-3 Pittsburgh would receive a bid despite its mediocre showing outside of Big East competition. Meanwhile, schools with impressive, yet imperfect seasons in non-BCS conferences will be cast aside to lower-tier bowls in what would become the pigskin version of the NIT.

Talk about widening the gap.

This doesn't mean that a playoff couldn't eventually work at the major college level. Under certain parameters, it could.

But until a system is in place that ensures that teams with Boise State's résumé aren't locked out, a playoff will be just as corrupt as what we have today.

Eliminating opinion polls from the process altogether would be a good first step towards achieving that goal. With the AP already backing out of the equation, perhaps the less reliable coaches' poll can now be removed as well.

Forming a selection committee with equal representation among all conferences would be the obvious replacement, with the computers serving as nothing more than a guide. That would introduce a system of checks and balances that currently doesn't exist in college football.

Another consideration would be the introduction of non-conference strength of schedule as a major factor. Since schools have no control over their conference slate, those that schedule aggressively outside the league should be rewarded for doing so.

That would provide Southeastern Conference schools with a little incentive to upgrade their schedules. More than any conference, the SEC is notorious for shooting low with its non-conference opponents.

Look no further than Auburn if you need a prime example. The Tigers' premier out-of-league game this year was against Louisiana Tech.

Even if school presidents could concoct the perfect playoff formula, you have to wonder if they could overcome the logistical hurdles they would face.

First, there's the regular season that must be taken into account. In order to make sure that all schools are finished in time for a playoff to begin, ten games might be the max.

That means most schools would have to relinquish the lucrative payday of a home game. In East Carolina's case, you're looking at the likely reduction of home dates to four.

Then there's the additional travel that would be involved for lower-seeded schools. Since neutral sites would likely be reserved for the championship or a Final Four concept, the first couple of rounds would have to be staged at home venues of higher seeds.

So, instead of fans making one holiday trip to a traditional bowl destination, they would possibly be asked to make several to obscure outposts.

No thanks. Give me a month to prepare for the Liberty Bowl and a shot to end the season a winner.

"I think sooner or later, people are going to go there," Cowen said of a playoff. "I just think it's begging to go in that direction. Anything less than that, even if we drew a modified playoff, we're still going to say that's got problems with it.

"The other thing is, we (have a playoff) in Division I-AA. We do it in all other divisions. Now, what is different about Division I-A is the historic bowl system and bowl tie-ins. That's what makes it a little more complex."

So complex that drafting a playoff wouldn't fix the real issue in Division I college football.

My guess: At this stage, it would do more harm than good.