A couple of things on this thread
I do think that eventually we will see a division between the "haves" and the have nots. The difference in program revenues continues to grow between the schools on the bottom of the FBS schools and those on the top. We have 119 schools in FBS but the difference between the bottom half of those schools and the top half is exponential. Schools like Texas, Michigan, Florida, etc. generate more revenue a year than the entire Sun Belt Conference or MAC. The schools on the bottom think they should get more of that revenue, those on the top believe they are carrying the bottom schools already.
I think we will see a division with the lower end schools either moving into the FCS or forming a new division between the FBS and FCS, most likely the first due to money. The speculation in the media has been to go to a 4X16 set up in the top schools. I have never heard any of the conference leaders put this out and they have only mentioned it in very general, speculative and less that enthusiastic terms when asked by the media. I think more likely we end up 5 conferences of between 12-16 teams, mostly 12 and 14 since these numbers make scheduling easier while maintaining a sense of conference and protecting rivalries. This also means that if you go to a playoff (which I oppose) instead of a four team playoff you get four extra games in an 8 team playoff with the 5 conference champs and three wildcards. This lets you include a team that dominates the regular season and loses in the conference championship game and also leaves room for some schools to remain independant if that is how it washes out.
As to the statement earlier in the thread about the government not allowing this to happen I don't see any way that the they do anything more than make some noise. The simple fact is that the government isn't going to do anything that endangers the politicians that run it. The powers in CF have the votes to easily block anyone who tries to stop their eventual re-organization. In the senate you will have the senators from all the SEC states, the Big 10 states, most of the ACC states, most of the Big XII states (especially if KU is included) and some of the PAC states who will side with the powers. I make a rough count of 27 states who's senators wouldn't dare oppose the interest of their flagship schools in terms of football interest. In addition you have a number of other states where you can count on at least one senator to support the powers. On the other hand there are only a few states where the senators would be very clearly an loudly opposed to this change, states like Idaho (assuming Boise is left out), Nevada, Wyoming, etc who stand to lose statis in this situation. A number of other states the issue just isn't important enough for their senators to make a solid stand one way or the other. In the house you find a similar situation. How many house members from Texas are going to oppose the interest of UT and A&M, in Florida how many will oppose UF, FSU, Miami, same in the rest of the strong football states.
