[2006alum]

No, it wouldn't.  It would simply resolve who won three games in a row to win a championship.  While (barring unusual match-up issues) the better team will win a game at a neutral site more often than not, that doesn't mean that the better team will always win three consecutive games.  

Part of this might be a disagreement about what it means to be the "best" team. In my mind, if you beat 3 top ten teams three weeks in a row on the way to a national championship, you're de facto the best team. That is, in Outsider's hypothetical matchup, if the Huskies beat Bama, Georgia, and Clemson on the way to a national title, in what universe are they not the "best" team? To me, soccer's problem is that relatively few scoring moments decide games as compared to football - in a game that ends 56-48, either team had many opportunities to stop the other and didn't. In a soccer game that ends 1-0 off a random deflected corner kick, there's a real sense that a random 30 seconds of the 90 minutes decided the entire outcome. That's far less often the case in football.

But yes- agree that they shouldn't add more games. And if anything, this solution also improves that: removing the conference championship and adding an elite 8 round would make the losing teams' seasons shorter, since the playoff game would substitute for their bowl game and they wouldn't have had to play a conference championship game.

[2006alum]

No, it wouldn't.  It would simply resolve who won three games in a row to win a championship.  While (barring unusual match-up issues) the better team will win a game at a neutral site more often than not, that doesn't mean that the better team will always win three consecutive games.  

Part of this might be a disagreement about what it means to be the "best" team. In my mind, if you beat 3 top ten teams three weeks in a row on the way to a national championship, you're de facto the best team. That is, in Outsider's hypothetical matchup, if the Huskies beat Bama, Georgia, and Clemson on the way to a national title, in what universe are they not the "best" team? To me, soccer's problem is that relatively few scoring moments decide games as compared to football - in a game that ends 56-48, either team had many opportunities to stop the other and didn't. In a soccer game that ends 1-0 off a random deflected corner kick, there's a real sense that a random 30 seconds of the 90 minutes decided the entire outcome. That's far less often the case in football.

But yes- agree that they shouldn't add more games. And if anything, this solution also improves that: removing the conference championship and adding an elite 8 round would make the losing teams' seasons shorter, since the playoff game would substitute for their bowl game and they wouldn't have had to play a conference championship game.