Are mega-conferences good or bad?

This summer it looked like the college football landscape would change forever.  What actually happened was much more tame. However, we are inevitably moving towards a more concentrated NCAA.  Will these mega-conferences be good or bad for the sport?  For the purposes of this discussion, let's assume that the conferences will only change for football so the other sports won't factor in. 

All of the good from mega-conferences derives from the fact that they should lead to a playoff.  The pro's and con's of the BCS can be debated another time, but almost every college football fan can agree that a playoff would be better.  College football is the only the only team sport in the world that doesn't use a playoff to determine its champion (I think).  Rather than deciding its champion on a computer and in the newspaper, the NCAA needs to give out its trophy on the field.  And by moving to 4 16-team divisions, we would be that much closer to our dream.  One of the major complaints regarding a playoff is the logistics involved with picking the teams (because the BCS is run so well).  Mega-conferences solve of the logistical issues because you can simply pick the top 2 teams in each conference for an 8-team tournament or the top 4 teams for a 16-team tournament.

Mega-conferences would also destroy what history and tradition remain in the game today.  Most of today's fans have never heard of the Southwest Conference or the Big 8.   They don't know that Texas used to have a big rivalry with Arkansas or that Penn State used to be as independent as Notre Dame.  Mega-conferences would tear apart many of the regional ties and rivalries that still remain in the game today.  Check out my speculation of who will end up where (http://thereasontheyplaythegame.blogspot.com/2010/06/total-different-ncaa.html) and you will see how geography has to play second fiddle to other considerations.  And that article was written with 5 conferences rather than 4.  Mega-conferences would also entrench the elites of college football in a way that the BCS never could.  It has taken 10 years, but the BCS has finally been busted repeatedly by teams who don't belong to the college football elite.  Mega-conferences would reverse this trend in 2 ways.  First, the mega-conferences would be designed with the BCS busters in mind, so Boise State, Utah, and TCU would be included.  By adopting the current generation of BCS busters, mega-conferences would force a new generation of teams to emerge.  Second, mega-conferences will be MUCH harder to bust than the BCS.  The BCS is an inherently unfair system that was forced by public opinion to allow outside teams in.  Mega-conferences and their accompanying playoff would be a fair system that could permanently lock outsiders out by only allowing spots to teams in the mega-conferences.  By accepting Boise State and Utah, the college football elites can lock out other outsiders forever. 

Ultimately, there is more to college football than playoffs and mega-conferences would be a bad thing for the sport. We should be thankful we still have the ACC, SEC, Pac 12, new Big 10 (old Big 12), new Big 12 (old Big 10), Big East, Notre Dame, MWC, and Boise State.  And even the BCS.