I have felt that way, but with the PAC12 falling, I am less certain. There is a path to get in automatically. However, if 9/12 of the field is made up of SEC and Big10 teams, then it will be very very likely that an SEC or Big10 team will win the playoffs. That will feed the perception that the SEC and Big10 are the only ones deserving of even being in the playoffs and will keep the ratio at 9/12. The next argument will be that the conference champions shouldn't get the automatic buys, it should be based on Bill Hancock's feelings. Then there will be an argument that since the Big10 and SEC win 8 out or 12 playoffs that there shouldn't be automatic qualifiers. Then the ratio will get to 10 or 11 out of 12. On top of that the one or two non-Big10 or SEC teams that get in will never get the buy week, based on Bill Hancock's feelings.
The BCS was proposed as a way to solve the controversy about the MNC. It never really worked. The CFP was proposed as a way to solve the controversy about the MNC. It has turned into a political tool instead of a "championship" tool. I fear that the expanded CFP will suffer the same fate. There will be a lot of pressure to get rid of the most deserving teams and only use teams with the most hype.