Oh, and anyone who tries to make an argument against a playoff at this point is a moron. How many times does the BCS need to implode before someone stops this nonsense? This isn’t gymnastics or diving. We can play the games on a neutral site and determine the better team. It’s only a matter of time before fairness prevails. Until then, there will be many many more frustrated players/coaches/fans who get screwed by the current system.

Why bother with the entire BCS at all? Not only do we not “need” a playoff, I don’t see that we need some kind of “official” national collegiate championship..

C’mon, now, what’s need got to do with it? I think it’s pretty clear that any debate among sports fans about the issue operates on the assumption that the discussion is about what the fans/consumers of college football would like the product to deliver. So it strikes me as a reasonable presumption that the people who support the enterprise have some claim to a right to shape it. The crowning of a legitimate champion is pretty close to the essence of modern sport.

Let’s take Doug’s point a bit further. Simply revert to having whatever bowl games there are be inter-conference — Rose Bowl always between Pac 10 and Big 10 champions, etc. Who knows, some of these student athletes might end up devoting a little more time to being students, rather than de facto pro (albeit poorly paid) athletes.

The first word I think of to describe this argument is “quaint.” And to be sure, college football banks a lot on legacy nostalgia, phony though it may be. If you truly think its important to change the priorities of the so-called “student athletes” of big-time programs so that being a student come first, you can make a splendid case based upon the true purpose of post-secondary education. But if such folks really want that kind of reform, they need to enact reforms FAR more substantial than rolling back the clock on postseason college football.

The best chance of adding even a bit of fairness back into the game will be the Plus One option, where the Bowl games act as a loose semifinal.

The problem with the OU/Texas situation is with the tie-breaker rules of the Big XII. If they change their rules closer to the something like the SEC (use the BCS to drop the lowest in a three way tie, and then use a head to head), then right team, Texas, gets into the NC.

ps. I am a Sooner fan and I feel for the Longhorns, but I can’t say I am all that sad ; )

In addition, institute a ‘relegation’ system like the English Premier League uses — 5 out of 6 last-place finishers in the ‘big’ conferences get put into a little conferences (goodbye, Indiana, Duke, Iowa State, Syracuse, and Washington!) and all 5 non-BCS conference champions get to follow up their tournament appearance with a spot in a BCS conference the next year (hello, Ball State, East Carolina, Utah, Boise State and Troy!).

It would be AWESOME.

As far as playoffs go, a 12 team system would be awesome. The top 4 get a bye, so there is always something to play for at the end of the year. And I dont believe that there has ever been an undefeated mid level conference team outside of the top 12 of the BCS after week 14/15.

Let’s take Doug’s point a bit further. Simply revert to having whatever bowl games there are be inter-conference — Rose Bowl always between Pac 10 and Big 10 champions, etc. Who knows, some of these student athletes might end up devoting a little more time to being students, rather than de facto pro (albeit poorly paid) athletes.

In picking the number of teams, you have to look at scheduling. The final college championship game schedules nicely into the slot created by the pros’ 2-week pre-super bowl layoff.

Weekends prior to that the NFL plays playoff games on saturday and sunday, because the colleges are traditionally finished. Except for the NFL conference championship weekend, when both games are on sunday. The day before is open for college to have their semi-finals. Notice that this would create a weekend of quite possibly the 4 best high-stakes football games of the year.

Then the college quarterfinals could be on New Year’s day, which is a traditional big football day. That would give 4 high-interest games on New Years day.

But to go back further would eat into December, which is a busy time for everyone, and it might even push out all the beauty pageant bowl games unless they became the sweet 16 hosts. This extra round just seems like too much to me. especially given that with 16 teams you are starting to get into the tier of teams that really aren’t at the same level as top teams. You’ve got to figure that half of these games would be blowouts.

As a Cal fan who watched helplessly as Texas cheated its way into the Rose Bowl by lobbying the poll voters, all I can say is:

Good.

Say there was an 8 team playoff this year. We’d be arguing about Boise State and Ball State (and possibly Utah) not getting bids despite being undefeated. It’s already a crime that Ohio State will go to a BCS bowl over Boise St.

The argument against having a playoff (the extension of the season), is not really an issue any longer, since the major bowls stopped playing on New Years Day, and they added the national championship game. A system that uses the major bowls as the playoff games and adds two more games and one more week for the semifinals and final is very doable.

In the long run, does it really matter if the “national champion” of college football is decided by a computer or a playoff ?

I’m a much bigger fan of the college game than the overhyped NFL, but I can’t see any reason to get excited one way or the other about this.