I saw this: http://collegefootballsolution.com/ The concept behind it is to keep the 4 BCS bowls like they are to appease the NCAA Gods. Makes sense. In fact, it's the only way we'll ever get to a playoff. USC vs Penn State Texas vs Ohio State Alabama vs Utah Cinncinnati vs Virginia Tech Here is where they go wrong with the plan. They automatically pit the Sugar/Orange together and the Fiesta/Rose. There will be years where the matchups are lopsided and give certain teams free rides to the NC game. The team that finishes #1 in the BCS at the end of the college football season (pre-Bowl) should get that advantage. I say you wait for the outcomes, then pit the highest ranked BCS team vs the lowest ranked BCS team in one of the semi-finals and then the other 2 teams left are pitted against each other. Now, the question arises, what about fans having to wait to see where they will be playing the following week? That won't be fair. The solution: you have both semi-final games play at the same location. This location rotates every year to a different site. It will become the same as the final four site for NCAA basketball. The national championship game would be set up just like it is now, with one of the BCS bowls rotating the game. This season would have looked like this: Rose: USC vs Penn State Fiesta: Texas vs Oklahoma Sugar: Utah vs Florida Orange: Cincinnati vs Virginia Tech For sake of argument, let's say Oklahoma and Florida won the games listed: (1) Oklahoma vs (19) Virginia Tech (2) Florida vs (3) Texas So getting to the #1 spot means a lot in this circumstance. Your season extends to the 15th of January, only 7 days later than what it is now. Based on this scenario, the only difference to what we have now is we lessen the BCS teams from 10 to 8 and we have 2 semi-final games inserted between the BCS bowls and NC game at a site other than where the BCS and NC games are held (and rotate it every year). I call it the path of least resistance. I would like to hear everyone's input and try and poke some holes in it. This is by far the best solution that would be FEASIBLE to the NCAA heads.
01 12-1 Oklahoma [Big12] 02 12-1 Florida [SEC] 03 11-1 Texas 04 12-1 Alabama 05 11-1 USC [PAC10] 06 12-0 Utah [MWC] 07 11-1 Texas Tech 08 11-1 Penn St [BIG10] 09 12-0 Boise St [WAC] 10 10-2 Ohio St 11 10-2 TCU 12 11-2 Cincinnati [BEAST] 13 09-3 Oklahoma St 14 09-3 Georgia Tech 15 09-3 Georgia 16 10-2 BYU 17 09-3 Oregon 18 09-3 Michigan St 19 09-4 Virginia Tech [ACC] I understand the need to satisfy the BCS conferences by giving them a high profile, high dollar bowl game. That is reality and those with tradition and power demand that. But the drive for determining a national champion is more than that, it is a desire to determine on the field who is the best team in the nation. The BCS is a compromise between the two and has been the target of much criticism. I also understand wanting to keep the BCS bowls involved; they are big time players in college football and can't be overlooked. But a playoff can not logically take place without seeding and organization, which has to take precedence over tradition if the playoff is to be taken seriously. There is also the issue of fairness. I can't think of a good argument for excluding Boise St, an undefeated conference champion, when lower rated champions are included (champions with the boon of playing in conferences that don't sabotage their rating) AND non-champions are included. That is not fair and seems pretty indefensible to me. Were I to do it, I'd put a ceiling on teams getting in and I'd most likely keep 1 team per conference to keep the playoff as small as possible while remaining in the realm of fairness. A lot of people seem to be championing Texas, but Texas did not win their conference. I think there is a lot of value in winning a conference.
