[ciscopack]

I think the voters should snub Michigan and Florida if they REALLY WANT A CHANGE. They should pit OSU and Boise State in their voting ballots and next season we'll have a 4 team playoff to determine the winner on the field. They'd be putting the 2 top undefeated teams in the championship game and they'd shake up the football world so much, Presidents of universities will get off their collective butts and take action. The SEC won't stand for it and the Big Ten would not like it either. It would shake up college football and the BCS however and 2007-2008 will be the year Division 1A had its first proven champion. No, I don't think Boise State would deserve top 4 status at all but that would be the ground shaker that made things happen.

[Willie Bee]

Welcome to SBR, cisco

Interesting notion, and I'm all for a slight tweaking to the current system to pit the top 4 teams in the BCS in a mini-playoff. LINK It would seem to be the least 'intrusive' way on the current bow structure and would allow the bigger bowls to maintain at least a big part of their traditions.

My biggest concern with any playoff system is it will eventually grow to include 8 teams, 12 teams, 16, 32, who knows? Get everyone in a conference, maybe 12 total in Div-IA, and let one rep from each conference advance, that would be as big as I'd like to see a college football playoffs. But I don't think you will get everyone to either conference up or agree that just the conference winners should advance. So by making it a 4-team bracket, it's very simple and adds just one more game. I think if the majority of fans were given the current system or a simple 4-team plan, they would be in favor of the 4-teamer by at least a 9-1 margin.

[EBone]

To fix college football, I believe the BCS needs to be disbanded. Here is how I would propose this be fixed:

There are currently 119 teams in Division 1A football. I would propose cutting down the number of Division 1A football teams down to, say, 96 teams (how you would cut these teams down to 96 for the division is another discussion). Further divide those 96 teams into 8 conferences which would make each conference a 12 team conference.

Each college football team would have an 11 game schedule playing each team in their newly affiliated conference once. I believe the conferences should be arranged by region. I believe this because I think regional rivalries are what make college football such a great game.

At the end of the regular season, I propose to have a Conference Championship Game (if you want to subdivide the conferences into North and South or East and West that's OK too). Take the Top 2 out of each conference and play the Championship game (or the two winners of each subdivision).

After the Conference Championship Games, you have a playoff to decide the National Championship Winner. You take those 8 Conference Championship winners and have a playoff to determine the National Title. The most games that could be played in this scenario by one team would be a 15 game season (11 game schedule, 1 Conference Title Game and 3 National Title playoff games).

In an 8 team playoff scenario, there are 7 games. So, they could rotate the Bowl game each year like they had in the past. Choose a 7 bowl game rotation (likely the ones with the most tradition) and rotate them in and out every year as to who gets a quarterfinal game, a semifinal game and a National Title game.

Strengths of this scenario: puts major emphasis on every game you play in the season because every game you play is a conference game. There is no subjectivity. It is all fought out on the field and the team that has been strongest against their conference foes comes out the victor.

Weaknesses of this scenario: I'd like to find a way to incorporate some at-large teams say 4 or 8 teams. The problem with doing that is that you bring down the importance of a Conference Championship Game. If you pick 4 at-large teams, then you have to choose which 4 Conference Champions have to play and which 4 conference champions get a bye which is a huge deal in my opinion. You could choose 8 at-large teams but then it again undermines the importance of winning your conference championship. As we have seen in other sports, when a team gets a wildcard birth in the playoffs, it seems to rejuvenate that wildcard team to perform. I want to reward consistent play but I don't want to deligitimize the Conference Champion.



That's what I propose. There are tons of holes in this but I think the general concept is a good one especially cutting the number of teams down to 96. That, to me, is probably the biggest key of all and then seperating those 96 into 8 Super Conferences (my apologies to Jackie Sherrill for using the term "Super Conference". I hope it's not trademarked or I owe him some jack).