[uncafan]

The problem for UNCA fan here is that he just simply hasn't done his homework on the situation. The article, as well as numerous other projections show rather easily how a home based playoff system would bring in MUCH more money than the current one.

My point was that there is a lot of LOCAL pressure on schools to keep the Bowl system in place... Its good for local economies and businesses. Again, I don't know how much ESPN would bid -- i don't know if its more than the ridiculous figure they already are paying to buy back the BCS games from fox. But I think it was clear my point was that for big time schools there's a lot more than the check from the playoff system or BCS. For Ohio State most of their money comes from all that goes WITH the bowl game, not the game itself -- because the TV money they get from that game gets split up between the other 11 teams in the conference. If its a playoff system you lose that Bowl "week of festivities", the fundraisers, the travel packages, etc. etc.

My other point was if there is SOOOO much money in a playoff, why haven't they tried to do it? Because the people in control obviously believe this is the most lucrative way to run it right now -- might that change? Sure... I also wonder, since ESPN just signed the deal with the BCS... How that affects everything.

[uncafan]

One question I do have though. It seems like the most likely thing to happen is a plus one.... Because then they could keep the 4 BCS Bowls as they are, and then after those 4 games move the national championship game an extra week back and have a 2 week break between the "semi-finals" and the NCG.

This obviously doesn't solve the situation perfectly, but it would at least give 4 out of the 5 teams a shot if it were in place this year. What do people have against a plus-one? Maybe i'm missing something, but, really the most realistic thing is a plus-one. It may not be the most fair, but, considering the money, who runs the system right now, etc etc. The odds are much higher for it than an 8 or 16 team playoff.... So why don't people get behind that system, or maybe the question is, what is the problem with it? Its still a step up from the BCS.

[horrez]

So why don't people get behind that system, or maybe the question is, what is the problem with it? Its still a step up from the BCS.

The problem is it doesn't solve the problem. Not only that, it would most likely delay the correct answer to the problem. This, of course, assumes the problem is deciding a national champion. Now, if the problem is just making money then an argument can be made either way. To just have a "plus 1" system still leaves it up to voters and "experts" who "know" what teams will win games and when those teams don't win they make excuses for them. "Well [insert name of "small" school here] beat [insert name of "big" school here] because this was their Super Bowl. If they had to play in the [insert name of big conference here] they wouldn't be able to win as many games". Even if these "experts" don't vote in the polls, they still influense voters. Who really knows how TCU would have done in the mighty SEC this year? Who really knows what record Boise State would have if they were in the Big Ten?

Right now there are college football teams that enter the season with no chance of winning a national championship. None. Why is this? Because of the conference they play in. I might be wrong, but I think FBS football is the only sport where a team can win every game it plays and not win the championship. The only way (I believe) to make sure every team has a chance is to have a playoff system that at least includes the conference champion of each conference. It happens in other sports.

[uncafan]

So why don't people get behind that system, or maybe the question is, what is the problem with it? Its still a step up from the BCS.

The problem is it doesn't solve the problem. Not only that, it would most likely delay the correct answer to the problem. This, of course, assumes the problem is deciding a national champion. Now, if the problem is just making money then an argument can be made either way. To just have a "plus 1" system still leaves it up to voters and "experts" who "know" what teams will win games and when those teams don't win they make excuses for them. "Well [insert name of "small" school here] beat [insert name of "big" school here] because this was their Super Bowl. If they had to play in the [insert name of big conference here] they wouldn't be able to win as many games". Even if these "experts" don't vote in the polls, they still influense voters. Who really knows how TCU would have done in the mighty SEC this year? Who really knows what record Boise State would have if they were in the Big Ten?

Right now there are college football teams that enter the season with no chance of winning a national championship. None. Why is this? Because of the conference they play in. I might be wrong, but I think FBS football is the only sport where a team can win every game it plays and not win the championship. The only way (I believe) to make sure every team has a chance is to have a playoff system that at least includes the conference champion of each conference. It happens in other sports.

Yeah i believe it is the only team sport... I mean I understand your argument there and I can't disagree with any of it. I'll be honest I'm a big history guy. I love that Ohio State ends every year with the Michigan game (although today a report came out saying the Big Ten is really going to push for a 12 team/conf champ game in next few years), and all the traditional bowls. The Rose Bowl esp. So I am a bit biased towards something that could keep a Big Ten/Pac-10 matchup there, or some of the other things. So naturally I'm going to see the positives of a plus-one.

But I guess my argument would be....Take every year of the BCS...and how many of those years would the voters combined with a plus-one system have "gotten it right"? This year it would be tough to make the argument for the plus one, can't argue about that, but on the flip side since 1980 there has only been one previous year where more than 2 teams where undefeated (there were 3 in 2004). So I guess my argument would be: 1) I can live with 1 'media chooses 4 out of 5 undefeated teams' every 20 years or so....and 2) its a HUGE improvement over the current system.

Again i think your points are valid -- call me a backwards thinker stuck in the history of the bowls etc. I guess for me, i'd be perfectly happy with a plus-one. But I can also see where if we got to a plus-one system, and the "problem" with it occurred only once every 10-15 years, there would then be zero chance of moving on to a playoff.