(11-23-2011 11:16 AM)joep2 Wrote: Quote:A playoff system could force teams to play upwards of 16 games
There already is a playoff system for college football. All that needs to happen is to incorporate it here.
Quote:in order to earn that false legitimization
False? The only thing false is the current system where not every team can legitimately compete to be in the championship, and no team earns a spot.
The top 25 is not can not ever be logical or legitimate. It's simply not possible. There is no need for it to be this way. Period.
And how many illegitimate championship banners does Pitt still have hanging up? or Minnesota? or Michigan? or Alabama (with their tear-away jerseys)? Despite the fact that most of those undefeated teams of yesteryear that each of these schools claim as 'national championships' were little more than state championships (because they mostly played a schedule of small in-state colleges or even high schools in many instances), they still fly the flags as if they were real 'national' championships. But your school's 'national' football history is even more fictional than most.
If the "bowl and poll" system of illigitimacy is ok for your school's past - why do we suddenly need a playoff just because the old system doesn't favor your school any longer?
This is what'll happen if the BCS is dissolved:
There still won't be a playoff.
Each conference will have a series of bowl games lined up - just like they used to. The ones that will really pay off (the Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar, etc), will match a major conference champion with the best available opponent (or another conference champion) - and will pay a lot more $$$ than other bowls.
The schools who feel locked out now (the non-BCS, the BigEast, most of the ACC, teams in the Big12 not named Texas or Oklahoma, etc) - will find no opportunity for a major payday because - even in undeafeated seasons, they simply will not garner enough media interest and advertising interest to warrant an invite to a major bowl. The SEC, Big10, Pac12 and some teams from the Big12 and ACC will get big payday invites. The rest will get minor bowls for minor money.
Under those options - a BCS that favors the 3 major conferences and a few other schools - but allows a way for an individual school to get a big payday when they have a great season, sure seems preferable to a system that locks the rest out every year and in every circumstance.
This would also be the case if the BCS just matched up 1 vs 2 and let the rest of the bowls make their own invites. Would there ever be a BoiseSt invited to the Rose Bowl? No, there wouldn't. Would Pitt ever get a Sugar Bowl invite to play the SEC champion? No, they wouldn't.
While I believe the BCS is unfair and flawed - I believe even more that what would arise if the BCS disappeared would be even more unfair and more flawed.