(11-21-2011 12:26 PM)TomThumb Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 12:03 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  Quote from Pac12 commish......."The thinking about AQ status is pretty different for the Pac-12 and Big Ten than it is for everybody else," said Scott. "It isn't as relevant given our unique relationship with the Rose Bowl. It doesn't really matter for us one way or the other whether there's AQ status or not."

So the Pac-12 is OK with doing away with automatic qualifiers to a BCS bowl because they're going to keep their...automatic qualifier to the Rose Bowl.

Haha...yup. Thats pretty much right. The power conferences will simply contract with one of the major bowls....pretty much just like it used to work prior to the BCS.

(11-21-2011 12:11 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 10:48 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 10:37 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 10:18 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  College football was always popular. Saying that it will decrease in popularity smacks of sour grapes. More inclusion is not the reason for the sport's popularity.

It sure as hell is. Like it or not, CFB ratings have skyrocketed in the past 15 years. That is the reason for TV networks and billion dollar TV contracts.

TV ratings and attendance demonstrate consistently that it's the power programs and conferences that are responsible for that. Do you really believe the smaller schools & non-AQs are the reason? More access for the little guy? There's little evidence to support that.

You are simply wrong. The power conferences are a ratings driver, but the little guys still make up half the total audience. How popular would the NFL be if you told half the cities that they no longer would be allowed to play in the super bowl, regardless of how well they played that year. Your audience would drop by 50%. Simple as that. Will the college audience drop by 50%, no of course not. Will interest in the "power conferences" drop---absolutely.

There's no evidence that supports that.

(11-21-2011 12:27 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 08:46 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 06:44 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 01:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(11-20-2011 10:18 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  It depends on which "new system" you are refering to. Right now there isn't one. There are several theories and many of them include some sort of top 10 are guaranteed the 5 or 6 BCS bowls. The rest of the bowls still get their conference tie-ins. In that situation it helps everybody that earns it.

I don't understand what people don't understand about that.

Because as you said, that is not the only plan being floated. For instance, one plan does away with AQ's and has the BCS only match the #1 and #2 teams. The Bowls are free to choose whomever they wish. Who do you think they are going to pick---an 8-4 SEC team or an undefeated CUSA team? Essentially, the former non-AQ's will be relegated to the gutter bowls regardless of thier rank or how well they played in a given season. They will be passed over for "name" teams that supposedly "travel" well. To paraphrase one conference official-- 'the days of Boise State vs Oklahoma would be over'.

When and if this happens....the bowl tie ins for the non-BCS conferences will shrink to almost nothing. Why in world wouldn't they? With a much larger pool to pick from in regard winning record teams from the big conferences they would be crazy not to. These minor bowls will have the ability then to pick teams(most likely close by) that will bring fans and elevate the bowl instead of being tied into a conference that can't bring the goods.

Well I hope they do go with just pick teams close by that travel, because that's a very good thing for ECU. Do you think the bowl in Charlotte would rather have us or a BE team? How about the bowl in DC? The one in Nashville would be very well attended by us. Also with the number of bowls in existance there are not going to be a huge number of bowl eligible teams not playing in bowls. Maybe 2 or 3 a year, but with ECU's traveling fan base it wouldn't ever be us. We are one of the few non-AQ's that would actually do better in this type of system.

You make a good point. ECU does travel well...especially to Charlotte and Atlanta.

Yep the ones that would be hurt the most by having the bowls have more freedom to choose who they want are teams with no traveling fan base, AQ or non-AQ. The 2 AQ conferences that would be in the most trouble with that are the ACC and BE. Right now the only team in the BE that would travel as well or better than us to bowls is Louisville. Of the new rumored additions the only ones that would are BYU and the academies. ECU is not in the same boat as the other non-AQ's from this stand point. Not saying that BCS bowls would be begging to have us, but a lot of the lesser bowls in our area if given the choice would rather have us than most BE teams and a lot of ACC teams.

(11-21-2011 12:28 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  Frank...... I think we're kind of speaking the same language but I think there will always be a way for current "non-AQ's" to get to major bowls. I don't think it's current BCS system or nothing for us.

IMHO, I think we're going to end up seeing something pretty much the same as the current system. Too many entities want too many different things, which means that there needs to be a system that satisfies no one, which you could say is the current system. At the end of the day, I don't think the Delany proposal will fly for anyone other than the Big Ten and SEC. What I think the Delany proposal does, though, is make it clear that if push comes to shove, they truly can just go back to the traditional bowl system (with the exception of having a #1 vs. #2 game) than allow more access for the non-AQs. While it's likely a "put the little guys in their places" threat proposal than one that would actually get implemented, there's leverage in that it's plausible enough that the little guys have to take it seriously.

(11-21-2011 03:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 12:28 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  Frank...... I think we're kind of speaking the same language but I think there will always be a way for current "non-AQ's" to get to major bowls. I don't think it's current BCS system or nothing for us.

IMHO, I think we're going to end up seeing something pretty much the same as the current system. Too many entities want too many different things, which means that there needs to be a system that satisfies no one, which you could say is the current system. At the end of the day, I don't think the Delany proposal will fly for anyone other than the Big Ten and SEC. What I think the Delany proposal does, though, is make it clear that if push comes to shove, they truly can just go back to the traditional bowl system (with the exception of having a #1 vs. #2 game) than allow more access for the non-AQs. While it's likely a "put the little guys in their places" threat proposal than one that would actually get implemented, there's leverage in that it's plausible enough that the little guys have to take it seriously.

This is exctly what I beleive.

(11-21-2011 10:48 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 10:13 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 10:11 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 10:04 AM)mlb Wrote:  My opinion is that they are going to end up killing college football's popularity. CFB has made huge gains during the "BCS" era that allowed for more inclusion. You go back to the old system and you see that popularity immediately drop...

You should have put inclusion in quotations as well.

You think killing it will make it better for programs like ECU?

Do I think ECU is in a better position now than before the BCS started? No I don't. Do I think it would be worse for a lot of the non-AQ's? Possibly. What I know is our goals of playing as many local name programs as we can and getting bowl eligible don't change. Also with the huge number of meaningless bowl games and our traveling fan base we aren't getting snubbed if we have the required win total. While a traveling fan base means nothing to the BE it means everything to bowl games. Their goals are to sell their vastly overpriced tickets, and we do that. No we aren't getting huge bowl games in AQ-less world, but we aren't getting them now so that doesn't change a thing. We might have a shot of getting to the game in Charlotte if they have more leeway to pick who they want. The one in DC would always be interested in having us. Either way I am not concerned.

Well that is a fair opinion for sure and helps to understand the rationale some have behind supporting the removal of the BCS system as we know it but what happens to the growing ECU program if there is no Bowl game at the end of the season because all those local bowls have been agreed upon between the multitude of highly placed programs in the ECU area? Will that stop the growth that ECU is having? Yeah, playing in bowls farther away isn't exactly great for fan travel but there are other aspects in which it is still important to be placed in those bowls.

Unfortunately College Football isn't just about appeasing the fans. Nothing appeases the fans like success and that could be seriously hindered should the Good Ole Boys club get their way fully when the BCS is gone. If you thought they were bad With the BCS, just wait till you see how they operate when that sanctioning body only is responsible for putting together the championship game.

For what it's worth, posting on this board has made me somewhat of an ECU fan. I root for you guys to grow within a state that has conspired to hold you down. I really do wish the best for you guys, I just think not having a BCS means Tobacco Road can seriously stick it to you guys. ECU is a threat to Tobacco Road.

(11-21-2011 09:17 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Well that is a fair opinion for sure and helps to understand the rationale some have behind supporting the removal of the BCS system as we know it but what happens to the growing ECU program if there is no Bowl game at the end of the season because all those local bowls have been agreed upon between the multitude of highly placed programs in the ECU area? Will that stop the growth that ECU is having? Yeah, playing in bowls farther away isn't exactly great for fan travel but there are other aspects in which it is still important to be placed in those bowls.

Unfortunately College Football isn't just about appeasing the fans. Nothing appeases the fans like success and that could be seriously hindered should the Good Ole Boys club get their way fully when the BCS is gone. If you thought they were bad With the BCS, just wait till you see how they operate when that sanctioning body only is responsible for putting together the championship game.

For what it's worth, posting on this board has made me somewhat of an ECU fan. I root for you guys to grow within a state that has conspired to hold you down. I really do wish the best for you guys, I just think not having a BCS means Tobacco Road can seriously stick it to you guys. ECU is a threat to Tobacco Road.

Do you think a bunch of bowl games are about to go away? What is the number at now like 35 or something? If that number of bowls remain and ECU gets eligible we will most likely get one. There just aren't enough AQ schools that can get bowl eligible to fill those spots. Also ECU is a more valuable team to some bowl games then a good number of BCS teams. Now if you believe that bowl games are about to drop to a more manageable number and some of the meaningless ones would go away then yes ECU might would be in trouble, but right now how many bowl eligible teams actually stay home? Can't be more than 5, and it wouldn't be ECU.

(11-22-2011 09:19 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 09:17 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Well that is a fair opinion for sure and helps to understand the rationale some have behind supporting the removal of the BCS system as we know it but what happens to the growing ECU program if there is no Bowl game at the end of the season because all those local bowls have been agreed upon between the multitude of highly placed programs in the ECU area? Will that stop the growth that ECU is having? Yeah, playing in bowls farther away isn't exactly great for fan travel but there are other aspects in which it is still important to be placed in those bowls.

Unfortunately College Football isn't just about appeasing the fans. Nothing appeases the fans like success and that could be seriously hindered should the Good Ole Boys club get their way fully when the BCS is gone. If you thought they were bad With the BCS, just wait till you see how they operate when that sanctioning body only is responsible for putting together the championship game.

For what it's worth, posting on this board has made me somewhat of an ECU fan. I root for you guys to grow within a state that has conspired to hold you down. I really do wish the best for you guys, I just think not having a BCS means Tobacco Road can seriously stick it to you guys. ECU is a threat to Tobacco Road.

Do you think a bunch of bowl games are about to go away? What is the number at now like 35 or something? If that number of bowls remain and ECU gets eligible we will most likely get one. There just aren't enough AQ schools that can get bowl eligible to fill those spots. Also ECU is a more valuable team to some bowl games then a good number of BCS teams. Now if you believe that bowl games are about to drop to a more manageable number and some of the meaningless ones would go away then yes ECU might would be in trouble, but right now how many bowl eligible teams actually stay home? Can't be more than 5, and it wouldn't be ECU.

Well, we are talking about putting that AQ stuff aside. You spoke of regional bowls. How many are right there close enough to ECU that you would consider local bowls that you would be excited to see ECU in so that enough fans would travel to it?

If bowls are going to be able to be more picky then they might indeed try to get teams closer to them so that right there might cut down the number of bowls ECU could get an invite from.

(11-22-2011 09:37 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(11-22-2011 09:19 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 09:17 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Well that is a fair opinion for sure and helps to understand the rationale some have behind supporting the removal of the BCS system as we know it but what happens to the growing ECU program if there is no Bowl game at the end of the season because all those local bowls have been agreed upon between the multitude of highly placed programs in the ECU area? Will that stop the growth that ECU is having? Yeah, playing in bowls farther away isn't exactly great for fan travel but there are other aspects in which it is still important to be placed in those bowls.

Unfortunately College Football isn't just about appeasing the fans. Nothing appeases the fans like success and that could be seriously hindered should the Good Ole Boys club get their way fully when the BCS is gone. If you thought they were bad With the BCS, just wait till you see how they operate when that sanctioning body only is responsible for putting together the championship game.

For what it's worth, posting on this board has made me somewhat of an ECU fan. I root for you guys to grow within a state that has conspired to hold you down. I really do wish the best for you guys, I just think not having a BCS means Tobacco Road can seriously stick it to you guys. ECU is a threat to Tobacco Road.

Do you think a bunch of bowl games are about to go away? What is the number at now like 35 or something? If that number of bowls remain and ECU gets eligible we will most likely get one. There just aren't enough AQ schools that can get bowl eligible to fill those spots. Also ECU is a more valuable team to some bowl games then a good number of BCS teams. Now if you believe that bowl games are about to drop to a more manageable number and some of the meaningless ones would go away then yes ECU might would be in trouble, but right now how many bowl eligible teams actually stay home? Can't be more than 5, and it wouldn't be ECU.

Well, we are talking about putting that AQ stuff aside. You spoke of regional bowls. How many are right there close enough to ECU that you would consider local bowls that you would be excited to see ECU in so that enough fans would travel to it?

If bowls are going to be able to be more picky then they might indeed try to get teams closer to them so that right there might cut down the number of bowls ECU could get an invite from.

The bowl in Charlotte is the obvious one that would be very well attended by ECU fans every year. My guess is if you gave that bowl a choice between ECU or a BE team they are choosing ECU every time. The bowl in DC is one that we traveled very well to last year, and would be one that would be interested in us. Not every bowl is going to have the ability to go closer though, so if the bowls in our area went other routes there would be other options available with 70 or so teams making bowls every year. The only eligible teams currently who don't make them are a very limited number of MAC and Sun-Belt teams. It's also going to be interesting how would the bowls determine who got first choice and so on if it went to a much more free market situation.

(11-22-2011 09:45 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-22-2011 09:37 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(11-22-2011 09:19 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 09:17 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Well that is a fair opinion for sure and helps to understand the rationale some have behind supporting the removal of the BCS system as we know it but what happens to the growing ECU program if there is no Bowl game at the end of the season because all those local bowls have been agreed upon between the multitude of highly placed programs in the ECU area? Will that stop the growth that ECU is having? Yeah, playing in bowls farther away isn't exactly great for fan travel but there are other aspects in which it is still important to be placed in those bowls.

Unfortunately College Football isn't just about appeasing the fans. Nothing appeases the fans like success and that could be seriously hindered should the Good Ole Boys club get their way fully when the BCS is gone. If you thought they were bad With the BCS, just wait till you see how they operate when that sanctioning body only is responsible for putting together the championship game.

For what it's worth, posting on this board has made me somewhat of an ECU fan. I root for you guys to grow within a state that has conspired to hold you down. I really do wish the best for you guys, I just think not having a BCS means Tobacco Road can seriously stick it to you guys. ECU is a threat to Tobacco Road.

Do you think a bunch of bowl games are about to go away? What is the number at now like 35 or something? If that number of bowls remain and ECU gets eligible we will most likely get one. There just aren't enough AQ schools that can get bowl eligible to fill those spots. Also ECU is a more valuable team to some bowl games then a good number of BCS teams. Now if you believe that bowl games are about to drop to a more manageable number and some of the meaningless ones would go away then yes ECU might would be in trouble, but right now how many bowl eligible teams actually stay home? Can't be more than 5, and it wouldn't be ECU.

Well, we are talking about putting that AQ stuff aside. You spoke of regional bowls. How many are right there close enough to ECU that you would consider local bowls that you would be excited to see ECU in so that enough fans would travel to it?

If bowls are going to be able to be more picky then they might indeed try to get teams closer to them so that right there might cut down the number of bowls ECU could get an invite from.

The bowl in Charlotte is the obvious one that would be very well attended by ECU fans every year. My guess is if you gave that bowl a choice between ECU or a BE team they are choosing ECU every time. The bowl in DC is one that we traveled very well to last year, and would be one that would be interested in us. Not every bowl is going to have the ability to go closer though, so if the bowls in our area went other routes there would be other options available with 70 or so teams making bowls every year. The only eligible teams currently who don't make them are a very limited number of MAC and Sun-Belt teams. It's also going to be interesting how would the bowls determine who got first choice and so on if it went to a much more free market situation.

Ahh yes the Belk Bowl, that is a good one for ECU in this possible future. Any others? Not sure if the Belk Bowl would invite them every year. They have to have some variety.

(11-22-2011 09:55 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(11-22-2011 09:45 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-22-2011 09:37 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(11-22-2011 09:19 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-21-2011 09:17 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Well that is a fair opinion for sure and helps to understand the rationale some have behind supporting the removal of the BCS system as we know it but what happens to the growing ECU program if there is no Bowl game at the end of the season because all those local bowls have been agreed upon between the multitude of highly placed programs in the ECU area? Will that stop the growth that ECU is having? Yeah, playing in bowls farther away isn't exactly great for fan travel but there are other aspects in which it is still important to be placed in those bowls.

Unfortunately College Football isn't just about appeasing the fans. Nothing appeases the fans like success and that could be seriously hindered should the Good Ole Boys club get their way fully when the BCS is gone. If you thought they were bad With the BCS, just wait till you see how they operate when that sanctioning body only is responsible for putting together the championship game.

For what it's worth, posting on this board has made me somewhat of an ECU fan. I root for you guys to grow within a state that has conspired to hold you down. I really do wish the best for you guys, I just think not having a BCS means Tobacco Road can seriously stick it to you guys. ECU is a threat to Tobacco Road.

Do you think a bunch of bowl games are about to go away? What is the number at now like 35 or something? If that number of bowls remain and ECU gets eligible we will most likely get one. There just aren't enough AQ schools that can get bowl eligible to fill those spots. Also ECU is a more valuable team to some bowl games then a good number of BCS teams. Now if you believe that bowl games are about to drop to a more manageable number and some of the meaningless ones would go away then yes ECU might would be in trouble, but right now how many bowl eligible teams actually stay home? Can't be more than 5, and it wouldn't be ECU.

Well, we are talking about putting that AQ stuff aside. You spoke of regional bowls. How many are right there close enough to ECU that you would consider local bowls that you would be excited to see ECU in so that enough fans would travel to it?

If bowls are going to be able to be more picky then they might indeed try to get teams closer to them so that right there might cut down the number of bowls ECU could get an invite from.

The bowl in Charlotte is the obvious one that would be very well attended by ECU fans every year. My guess is if you gave that bowl a choice between ECU or a BE team they are choosing ECU every time. The bowl in DC is one that we traveled very well to last year, and would be one that would be interested in us. Not every bowl is going to have the ability to go closer though, so if the bowls in our area went other routes there would be other options available with 70 or so teams making bowls every year. The only eligible teams currently who don't make them are a very limited number of MAC and Sun-Belt teams. It's also going to be interesting how would the bowls determine who got first choice and so on if it went to a much more free market situation.

Ahh yes the Belk Bowl, that is a good one for ECU in this possible future. Any others? Not sure if the Belk Bowl would invite them every year. They have to have some variety.

The Belk Bowl, the Military Bowl in DC, maybe the one in Nashville, the bowl in St. Pete. If we managed to have a really good year and were ranked highly the Peach might be interested again. We have been there before and did set the attendance record at the time (it was the last football game played in Fulton County Stadium). I would say those would be your obvious rotation depending on which ACC/BE/SEC teams are eligible and what bowls would have choices before others. There are so many hypotheticals in this that it's hard to say. Obviously the SEC teams travel better than us, that isn't up for debate. The teams in the ACC that travel better than us for sure are Clemson and VT, and then the others would depend on the matchup, season each was having, and location of the bowl. The BE at this point without WVU has UL who travels well and that's it. Not every one of these games is going to be able to get an SEC team and one of the for sure large traveling ACC teams.

Then perhaps the diminishing of the BCS would be a good thing for ECU and with that I can understand why Pirate fans would be happy for it.

I wonder how that would play out across the country and which schools it would help and which ones it would hurt?

(11-22-2011 10:31 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Then perhaps the diminishing of the BCS would be a good thing for ECU and with that I can understand why Pirate fans would be happy for it.

I wonder how that would play out across the country and which schools it would help and which ones it would hurt?

For the majority of non-AQ's it would probably be a bad thing. I don't deny that in the least. The schools it would help are the ones with large fan bases that travel, and the schools it would hurt are the ones who don't have that. B10 and SEC teams would be in the highest demand for all bowls, because obviously they have fans that will travel to bowl games across the country. Those 2 would be the really big winners in this.

I hope it keeps getting more and more exclusive.

(11-22-2011 10:38 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-22-2011 10:31 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Then perhaps the diminishing of the BCS would be a good thing for ECU and with that I can understand why Pirate fans would be happy for it.

I wonder how that would play out across the country and which schools it would help and which ones it would hurt?

For the majority of non-AQ's it would probably be a bad thing. I don't deny that in the least. The schools it would help are the ones with large fan bases that travel, and the schools it would hurt are the ones who don't have that. B10 and SEC teams would be in the highest demand for all bowls, because obviously they have fans that will travel to bowl games across the country. Those 2 would be the really big winners in this.

Agreed!

If the BCS goes to being just 1 bowl game that puts 1 v. 2. The Rose, Sugar, Orange, and Fiesta will just slide into the pecking order of the conferences they partner.


Hypothetical:
The Sugar Bowl would get the 1st selection of the SEC and 2 selection of the Big 12 AFTER the BCS selects 1 v. 2.
The Rose would get 1st selection of the Pac 12 and Big 10 after the BCS selects 1. v. 2.
The Orange would get 1st Selection of the ACC and the 2nd selection of the Big 10 after the BCS selects 1 v. 2.
The Fiesta would get 1st Selection of the Big 12 and the 2nd Selection of the SEC after the BCS selects 1 v. 2.

Other Bowls would be free to move up the pecking order if the price is right, since the BCS cartel would no longer be in play.

(11-22-2011 10:31 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Then perhaps the diminishing of the BCS would be a good thing for ECU and with that I can understand why Pirate fans would be happy for it.

I wonder how that would play out across the country and which schools it would help and which ones it would hurt?

It's hard for me to see why it would be a good thing for ECU. If the current BCS bowls are left to their own devices to make their own deals, they'll likely be in the form of contractual conference tie-ins (i.e. Orange Bowl *always* takes the 2nd place Big Ten team). There won't be a concept of at-large picks anymore, so ECU (and the other non-AQ schools) won't have any access to those games and be relegated to whatever C-USA/Alliance tie-ins are in place.

(11-22-2011 02:21 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-22-2011 10:31 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Then perhaps the diminishing of the BCS would be a good thing for ECU and with that I can understand why Pirate fans would be happy for it.

I wonder how that would play out across the country and which schools it would help and which ones it would hurt?

It's hard for me to see why it would be a good thing for ECU. If the current BCS bowls are left to their own devices to make their own deals, they'll likely be in the form of contractual conference tie-ins (i.e. Orange Bowl *always* takes the 2nd place Big Ten team). There won't be a concept of at-large picks anymore, so ECU (and the other non-AQ schools) won't have any access to those games and be relegated to whatever C-USA/Alliance tie-ins are in place.

It's hard for me to see how it's any worse for us now than the current system. The current system relegates us to garbage bowls unless we happen to put together a magical undefeated season. That isn't likely to happen ever unless we drastically change the way we want to schedule, which isn't likely to happen. Only thing it changes is hurts some of our competition, which is fine by me. I have accepted that ECU is likely perpetually fu*ked by this system, so I am just rooting for more to be forced to join us in the land of the fu*ked. Is it a bitter and petty position? Yes it is, but unless someone can tell me something realistic that's going to happen that will be better for ECU this is what I will root for.

I'd really love to see the non-AQ conferences just do their own playoff. It could be more interesting, it would force a ton of coverage, and it would make the BCS conferences look gay - maybe even gay enough to get them to participate in the playoff. The only reason people watch the bowl games anyway is because that's all there is.

(11-22-2011 04:48 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  I'd really love to see the non-AQ conferences just do their own playoff. It could be more interesting, it would force a ton of coverage, and it would make the BCS conferences look gay - maybe even gay enough to get them to participate in the playoff. The only reason people watch the bowl games anyway is because that's all there is.

What's to make that any more viable than the FCS playoffs?

I hate to say it but political intervention and a playoff is the only answer with the current state of college football. Either that or roll the clock back 30 years where none of this mattered.