It has been my belief that the purpose of the BCS was to screw the post-season up so much that the only way to fix it would be playoffs. That said, here's how it should start:
Step 1: The Big 10 adds a team and begins playing a title game. Notre Dame looks like and attractive addition, but Louisville, Marshall or Cincinatti could work as well.
Step 2: Two weeks after the conference title games, the SEC winner plays the ACC winner for "Champion of the South" (no offense BC fans). The Big 10 winner would play the Big 12 winner for "Champion of the Midwest" (no offense PSU fans). The following week, the winners play each other. Last year that would have featured the LSU-Virginia Tech winner against the Oklahoma-Michigan winner.
Step 3: After two or three years of this, the "playoff" would be expanded by one game. SEC vs C-USA; ACC vs Big East; Big 10 vs MAC; Big 12 vs WAC. This nicely appeases the brides-maid conferences while respecting the fact that the Mountain West is not on the same level as the SEC (as Urban Meyer is learning).
The problem is the Pac-10. In order to be included, they should add two teams and a title game. They could then play the Mountain West winner. This would leave us with five teams after round one instead of four, so one would have to get a bye.
I'd settle for initially keeping the BCS ranking in its present form...but take the top FOUR teams...have 1 play 4, 2 play 3...use the present bowl venues..with the....and then just add ONE national championship bowl..might even be possible to do it at the same site as the Super Bowl each year...