[L.N. Smithee]

Third, the majority of Division 1-A ADs will never agree to a playoff system under the current configuration. Why? Because currently sixty-four teams get a chance to play in thirty-two bowls, there is more money to be had under the bowl system.

The ratings for the bowl games leading up to New Year's Day are miniscule. There is more money to be had in a playoff system because the games would actually mean something leading up to the championship game. The Times article said the current TV contract would have added another $40 million if they just added one more game in a playoff format. The teams with 7-4 or 6-5 records might be out in the cold for the real prize, but the lump sum of money that is distributed to all the conferences would be greater.

The NCAA tournament explosion hasn't killed the NIT tournament. It's still around, and you could keep the Eat-at-Joe's bowls around too. The schools like Ohio U. and Southern Miss. playing the other day to the delight of only their fans can still have their little games, and one of them can dance on the turf afterwards. A real legitimate system shouldn't be held up to protect the significance of the GMAC Bowl (more like the WGAD bowl).

[RabidBartender]

I would love to see them do away with "polls". 65 jock-sniffing writers shouldn't get to determine who the champion is - the football field should, through a playoff system.

Free Boise State!

[Hawk1976]

Please chalk any snippiness in my earlier post up to not having my morning coffee yet and being rushed.

I would like to see a sixteen team playoff system myself.

The school president's won't bite because semesters end right about that time in December (finals). The president's and the AD's also like the money the bowls generate. I agree they could get more with a playoff system and parallel bowl games.