[Diddle E. Squat]

So please through out your strongest criticisms. I believe this to be a flexible and sensible compromise to which no logical or reasonable argument could be made against, nor against implementing it in the next year or two. So hit it with your best shot, I bet I can refute any argument you through out.

BTW, here are the keywords, for those in need:

BCS CORRUPT BOGUS FRAUDULENT SNAKE-OIL STINKS OUT LOUD FOR COLLEGE FOOTBALL IN THE TAMMANY IVY HALLS

[bray]

Anything would be an improvement over the Bull Crap System! My idea would be to take the top 8 Conference Champions and put them in the BCS Bowls and make that your playoff. If nothing else you could have the winner of the top 2 Bowls, (this year the Fiesta and Rose) then let the winners play.

Pray for GW and the Truth!

[Numbers Guy]

Better than other proposals. I'm against all playoff proposals myself, but if we're going to have a playoff, make it be after the bowls and restore the traditional bowl matchups. This post-sundown Rose Bowl just for TV really makes me sick.

[Roebucks]

bumping for a more thorough read tomorrow. One question, is this your own analysis? If so, why don't you submit it for publication in Sporting News or some such? Anything to get the ideas flowing...

[FirstFlaBn]

We've differed in the past, but I do appreciate the effort and thought you've put into your plan. Here's my objection: it cheapens the regular season. Second, I looked it up - at my school booster contributions and ticket sales account for 75% of football revenue, TV something less than 30% (and that's in the SEC, with the best TV payout of any conference). I think you perhaps overestimate the importance of TV money. Would be interested in any informed opinion about the total TV revenue take from your system, though.

The regular season is a big deal for the people who pay the freight. My conclusion is that support for a playoff comes mainly from sportcasters (who fly in the day before and out immedialtely after the game - at somebody's else's expense - and thus, have no knowledge of the social aspect), fans of marginal teams whose season would be made by upsetting a top team in the playoffs, and couch potato fans who haven't bought a ticket since college, but want more games for TV. Can you show me any evidence (not opinion) showing a great interest among boosters at the perennial powers for a playoff? If not, I'm afraid you might be out of luck.

Finally, as I've said before: look at it as a political issue. What happens in politics is that when an issue gains traction, defenders of the status quo will move slightly towards the innovators and thereby coopt the support of the mild supporters of the new plan. To me, that's partially responsible for the SEC and Big 12 having championship games. That certainly describes how the BCS developed. Best bet: look for more incremental changes.

With it being the Rose Bowl's first chance to host the game accompanied by Oregon's complaints, any immediate major change would have to originate from the PAC-10. If it doesn't come form there, it won't, in the short run, come from anywhere else.

Thanks again for the thought-provoking post. Now I can't blame not cleaning out the garage on college football. I can't wait 'til August 31!

[L.N. Smithee]

I don't know what is wrong with the current playoff system used by the NCAA in all other divisions of college football except that the same people won't rake in the cash.

[Hegewisch Dupa]

Hey dude - this is well-written. You gottem talent