Reply #16: I can certainly understand not liking the BCS system [View All]

And I don't propose to defend it, really. Of course, under the old bowl system it would probably be USC vs. Ohio State in the Rose and Florida-Michigan in the Sugar. Perhaps that would even be preferable--if the undefeated team wins, they win the MNC, and if not then the winner of the also-rans game wins the MNC.

I don't support a playoff because I like the bowl games, I like the regular season, and it doesn't bother me that there is controversy and debate as opposed to a universally-agreed upon and official national champion.

I think a playoff system would "work" in the sense that it would determine a conclusive champion, but I don't think it would necessarily identify the "best" team any better than the current system does. If, for instance, we had a four-team playoff, who gets in? Does Michigan still deserve to make the playoffs over a team that actually won their conference? I wouldn't mind an +1 or a +2 system that some have proposed, where the winners of the major bowls play each other in a playoff format. :)

With respect to Florida and Michigan, I'm not comparing the two or comparing Florida's Conference Championship vs. Michigan's failure to win their ocnference. I'm just saying that Michigan had a chance to play their way into the BCS Game and didn't get it done. So I don't think they got screwed.