What College Football Should Do with the BCS, Bowl Games and a Playoff System

Ryan RiddleCorrespondent IJune 14, 2012

Image courtesy of Dan Levy
Image courtesy of Dan Levy

There appears to be eminent change on the horizon for college football and the BCS. I assure you, no one can be more happy than myself.

The metamorphosis gaining the most traction appears to be some form of a final four model. Although this would be an improvement to the current system of crowning a national champion, I personally would like to see a bit more innovation.

So with the winds of change in the air, I decided to take this opportunity to explain my simplistic, yet ideal scenario:

First off, I would keep the BCS system used to rank teams by combining the opinions of coaches, associated press and the analysis of computers. I think this is a fairly comprehensive way of factoring in as much as possible for ranking teams.

In my ideal scenario, every FBS team in Division I football would be limited to playing no more than eleven regular season games. This allows for the possibility of more games to be played during the "BCS Playoff," which I will explain later.

With each team limited to eleven regular season games, this makes room for an eight-team playoff bracket, based on the top eight ranked teams by the BCS system. However, a team would not have to win a conference championship to qualify. It would be based purely on the best eight teams in the country from any conference.

All other teams that fall short of making the Top Eight will be eligible to play in traditional bowl games, similar to what we're use to. The only changes to those bowl games would be possible date changes to make room for the eight-team "BCS Playoff."

The eight-team playoff would be replacing the BCS bowls and each game would be named and considered a bowl. They would be played on neutral fields designated by the particular bowl game destination.

Teams would be bracketed and paired against each other with the top ranked team playing the eighth, followed by, two vs. seven, three vs. six and four vs. five. This first round can be played in the middle of December.

Moving into the second round would continue to pair the highest rated team remaining against the lowest rated. This format would maintain until we were left with a single definitive national champion which would be determined sometime in the middle of January.

Furthermore, just as they currently alternate which bowl game will host the national championship every year, I would be in favor of carrying this over into the playoff format as well. So one year the Rose Bowl can host, and another year it can be the Sugar Bowl.

Under this model, teams would still play conference championship games, so if one of those teams were to make it all the way to the National Championship, they would end up playing a maximum of 15 games in the season. This is not a big increase from current formats where teams routinely play 14-game seasons.

In conclusion, all of the pageantry and traditions of bowl games would continue on in a similar fashion, appeasing the traditionalist and economic interest of teams and conferences alike. Giving more opportunity for smaller schools and non-BCS conference schools to compete for the National Championship, while virtually eliminating the annual controversy of determining which teams are eligible to play for the title. And most importantly, this would significantly increased excitement for the bowl seasons and validate a true National Champion.