College Football: An Alternative To The BCS and How Everyone Wins

Alex CarsonCorrespondent IIIDecember 23, 2010

More teams. More money. More football. We all win.
More teams. More money. More football. We all win.Streeter Lecka/Getty Images

It's interesting to see BCS officials talk about how the system is the best possible. The easy thing to attack, as most writers and fans do, is the money aspect. How it's "all about the money," and that the NCAA and BCS doesn't care about what's fair.

I'm not going to say if I believe that is true or not. It might be, but we can't know what other people are thinking even if the writing is on the wall, so to speak.

One of the other things you hear thrown out there when people talk about changing the system is how it would alter traditions. The big four bowls, their traditional rivalries and, yes, what it would mean for revenues for those games.

That's all smoke and mirrors, though.

Look no further than this year's Rose Bowl not having a Pac-10 team involved due to Oregon being in the National Championship. Instead of just sliding in Stanford to play the Big Ten champion, we have TCU.

Not to discredit TCU, they had a great season and deserve to be in a BCS Bowl. However, because of high interest and, you guessed it, revenue possibilities from having TCU in the game, the Rose Bowl abandoned the traditional match up.

Do they really care about tradition?

There have been many alternatives tossed out there to make the system better and include more teams in the National Championship mix. My preference would be an eight team playoff. Since we're talking about college athletes who should be in class more, not less, that anything more is just too much.

My favored solution would be to first pit these eight teams in quarter finals matches at the big four bowls. Oh, and none of this waiting a month stuff. These games happen the weekend after conference championship week.

The second round would see the four remaining teams play their semi-final games at two of the big four venues. Then, finally, the championship game is played at one of the sites that did not have a semi-final game.

This would all be done on a yearly rotating schedule, that would earn three venues two games. Every fourth year, your venue only gets one, but every four you get the big one. See the picture to the right for a sample schedule.

This is just another in a long line of playoff hopes that may never happen. Instead of just a proposal though, let's look at how these match ups could shake out for the four venues. Remember this is all hypothetical, so I'll pick random teams to move forward in each round.

  •  Quarter Finals 
      • Orange: Auburn Vs Arkansas
      • Rose: Oregon Vs Oklahoma
      • Fiesta: TCU Vs Ohio State
      • Sugar: Stanford Vs Wisconsin


  • Semi Finals
      • Rose: Auburn Vs Ohio State
      • Fiesta: Oregon Vs Wisconsin


  •  National Championship
      • Sugar: Auburn Vs Wisconsin


Hang on, Oregon fans! I totally put in the caveat that it was random. You think I'd actually predict a Big Ten team to beat a Pac-10 team.


Anyway, I believe this portrays a system where more teams can have hope, even if they lose a game during the season. It means more football for us, and more money for the schools, conferences and bowls.

I don't think tradition really matters to these bowl hosts. Nor do I think it matters to the NCAA or BCS. They've changed before for the sake of money, why not again?

It's just one fan's perspective. What's yours?