College Football Fans Debate: Should NCAA Move To a Playoff System

As the BCS rankings are released for another week, we've seen plenty of writers across the Internet share their own opinions on the BCS system.

Many people would like to see college football move to a playoff postseason, where numerous teams from around the country have an opportunity to seize a national championship. Instead of debating who's best between a one-loss Ohio State team and undefeated TCU or Boise State, why not let them decide on the football field?

Still, others say the BCS system preserves the prestige of classic bowl games, such as the Rose Bowl. If we were to get away from the BCS, what would happen to these pillars of college football? Folks argue that although the BCS isn't perfect, no system is. Playoffs would add multiple weeks to the season, and be difficult to organize.

The system we have in place currently works just fine (for some teams) and doesn't need to be changed. The BCS is also great for making everyone’s pockets fatter, as bowl games are great revenue generators for the teams involved and sponsors of the events.

Of course, there are plenty of flaws with both ideas. A playoff system could take away from the feeling that every game matters during the college football season.

For example, if Alabama clinched a playoff spot after 11 weeks of the regular season, who's to say they wouldn't sit some of their top players the last week of the year against Auburn? This could dramatically affect the pageantry of the sport.

Cassic rivalries would mean less to the teams because they already clinched a playoff spot and don't want to risk injuries in a now less-meaningful game.

Currently, if a team loses even one game, they are usually out of luck in the national title race—implementing a playoff system could give one loss teams new life. This takes away from the sudden death feeling of every week of college football.

The BCS is no piece of perfection either. Just ask the Utahs, TCUs and Boise States of the world.

Often, the computer votes are less predictable than Lady Gaga's wardrobe manager. Automatic qualifier conferences are favored ahead of smaller conferences—perhaps rightfully so. But the bottom line is that only two teams get a shot at the national title when there are often multiple teams that look worthy of a shot as well.

The BCS currently has 32 bowl games. Is it really necessary to reward 64 teams with postseason games? Is a 6-6 record something to be proud of to the point that the team gets a trip to an exotic location to play in a bowl game?

I could be like 99.9 percent of the other Internet writers and give you my "all important" opinion. Or I could use the Internet as the great tool it is and allow for reader feedback and interaction. Please leave a comment explaining whether you are in favor of a playoff system or the BCS, and explain why. Feel free to include how you would set up the playoff system if you were in charge, or any changes you would make to the current BCS system.

I'll do my best to respond to every comment and play the devil's advocate in an effort to get a good Internet debate going.

Let me know how you guys like this type of article/debate, and if you'd like to see more of this in the future.