NCAA Postseason: Why the BCS Can Coexist With a Tournament

Many people want playoffs in college football, many people want to keep the bowl games. I say, why can't we have them both. Just like basketball has the top 64 teams in the country going to the tournament, football could implement a 32-team playoff (since football has the FBS and basketball has all of Division I).

In basketball there are the 32 that just missed the tournament who get to go to the National Invitational Tournament. That is where the bowl games come in for football.

Remember, the NIT came before the NCAA Tournament and the winner of the NIT were crowned national champions until the NCAA stepped in, just like the bowl games in football, that for a long time, were all invitationals.

It is clear that the current format in football needs to be changed, but taking away all the bowl games would be awful especially for all of the six-win teams who would've gotten bowl bids, but were snubbed for a playoff spot.

For all of those teams who missed the playoffs, they need a postseason to build on next year and finish on a high note just like in basketball with the NIT. We could then keep the BCS in place only with a little less meaning.

The Rose Bowl could still host the Big 10 and the Pac 10, except the bids will now go to mid-tier programs like Arizona State and Illinois. The same would go for the Sugar Bowl with Mississippi State, as well as the Orange, and Fiesta with an ACC and Big 12 team.

Some of the bowl games will have to go, heck, we could bring the Oil and the Tangerine Bowls back to replace the Papa Johns.com and the GMAC Bowls. The NCAA knows it needs to create a playoff for football, but they also know how much money the bowl games bring in.

The NIT was never done away with, so in football the bowl games can be the equivalent to the NIT so the Bowl sponsors can have their money and the fans can finally have a champion.