Lets say the NCAA allowed the BCS to have a plus one game for the championship.

There would still be 5 BCS Bowl Games.

6 Conference Champions
4 At large selections

The 4 highest ranked teams in the BCS formula at the end of college football season would be seeded to play each other.

Last year, the BCS forumula for a plus one game would have looked like this.

1) USC
4) Ohio State

2) Texas
3) Penn State


The Winner of those 2 games play for a national Championship.


Would this be a fix for crowning a true National Championship? Or would it be the begining of more controversy from teams that feel they should have been in the top 4 ( teams ranked 5-8 by the BCS rankings).


Thoughts?

I think it would be a step in the right direction toward where most want it to be (and to where I want it to be): a full-fledged playoff.

I think regardless of where the cut-off is (2 teams in the current BCS system, 4 teams in your proposal, perhaps 8 or 16 teams in a full-fledged playoff), there will always be someone left just outside of the game/playoff that will think they didn't get a fair shot and should have been in.

Indeed, a step in the right direction, there would still be bitching as to who represented in the BCS but still. Settling things on the field is better than in the polls.

One more example of how people get stuck in a certain mindset or rut and can't imagine a better way out.


$$$ will prevail and we will see a March Madness style playoff. That's the American way.

There will be a 5th BCS game this year...the Championship game, but it will not feature winners from other BCS games. It will take the so called #1 and #2 teams and have them play each other on Jan 8. This game will roate between the 4 BCS game locations. So, in 2007, the Fiesta Bowl will be played in Arizona, then the New Championship game will be played there a few days later. This to me, does not seem like a fix to the problem, at all.