how many out there think there is too many bowl games. they keep saying they can't do a palyoff, but if they use the smaller bowls as the playoff with the champoinship game at the end then it will work. there is almost a full month of bowl games

maybe but bowl games bring in a lot of money for those smaller schools. so what would you do for them?

if they win like boise state last year and hawaii this year then they are in the playoff system. all u have to do is win

how would you pick the play off teams

by records. i am a die hard ohio state fan and am pleased they are in the national championship game. but lsu with 2 losses does not deserve to be there when there is still an undefeated team in hawaii

if a school has a weeker scderul but a better record do they get in

yes it is based on record

i do think something needs to change. the only thing is if you go to a play off will that hurt the small schools when they look to get players into their program

it didn't appear to hur boise state last year ot hawaii this year. and all u have to do is look at basketball, "small " schools all the time win games against the "big" schools in their tournament and nobody looses money. i just think the bcs has never really worked

true to the bcs i would just hate to see the small schools get hurt cuz they are not getting the money frome bowl games. there are some good small schools out their

I think it helps schools that are struggling to have a good football team. Like Kentucky has won two music city bowls in a row, and for them thats like winning the national game because the team isn't super powerful like Ohio State or LSU (tho kentucky beat LSU)

when I was a kid, we had 4 maybe 5 bowl games. Anyone who's been to Dallas can see how old the Cotton Bowl is. It was good back then. It is crazy now.

My college went to the "Liberty Bowl" when they didnt make the Rose Bowl, but that didnt change anyone's opinion on them. I still think there are too many..

Yes - too many. I don't see why they can't create a playoff system like they do in Division 1A, division 2 and division 3.
They don't seem to have any problem reasoning out the champions of those divisions. The way the national champion of division 1 is determined is rediculous.

dude Hawaii beat 2 teams with a winning record all year

did you see them get spanked by Georgia? Georgia could have won by 60, easy. They quit playing after the first half

The WAC isn't putting anyone into the national championship game for good reason, they are on par with the MAC or Conference USA.

I would say with Hawaii losing the way they did, and then Boise State losing to ECU it looks like the MAC or CUSA might actually be better overall than the WAC.

top to bottom I think the MAC and CUSA are better conferences... then again I went to both a MAC and CUSA school so I might be biased

Yeah I am a ECU grad here myself but I would love nothing more than for us to get into the Big East down the road.

I would argue that Conference USA isn't much behind the Big East

I would say in terms of talent perhaps not but since the Big East is in the BCS it is an advantage for all of their programs. In many ways if you are not in a BCS conference there is the feeling you are on the outside looking in.

Yeah but then you look at a team like West Virginia, going to a BCS game and all that... almost played for the national title... since 2000 they've put only 11 guys in the NFL... there are Conference USA teams with that kind of talent, really. Hell I went to Tulane and we've put 6 or 7 in the NFL in that same period. Hell, UTEP has had 10 guys drafted since 2000, and West Virginia 11... what's that tell you about the "powerhouse" WVU program... and why Rich Rodriguez took that Michigan job. The Big East hype is a joke