True.

But at the same time, when you compare the strength of schedules to an undefeated TCU/Boise State to a 1 loss Big 10, Pac 10, SEC, ACC or other big conference school, it's really hard to fit TCU/Boise State in the National Championship game.

The problem with the current system is no big conference will schedule TCU, Boise State, etc... For reasons unexplained. Then the same big school complain that the little undefeated schools play no tough schedule.. It's a double standard in that aspect. If they evened out the scheduling of schools, the BCS would work WAY better, IMO.

Not to downplay the fact that a playoff system would be better.. I just think it was better before the BCS, and would like it that way more than anything else.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Strength of schedule is irrelevant. As I said, the whole point of a playoff is to give teams a chance to lose. If they lose, fine -- they are proven to be pretenders. If they win out, they are crowned champions. It's how every single sport in the world except FCS football works.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

I sort of wish they would have had this stupid BCS thing when I was in my twenties. Then I could have really celebrated the New Years until the wee hours and not worried about waking up for the Rose Bowl or whatever.

But now that I could care less about the games, I'm too effin old to drink and party that way any more.

"Wade" wrote: