My opinion: if anyone thinks the BCS was intended to determine a true national championship, then Ive got a couple of bridges in New York that Ill sell you for cheap. The BCS is intended primarily to preserve the bowl system, and national title matchup pairing the two best teams is an occasional luxury. Only a playoff will ultimately determine the national champion on the field.
I like the idea that Brown (among others) has previously postulated: use the BCS rankings to determine seeding in an eight- or ten-team tournament. This way, a tournament would not render the regular season meaningless. Now, the current BCS system renders 27 of the 28 scheduled bowl games meaningless.
For those who argue it would make for an impossibly lengthy season, consider this: eliminate the 12th game (as weve seen the last two seasons), eliminate the conference championship game, and play just two non-conference games in a ten game regular season. That will mean the teams that vie for the national title will have played a maximum 14 game season. Bear in mind that if Texas reaches the Big 12 title game this year, it will have played a 14 game season. Whats more, if Kansas State advances to the conference championship, the Wildcats will have played a 15 game slate.
Still like the BCS? Consider this: if Texas loses just one or two games this year, it will end up back in the Cotton Bowl facing an SEC also-ran.
Its time to take the BS out of the BCS.