BCS Debate Part II:

In yesterday's post, I discussed the historical reasons for why the BCS is a system built for failure. Today, a look at one of the possible solutions: go back to the old system.

The "old system" according to me can be defined as a world with very few bowl games pitting conference champions against each other with some polls saying this team or that team is "the best." It's a national championship in the sense that "high school national champions" are champs: some people who are supposed to know something said they were. This system encourages rivalry games (Big Ten v. Pac-10, etc.) and tradition, as well as accentuating conference play. Bowl games would be rare experiences for any but a "dynasty" team, and would put the focus on those regional rivalries instead of the more national focus of today's system. I like this system more than what we have, mostly because it is sings TRADITION like a fat Russian and doesn't pretend that the "national championship" is what really matters. The rivalry games matter and that's where the focus is.

Having said that, this system is gone forever. There's too much money to be had, and it's likely that we will continue to see the expansion of mediocre bowls, not a contraction. It still doesn't solve the problem of a long lay-off, but then it doesn't need to because the really important conference games are over before the bowl game is played.

Even though it's gone, I prefer old school honesty to BCS pretension.

Stay tuned tomorrow for another possible solution...