One thing i like about the bowl system as it currently stands is that it allows 35 teams to end the year on a win. Without the bowl system, we wouldn't have kicked florida's ass a few years ago, and we wouldn't have out Jan 1 date with MSU (ntmsu). 

I think that an "elite playoff" (brian's top 6 proposal or something similar) should happen, and keep the lower bowls. It lets the teams get the trip, the swag, and the chance to end their year on  a win. 

FWIW, I've seen lots of college coaches at clinics and such, but very few have been more impressive than Penn State's crew.  Several of those guys seemed to have the magnetism and charisma to be a head coach at some point: Ron Vanderlinden, Tom Bradley, and Larry Johnson.

I'm also thinking Tressel might want to take away his Twitter and let him go back to writing messages on his eye black. At least eye black washes off when you're done.

Here's my serious question (I'm not just being an assface) about the 23% of people that want Les Miles. Are they;

A. Paying attention and like what he's done recently.

B. Paying attention only to the record.

C. Not paying attention and still fighting the last coaching search battle.

You mean 1 vs the 4/5 winner, and 2 vs the 3/6 winner, right?

...after Harbaugh's bowl game.

All i have to fucking say is that LSUfreek photo made my jaw drop...I don't know what to say

My critique of Brian's is that it still relys so heavily on the polls.  Oklahoma, MSU, Boise, Arkansas and others have strong arguments they belong over Ohio State in 2010.

My preference:  8 teams, auto-bids from 6 BCS conference champs. 2 bids for non-BCS conferences (e.g. Notre Dame, Boise, etc.)  Most years the top 2 seeds will have relatively easy matchups with whatever crap is produced from non-BCS schools or whatever weak team is coming out of the BCS (e.g. Big East champ)...so it still retains the spirit of the 6 team system which rewards the top 2 teams more heavily than others.

I'd prefer only conference champs advance to put the focus back on winning the conference and put less responsibility in the polls.  Polls can be used for seeding, but don't need to decide who does or doesn't gets a shot at the title.

This will probably lead to nothing except a couple of raises but it's worth keeping an eye on if only to see how easy OSU's path to the Big Ten Championship game is going to be

Meh, Wisconsin is tough for them, and PSU might have a resurgence under a non-corpse of a head coach.  But yeah, OSU has the easier division as long as PSU is down.

"The conclusion is that on January second Harbaugh or Rodriguez will be Michigan's coach and that person will be the coach in 2011."

While I 100 percent agree with your five points, I believe the conclusion should be that we will find out on January 4th, possibly the 3rd, rather than the 2nd, because Stanford plays onthe 3rd.

Best part of the poll is that only roughly a third of the people polled said they were Michigan fans. Why even ask them the questions then?

Pryor should be locked in the basement by Tressel until his graduation.

You misspelled "...until his eligibility is up."

In sum, there is no reason people who do not stand to lose money would oppose the idea.

The problem is, there are people that stand to lose money, and not just the bowl operators.  Playoffs make remaining bowls even more meaningless, meaning less payout.  Under a strictly top-6 system, every non-BCS conference would look at it and think they have almost no chance at making the playoffs.  They lose the extra money from the BCS on a yearly basis, paltry as it may be, to join a playoff system that will almost always exclude them.  Similarly, how often will the Big East put a team in the playoff?  Adding the two groups together, those are 61 of the 120 teams of NCAA FBS that are in line to lose money from your 6 team proposal.  

The NCAA has to approve any additional games to be played, I don't see it happening unless it makes more money for EVERY school, not just those in BCS conferences.  Most people's ideas for a playoff that aims to maintain the intensity of the regular season rely on 4-8 teams getting in.  This just isn't probable with what it would take to replace the BCS.  When we get a playoff, it will be Weitzel's 16 team, every conference gets an automatic entry proposal. 

please don't use the words "pryor" and "graduation" in the same sentence as it makes my eyes bleed.

...this story about Jim Delaney's very pointed comments to the non-AQ conferences at a recent panel that addressed the topic is a must read. 

Inside The W Hotel in Manhattan on Wednesday morning, they sat side-by-side on a platform. Five of the most powerful men in college athletics -- the conference commissioners from the Big Ten, SEC, Pac-10, Big 12 and Big East. Also part of the panel was Western Athletic Conference commissioner Karl Benson.

Although Benson was seated with the group at IMG Intercollegiate Athletics Forum, it's very obvious: Benson and his league are clearly viewed as an outsider by the big boys.

And college football's behemoths -- the automatic qualifying BCS conference commissioners -- vow they'll keep it that way. 

Essentially, Delaney went off on the idea that the non-AQ conferences are getting a raw deal and essentially threatened that if they continued to press their luck on getting additional concessions, there would be hell to pay.

Delany sat between SEC commissioner Mike Slive and [Larry] Scott, the Pac-10's new commissioner. Only a few feet to Delany's right sat Benson, but they may have been located on opposite sides of the Earth -- much like their polar opposite views of the BCS.

At least on two occasions during the forum, Delany interrupted Benson to hammer his opinion home.

"The BCS has provided greater access," Benson said. "Look at 120 schools, 11 conferences and to establish opportunities for those student-athletes. To play on the big stage, we've been to the big stage. ...

"The problem," Delany interrupted, "is your big stage takes away opportunities for my teams, to play on the stage they created in 1902."

Responded Benson: "I think the group of five (non-automatic qualifying BCS conferences) has established value in the last five years."

"The notion," Delany said, "that over time by putting political pressure on, it's just going to get greater access, more financial reward and more access to the Rose Bowl, I think you're really testing. I think people who have contributed a lot have, what I call, 'BCS defense fatigue.'

"If you think you can continue to push for more money, more access to the Rose Bowl, or Sugar Bowl. I have tremendous respect for Boise and TCU. ... I think they are tremendous teams that can beat any team in the country on a given day. I think the only question is, 'Does one team's 12-0 and another team's 12-0 equate?' And that's where the discussion plays out, not whether or not they're elite teams or deserving access to the bowl system. I'm not sure how much more give there is in the system.

<<<<>>>>

Benson said he supports the BCS, but wants even more access and more revenue. This is not a popular subject with Delany.

"We gave up the Rose Bowl, the SEC gave up access to the Sugar Bowl, others were included but they never had access to any of this before," Delany said. "You have to understand who brought what to the table. Who's continuing to give and who's continuing to get."

Delany, then, not so subtly drew a line in the sand.

"The only thing I would say, if you think you (the non-automatic qualifying leagues) can continue to pressure the system and we'll just naturally provide more and more and more," Delany said. "I don't think that's an assumption that our presidents, athletic directors, football coaches and commissioners necessarily agree with.

"Karl (Benson) says we like this contract and we want more. Well, we've got fatigue for defending a system that's under a lot of pressure. The pressure is for more. It's never enough."

<<<<>>>>

"You can discuss it until the cows come home. The only way the system works is if everyone is willing to play the game. It doesn't work if I take my ball and go home. It doesn't work if the Big East takes its ball and goes home. Does it work if Mike (Slive) takes his ball and goes home? This is nothing but an interlocking of contracts that are negotiated."

Those contracts, though, may not be renewed if the non-automatic qualifying leagues keep asking for more. And from Delany's tone: this isn't a threat, but a promise.

Guess what?  There's not going to be a playoff anytime soon.