You know, the topic that I am about to discuss for this week's column will always be debatable. It seems like I am a broken record every time I talk about the…wait for it…the BCS.
I'm fully aware that we are still more than three months away from college football, but I have a small problem. OK, it's a huge problem.
The BCS has tried so hard to give us a system that will properly determine a national champion in NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision football.
Which brings me to a quick gripe. Why did they change the name from Division I? Anyway that's another column.
Last week, it looked like we were going to be that much closer to almost every college football fans' dream and ACTUALLY have a playoff format.
The proposal was to make a small, four-team playoff in which the best four teams (supposedly) will play in a plus-one situation to determine the two teams that would face each other in the National Championship.
That's not a bad idea. There was only one problem I have with that suggestion: Four teams is not enough.
Needless to say, the idea was given the not-so-surprising thumbs down. Forgive me, if I am not the least bit surprised.
The BCS consists of the six "power" conferences in the FBS - the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10 and the SEC.
Of all of them, four rejected the idea. The only two that wanted to continue negotiations for a four-team playoff were the SEC and the ACC.
In the SEC, arguably the most competitive of all conferences, I can easily understand why they would want a playoff.
Last season, the BCS championship spot was between the LSU Tigers and the Georgia Bulldogs. Both finished with the same record, yet LSU won the conference title game against the Tennessee Volunteers.
The Bulldogs, who weren't eligible for the championship finishing behind Tennessee in their division, were No.4 in the BCS Standings. Meanwhile, the Tigers were well behind at No. 7.
Through the miracle of a strong resum/, including six wins against top-25 ranked teams, the BCS jumped LSU five spots to reach the title game.
Although it seemed like Georgia took it in stride, I can understand the Bulldogs' disappointment for not getting in the championship. They took it out on the Hawaii Rainbow Warriors at this year's Sugar Bowl.
As for the ACC, that conference is a mess. There's not much competition there. It seems to be Virginia Tech and them. The days of the Miami Hurricanes and the Florida State Seminoles being dominant are over, and both schools are in the "rebuilding" stage.
Basically, I feel like they agree to a playoff because it becomes a more competitive conference again.
As for the four other conferences, namely the Big Ten and Pac-10, I'm not surprised. After all, the Big Ten has their beloved Ohio State and Michigan, while the Pac-10 includes USC and them. Yes, I am aware that there are other teams in that conference, but USC has been the ultimate bread winner for the Pac-10 in the last few years.
They will stop at nothing to keep the tradition of the Pac-10/Big Ten match-up that traditionally reigns over the Rose Bowl.
After the BCS rejected the playoff, which would have been effective in 2010, we now have to wait until 2014 for playoff talks to be in effect again.
So this leads me to create a playoff format for the BCS's consideration six years from now.
Let's make the situation a 12-team format - the six power conference teams are seeded No. 1 through No. 6. The top four of those teams, based on their records and their conferences, get a first-round bye. The other six receive at-large bids.
Here's how it would work based on last season's finish. The winners from 2007 were (in my seeded order) the Ohio State Buckeyes, LSU Tigers, Oklahoma Sooners, West Virginia Mountaineers, Virginia Tech Hokies and USC Trojans. USC gets the sixth seed based on its losses to the Oregon Ducks and a major upset to Stanford.
The other six teams include the Georgia Bulldogs at No.7 the Missouri Tigers at No.8, the Kansas Jayhawks at No. 9, Hawaii at 10, the Florida Gators at 11 and the Arizona State Sundevils to round out the field at 12.
The higher seeds in each match-up in the first round play at their home fields. In the quartefinals, the eight teams play in the major BCS bowl games.
Missouri and Kansas play for a right to play Ohio State in the quarterfinals. Virginia Tech faces Arizona State to possibly meet West Virginia.
USC and Florida face off to see who meets the Sooners and the Georgia Bulldogs meet with Hawaii for a shot at LSU.
The format continues for four weeks to determine the national champion with the final two left standing during the tournament.
This allows all teams that are deserving of a national title shot a chance.
It would determine a true champion.
I don't understand how difficult it seems to pull this off?
College basketball allows 65 teams a chance to win the national title.
College baseball, lacrosse, soccer and hockey all have playoff formats. In fact, even the football divisions below Division I (and I will always call it that because FBS sounds stupid) have a playoff.
In fact, they are going to extend their format from 16 to 20 teams in 2010.
I'm only asking for 12 teams people, but yet Division I-AA (again I will call it that and not the FCS) allows 16.
Until there is an actual playoff system in Division I, there will always be a debate on who should and who shouldn't be in the championship.
But if arguing is what they like to do, I guess I should let it be.
I'd like to say what I think the BCS really stands for, but it is a family newspaper. I've got to keep it clean.
Juan Carlos Reyes is a sports reporter for the Record Star. Readers may contact him at 361-387-4511 or via email at firstname.lastname@example.org.