The BCS Blues

I have been sitting here all day thinking about how absurd the BCS is and I keep getting more and more irritated.  There are 120 FBS schools, and 70 of them make a bowl game!  Of those 70 participants, only 18 have 10 plus wins, 22 have eight to nine wins, and the rest are around .500.  Of the 11 FBS conferences, two have a winner with less than 10 wins.  All but one team with a (7-5) record made a bowl game. Of the (6-6) teams two did not make a bowl, however UCLA (6-7), did make a bowl game.  This is MEDIOCRITY at its best!  Is this really what we want to see year after year?  Reward teams who win only half of their games?  People battle all the time about conference affiliations, but a (6-6) SEC team and (6-6) MWC team still both suck!  I am sick of this.

So here is what I suggest be done if we are not going to have a true playoff.  Make all bowl games subject to a tier level based on participants record.  NO conference affiliations.  For example, place all 10 plus win teams in one level; those with eight to nine wins in another; and then the rest in a third tier.  Each tier is worth a different scale of money.  Some years there may be a crossover in records, but this way schools are more closely rewarded based on their record. 

Each year the bowl's tier level would be subject to the participants record and the match up would be handled by a independent committee.  Why should a team with 10 wins get less money for a bowl game than a (7-5) in another bowl game just because of a conference name?  A (6-6) SEC team and a (6-6) MWC team are still poor.  The (6-6) team did not earn it.  In this scenario, an exciting match up might have been Boise State vs. Houston.