The BCS' stated goal is "to match the two top-rated teams in a national championship game and to create exciting and competitive matchups between eight other highly regarded teams in four other games."
Bull, we say, and here's the evidence to back it up: A study by Cornell student Max Wasserman that was published in May by the Big Lead.
Wasserman compared the margin of victory of the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange bowls from the past 30 seasons, the last 10 of which have been under the BCS system. Outside of the Fiesta Bowl, the average margin of victory has increased by at least two points in the 10 years under the BCS.
No wonder TV ratings for four of the five BCS games showed a sharp decline in 2008. The Sugar Bowl experienced a drop of 25%, followed by the Rose (20%), BCS title (17%) and Fiesta (8%). Only the Orange Bowl saw a slight increase (6%) in viewership.
That's right, the BCS makes a regular habit of picking the wrong teams for the wrong games.
The solution is a playoff free of politics, and we have a sure way to take politics out of the equation. Let the sportsbooks in Las Vegas pick the teams and matchups. Check out the top 30 from the Las Vegas Sports Consultants, a true representation of where teams should be in the BCS standings.
Yes, put a little scratch on the line and opinions quickly change. Who wouldn't want to see Jeff Sagarin put 20 large on a team based on his computer rankings? Harris Interactive voters would suddenly remember that Penn State has lost a game.
When money is on the line, people suddenly think with a clear mind. That's why Florida is a 10-point favorite.