I am not sure that the new system would be much of an improvement over the BCS format this year. We would probably get Iron Bowl 2 with a FSU vs Baylor / MSU match up. The Iron Bowl has already been played, that would be crap. MSU or Baylor and maybe others would *****. This is what we need: All 10 conference champions and the highest ranked independent play off ( I would not be opposed to saying just 10 conference champs alone, forcing independents to join one). If you are not a champion of your conference, don't even talk to me, regardless of record. Current computer rankings are used to seed the bracket. 1,2,3,4,5 seeds get first round bye. A week after conference championship games 6 vs 11, 7 vs 10, and 8 vs 9 contest play in games at the higher seeds home field. The next weekend 1 vs 8/9 winner, 2 vs 7/10 winner, 3 vs 6/11 winner, 4 vs 5 are played at higher seeds home field (I could support using neutral locations at formerly early bowl games. They would probably love it because their games wouldn't be nearly as irrelevant). On New Years Day the semis are played at a rotating formerly BCS bowl location. The next Monday (at least 7 days away) the Natty is decided on a rotating basis at a formerly BCS bowl location. Among the many benefits: It will minimize the scheduling of patsies to pad records because a seat in the bracket is not dependent on final record, but rather conference champions. Teams would be way more likely to schedule good match ups outside the conference to get them prepared, or increase the number of conference games played each year. It will virtually eliminate media bias and the influence of television contracts in the outcome of a champion. Obviously, the bias will influence the seeding somewhat, but not a seat at the table.