You're talking about something else altogether, brrexl. I was addressing the idea of using the existing bowls for the playoff games. What you are talking about is not including them in the playoffs.

Not in the Play Off, only in the Championship Game. This keeps the Rose Bowl from getting a Bad Draw when Alabama and Penn State come to town, and instead could pit a West Coast team (Runner up in Conference) against another West Coast Runner Up (Perhaps an Oregon vs TCU type of match up).

None want to play second fiddle and none want to risk a less than full stadium in a 1st Round Game. Reward the Play Off Teams by giving them the 1st Round Games. Perhaps the Bowls could agree to Rotate Semi-Finals and Finals if it came to them not getting the games at all.

why not just have the same 4 bcs sites as normal, with the same ole formulas for getting in. cept the all play jan 1 or 2. then the top 4 play a playoff at the bcs sites, rotating the way the title game does now. 3 of the 4 sites could get 2 games per year on a rotating basis. how is that not more money then now? or the playoff could be comon site so every year 1 site gets 3 extra games. no matter how you dice it the original bcs games have same prestige, if not more since theres a shot to get to the finals on the line. forinstance this year i could care less about the rose or orange. they just didnt have teams i cared about. now if those teams perfomances had bearing on weather or not UT, Boise, Bama or FL got to the title game i might have watched. and i dont buy the glory days of the ap poll. the reason we ended up with the bcs is because you had split titles. it is better now then it was then, but i've always been in favor of the 4 team playoff, its rare you have 5 teams that have a legit claim on a title shot, but there's almost always 3 that do.

So, let's say that the top 14 teams now get in BCS Bowls (lets add, say, the Capital One Bowl, since that's pretty much a BCS bowl game anyway). That means the bowl season would have looked something like this, maybe with some of the matchups switched. But, these are the matchups I think would have occured, or something similar. The Rose Bowl can keep the Pac-10 vs. Big 10 thing it has going:

Capital One Bowl: 10 Iowa vs. 14 BYU (Dec. 31- 8:00)

Orange Bowl: 6 Boise State vs. 13 Penn State (Jan 1- 1:00)

Fiesta Bowl: 9 Georgia Tech vs. 12 LSU (Jan 2- 1:00)

Sugar Bowl: 5 Florida vs. 11 Virginia Tech (Jan 2- 4:30)

Rose Bowl: 7 Oregon vs. 8 Ohio State (Jan 1- 4:30)

Semifinal Game (@ Fiesta Bowl Location): 1 Alabama vs. 4 TCU (Saturday, Jan 26- 8:00)

Semifinal Game (@ Sugar Bowl Location): 2 Texas vs. 3 Cincinnati (Sunday, Jan 27- 8:00)

Finals (@ Rose Bowl): TBD (Thurday, Jan. 7- 8:00)

You've never heard kids say they aren't going to USC or Texas (or Alabama, for that matter) because they don't get paid... because they DO get Paid.

Every Major Program does it, even if the Head Coach doesn't realize it or contribute to it. You can't stop a blank envelope coming to a kid at a Booster Function. Cash is pretty darn hard to trace. Not to mention the Eat For Free Lunches, the 'Borrowed Cars', the Nice Clothes that some Boosters Daughter buys her new Boy Friend so he looks nice when they go out, and all the other Fringes that occur. Not to mention the Price of the Scholarship (at the Upper Schools for an Out of State Player that can get REALLY Expensive).

I'm not saying they SHOULDN'T GET A PAY CHECK, I'm just saying they do get a $40K Education (give or take 40K... in fact, give or take an Education) along with a ton of other stuff that the NCAA just can't trace. Players don't cry about it, because they already get it. Without Taxes. Without Agents and Contract disputes. And it's based more on Performance than NFL Contracts. You start to suck, you start being the guy with no Envelope at the Dinner.

It's like the Professional Sports. On the one hand you can claim the players are part of something that brings in so much cash that they don't get what they deserve (hard to say $50 M for 5 Years is to much money when the Team makes in the Low Billions) but on the Other Hand they get so much more than the average Joe... or Rocket Scientist for that matter.

I'll tell you this much. You think Joe McKnight went to USC over Florida and Alabama because of 'Tradition'? He had no loyalty to ANY School. Name the RB that was going to keep him on the Bench for 4 Years at any of those Schools? It wasn't a Playing Time Issue, he was the Top Back in his Class. Somebody gave him something he wanted, or more precisely gave him MORE of something he wanted than the others were willing to offer.

Reggie Bush? Maurice Clarrett? These guys aren't the only ones, the NCAA just doesn't have the Resources to scope every School so they wait for one to come on strong then check into things. When did Tennessee get hit? After they starting winning. 'Bama? Ditto. Auburn? Right around the time they started fighting for Big Bowls. USC? Clean as far as the NCAA was concerned... until they started being a Mini-Dynasty.

Where there are Wins, there are Dollars pushing for more wins.