This whole post is just a summary of something somebody else wrote? Okay, I guess. Better, maybe, to cite the other guy, and then say what you think, in your own words.

Yes, the current bowl system is archaic. And there are too many of them. But it's kind of fun to follow all the whining, arguing and complaining during the season--and especially at the end--as teams and leagues fight for rankings.

If you go to an NCAA-sponsored playoff, there will still be just as much arguing and complaining, but my guess is that the system will favor the Big Boys of college football. The early pairings/seedings will be fixed for the Big Boy favorites to dominate.

I remember vividly how Athletic Directors excused the excesses of college football and basketball as necessary "to fund other scholarship sports".

Then they turn over incredible amounts of loot so they can schmooze with Bowl committee honchos, wasting millions every year.

Corruption, old boy corruption, pure and simple.

Thanks for the article, and especially for the link to Dan Wetzel's devastating expose.

Wow, that is a fabulous article. It is astonishing that all that money is just being wasted on these bowls...especially when the original tradition (i.e., one specific conference champion versus another) has basically disappeared.

"Carolina's own running game should allow them to control the game and keep Eli Manning from pulling off the kind of late-season, late-game heroics that made the 2007 Giants the 2007 Giants."

Yes yes, you were so right! Do it again in three weeks, please...

So I have just very suddenly moved from Australia to Portland OR. Arrived just in time for this year's "Civil War" (oregon state versus oregon) during which I and the rest of the party were 100% confused about who the Ducks would play if they went to the Holiday Bowl. Being new to the area (grew up in Rose Bowl country) I ruined the fourth quarter surfing the web and shouting misinformation to the others. Am happy to read an article which explains what the bowls are really all about...

Trivia from Australian sports: the verb (and noun) "root" in Australia is a synonym for the f-word. A common insult is, "he couldn't organise a root in a brothel." So when they hear US media say things like "Everyone's rooting for USC" or whatever, it's ... awkward. Their word for our meaning of "root" is "barrack"; "She's barracking for Parramatta again this year" - that would be the Eels - don't get me started about cricket and rugby -

Hope all is going well in your new role.

the fact that with the current 'bowl system' 34 good teams will end their year with a win. Contrast that to the NCAA Basketball tourney, where 63 good teams will end their year with a loss.

That is a BIG part of it, IMO.

I used to be a big fan of the idea of a playoff system but have all but abounded that idea as worse than anything we have now for a few reasons. The biggest is the increased number of games played by players that have the most chance to be paid on sundays. I know there is already too many games but any playoff system would add at least one extra game but most likely 2 to 3 extra games with the two final teams playing anywhere from 13 to 15 games. That is just an undue risk to the player for little reward for that player.

Second, it will kill the only regular season that means anything. Granted an early loss means less than a late loss but a team that with even one loss will still need help to play for the national championship. On top of that teams will be even more likely to load up on cupcakes than before to insure they get to 10 wins and a spot. Why would USC or OSU take a chance against each other in September when they could just wait for December in the playoffs.

Third, it will not end the arguments. Take the Big 12 this year but assume that Texas Tech only lost to Oklahoma there would still be 3 teams in the top 5 where only 2 get a chance to go. Not at all different than what we have with Texas and Oklahoma now. Or how about how the SEC will whine its way into a defacto automatic at large bid.

But, the biggest problem I have is fine this makes the schools a lot more money but what about the kids? They will not be seeing this cash and to the kid what is more important having a week or two vacation in sunny California going on the Tonight show and Knotts Barry Farm or staying in a hotel room in Columbus, Ohio or College Station? The bowls are one of the very few perks that the athlete can legally get. Why does anyone want to take that away?

When most folks scream about a playoff system versus bowls, they are only looking at the BCS games, not the lesser bowls. Believe it or not, the kids who play in the lesser bowls have the time of their lives too. A huge part of the bowls are the events that the bowl committe stages for the players: dinners, trips to amusment parks, etc. My guess is if the NCAA runs a playoff system, the games would become just that - games and all of the other stuff that makes them special would die.

And why do Athletic Directors smoozle with bowl reps? Because not every team with a qualifying record is automatically assigned to a bowl game. It is huge for the kids and the fans to "go bowling" and often the AD has to work to make this happen.

As for "when players get paid". I use to make that argument too, but now I believe that the players do get paid: they get a scolarship and grants (seen the price of a college education these days?). Funny, you never hear Division III players complain, do you? Most folks who argument that college players should be paid are only looking at the players who go on to the pros - not the other 90 kids on the team.

My solution: give up this ridiculous obsession with which team is number one and enjoy the tradition of bowl games.