This post was mentioned on Twitter by scottwritesall: RT @scottcohen13: For the #collegefootball fans out there, my opinions on and solution for the BCS: http://bit.ly/8GhBcV...

I appreciate your concern about conference alignment, but my point is that winning your conference should be the ultimate goal. That, and conference winners should be rewarded for winning their conference by being assigned a higher seed. Alabama (in my scenario) would have lost one game and NOT won the SEC, therefore they got dropped to the top Non-Conference-Winner seed.

If a one-loss Alabama team truly thinks they should contend for the National Championship (as they felt last year before getting smoked by Utah), then they can prove it on the field in the playoffs. Every team in the playoffs has to win 4 games in a row to be a national champion, it only seems right to reward the conference winners.

My goal is to give the other conferences a fair shake, something the current BCS formula doesn’t do. And let’s face it, automatically assigning the #16 seed to the Sun Belt winner isn’t fair. Therefore the top 11 seeds are determined by conference winners, the rest by the polls.

Many would argue that the SEC is in a down year this year. Only Alabama and Florida are impressive, and even then, it’s only because they’re winning. They certainly aren’t getting “style points.” The Big 12 is down this year. You can absolutely make the argument that the Pac-10 is the toughest of the BCS conferences this year, but the Mountain West is playing tough and the Big East is a pretty solid conference this year, too.

In any system, there are going to be solid teams left out. Even in the 16-team playoff system. But this system encourages winning your conference so you don’t run into a situation like say Oklahoma getting to the NC game against USC when they DIDN’T win their conference.

The bottom line is WIN YOUR CONFERENCE and prove your dominance on the field.

I like the playoff system like everyone else. The thing I struggle with on your idea is the conference alignment. Each conference gets their winner in, and can only have one other team take an at large birth. In this scenario, I get thrown off with Alabama. A team that has held the #1 spot this year has done nothing wrong but win its games in arguably the toughest conference there is (Pac-10 might disagree). They get dropped to the 12th seed behind a Troy team that deserves respect but at 8-3, i think that its a little bit off. Remember last year when the Big 12 was the dominate league. In this scenario, Texas and Oklahoma would be in, but an 11-2 Texas Tech would be out.

I think the playoff seeding should not factor in which conference the teams are from. If the top 16 teams happen to share the same conference then good for them. The real trouble comes in decided if a 12-1 SEC team is better than an undefeated Boise State team. I think that’s where you lets the polls decide, much like your theory on determining the 12-16 teams. Let the BCS still have its say in determining the top 16 teams, then they play each other according to your plan. All this being said I think it may work, until we realize it doesn’t and should have just added a plus 1 game to the current system.