College football needs a playoff system.

"The risk of injury is inherent in any football payers career. Countless practices and games since the age of eight make the possibility of a select few programs playing a few more games an insignificant increase in the injury risk, despite your mathematical formula. Also, you don't dive me a reason to value this possibility against any real consequences. If your mentality is taken, we shouldn't allow people to play the game at all." My mentality is comparing the length of 12 games to 16 games, which is a 33% increase in games played. College football fans are strongly in favor of the playoff system because it is the only mainstream proposition as an alternative to the BCS as it is today. My proposed system, however, of adding one game to the schedule, encouraging larger conferences without a championship game to have one, and forcing schools to choose non-conference D 1-A opponents over D 1-AA or D 2 opponents, adds 1 to 2 games to a team's schedule, gives a greater overall strength of schedule to the entire CFB nation, and helps to determine who the best teams in the nation are. The controversy of the BCS system derives when fans or players feel that their team is more qualified than another and was hindered from reaching a certain bowl game because of "unfair voting" or conference strength. The entire process of selecting the best teams in CFB is and always will be subjective, not objective. Expecting a system to be flawless is uncalled for and unrealistic. The current BCS system is much more flawed that your college football system. However, for the topic "College football needs a playoff system", I am choosing to negate your support of college football by proposing the previously mentioned changes to the current bowl system that would increase fairness without increasing any other negative variable factors. "Taking televised slots away from rebuilding programs is a non-issue. We would still alocate 17 slots for these types of games instead of 22 or so. Also, a team winning the Meineke Car Care Bowl is hardly an incentive to choose that school over any other winning program. This isn't enough to sway players to those programs. This talent cycle would be unchanged. As far as schedule overlap, why can't we use the schedule already in place? There was a full-month and a half of bowl competition now. Use that space to distance the playoff games and the scheduling remain the same. Only four weeks would be necessary." The current schedule is 32 bowl games over 3 weeks, not 4. Spreading the playoff system, as required by the preparation and rest needed for a football team, would add at least another weekend to the season. The reason that Boise State was able to build itself into a champion was not because it won any notable bowls prior to last year, but instead because it won 6 consecutive bowl games in relatively unknown bowls against relatively well-known opponents. By playing what the college football fan-base considered "tougher teams", Boise State was able to improve its reputation, improve its recruiting, and thereby become the great team that it was last year. "The fact remains, we have been encouraging and urging for years now and nothign has changed. Only rooted, fundamental changes in the system will force and produce the kind of change that is needed. REQUIRING change is the only way it will be brought about in this situation because no single conference wants to take the plunge. If we are ever going to have a true CFB champion, we have to install an institutional change that will make that happen. This playoff system would garuantee interesting games, something that the current system lacks. The status quo proves." My proposed system would also require major changes. Not allowing teams to schedule against D1-AA and D2 opponents is a direct rule that can be implemented much easier and quicker than a playoff system. Offering promotional incentives to teams that performed well the previous year to play non-conference games against other teams that also played well the previous year would give CFB an opportunity to improve for not only the post-season but also the actual season. Imagine watching the Gators play the Sooners, the Auburn Tigers play Michigan, or even FSU play Texas. It's not like the teams would deny the special attention or opportunity to prove themselves; nearly every top-10 or highly ranked CFB team truly believes that it is the best team in the nation. Make them prove it so that the post-season becomes more exciting. Unless changes are made to the regular season, regardless of the format in the post-season, it will be flawed. It's difficult to even choose the top 16 teams in the nation when many of them are from different conferences and don't play against one another or the other's regular conference opponents. The best way to level the playing ground that is college football is to level the playing ground before it gets to the important games, not during the important games. Thanks, The Colonel