Division I College Football Should Implement a Play-off System

Any argument that college's can't do it is flawed. 3)High School Football in all 50 States have play-offs. 4)The Current BCS is rigged. 5)The BCS system allows teams to finish the season unbeaten and not a national champion. 6)My opponent's counter-plan invovles relying soley on the computer to decide on national championship game between two people, again failing to leave any way to decide between three undefeated teams. (Emiperical Example in '04 dropped) 7)Having more games would be more profitable. .. .simple economics. 8)Cinderalla's would exsist in college football 9)My opponent completly concede my turn on his luck argument (the basis of his entire second post). Meaning I win every argument he defended in that post. 10)Wouldn't take a month of between the regular season and post-season 11)My attack on my oppenents argument that the BCS produces a better championship game went dropped, and the numbers back up my side that it doesn't. 12)My opponent conceded that you have to look at the best team over a multitude of nights: Thus, a play-off. 13)A play-off is more fun to watch: Why have near-bear when you can have real thing? My opponent has awnsered constant questions I've asked by saying, "I Don't Know, but they do". I'm sorry this is debate. If you don't know find out. That is how debate works. Simple saying you don't know means that argument is dropped because you don't have a real awnser to give to me. I don't have to refute or exstend anything you drop. And since almost all of you argument start with, "I don't know" well then I guess you don't, but its not my job to figure it out that's yours. Carry over all the questions I've asked that my oppenent has dropped or said, "I don't Know" to as a voter for pro. Reviewing my opponents most recent, and very short post, he dropped all of my arguments on What to do with a three deserving teams, or the fact that he doesn't know what he's talking about when theirs a hundred teams in college football. Also, the fact that the experiment of the BCS which he compared to the American democratic experiment, my turn that the experiment has to work went dropped, conceding that the BCS experiment has failed. He has no concrete examples to support his hypothetical ideas, where as I have the whole sports world. My fair play-off would solve for any issues I've sent on the BCS and more. The only possible exception would be if a confrence sent bad team that kept a good one out, but that's why their are at large bids and the confence auto-bids would be up to the confrences themselves not College Football. The only argument that went uncontested by me in my opponents last post was him ranting on why the BCS doesn't change to a play-off. Filled with "Maybe's, I Don't Know's, and Might's and If's" No where did he credidate his argument with sources. Merely assumtions. And regardless of what of the BCS thinks on if they should change the system (which of course whould be biasist to keep the current system). Even if the BCS won't implement the system, the resolution states 'should'. Which means as long as we should implement the play-off (even if its not fiseble or the BCS won't go for it. ) you have to vote pro. Also, if my opponent decides to finally awnser all of the questions I've asked him in all my previos post (which he won't), but if he does try to respond to them. Please note its abusive for him to bring up new arguments in his last post. He can only respond to arguments. .. .accept he's dropped all of them so I don't really know what he's going to say. But seriously; go read Wetzel's Play-Off plan. The man makes sense.