The only undefeated team in the nation will not play for the title. Two teams that did not win their own division, let alone their conference, could. It is painfully obvious that a playoff in college football is necessary. The simple truth is that it is nearly impossible to determine who the two best teams are using the BCS rankings.

There are seemingly an endless number of teams that could make the argument they deserve a trip to New Orleans come January. Despite the arguments of some purists, like ASM's Vaughn Hines, the reason a playoff system is an inherently better system is because it avoids problems that the current system consistently falls into. For instance, the current system favors teams that lose earlier in the season. Georgia, a two-loss team, now has a better shot at playing for the title than Kansas, a one loss team, even though the Jayhawks only loss occurred Saturday night at the hands of now No. 1 Missouri. Ohio State is another example of this phenomenon. The Buckeyes lost to arguably a tougher opponent, Illinois, than West Virginia (who lost to South Florida), yet if the BCS title game were today, the Buckeyes would be on the outside looking in. The BCS may be correct, the Mountaineers may be the better team, but then again, they may not be the better team. No one knows for sure. Instead of punishing one team for losing too late in the season, why not let both teams get a chance to settle it on the field?

Another problem with the BCS is the way it unfairly treats the conferences. In a sense, it is quite the conundrum. On one hand, it is detrimental to be part of what it determines as a weak conference, meaning not one of the six BCS conferences that are guaranteed a BCS bowl birth. Hawaii is currently the only undefeated team left, yet it cannot sniff the top 10 in the BCS rankings. One would have thought Boise State’s memorable victory over Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl last year would have proven that the mid-majors can hang with the big guys, but the stigma remains. This is not to say that Hawaii is the best team in the country, but what more can they do than win every game on their schedule? There should be some way that non-members of the BCS conferences can be part of the national-championship picture.

On the other hand, within the six BCS conferences, it greatly benefits teams that play within conferences that are down during a particular year. Should Missouri fall to a tough Oklahoma team in the Big 12 championship game, West Virginia will most likely face off against Ohio State. It is no coincidence that these two teams also happen to be members of the two weakest BCS conferences this year, the Big East and the Big Ten. Is it really fair to ask members of the Big 12, the Pac 10, and the SEC to go undefeated or just lose once when they play tough games every week? West Virginia and Ohio State faced tough games during their conference schedule but also faced a few cupcakes of the likes of Syracuse and Minnesota. It seems unfair to judge teams based on their win/loss record when the strength of schedules are so unbalanced.

Conference championship games pose another issue for the current BCS bowl system. It is inequitable that teams in the ACC, Big 12, and the SEC are forced to play an additional game against a quality opponent. Members of the Big Ten, Pac 10, and the SEC can just sit back and relax and yet potentially move up in the polls based on the outcomes of the championship games. Missouri for instance is in a no win situation. The Tigers battled all year long to earn their No. 1 ranking, including the win over division rival Kansas on Saturday. So how are they rewarded for their stellar play? The answer is a rematch against the team that dealt them their only defeat of the season, Oklahoma. Missouri has nothing to gain should they win the match-up against the Sooners yet should they lose their national title championship aspirations will be dashed. Understandably commissioners want title games for their conferences because they bring in huge amounts of money, but to have them in certain conferences and not in others makes no sense.  Either require each conference to have one or do not have any at all.

If asked which teams they would least want to play at the moment, there is a good chance many college coaches would say Florida, USC, or both. No one is playing better football than Tim Tebow and the rest of the young Gators while the finally healthy Trojans are now living up to their preseason billing. With the current system it would be unthinkable for either team to get a shot at the national title because they did not do enough to earn it. However, if the purpose of the BCS is to pit the two best teams against each other, then the Trojans and Gators have a legitimate argument. The great part about college basketball is that teams can struggle early in the season, mature and improve as the season goes on, and by tournament time be a real contender for the title. In college football this just cannot happen, a team must be playing at a high level from the outset of the season to have any chance.

This college football season has been unlike any other in recent history with the endless amount of remarkable upsets. It seems as if every year there is a call to change the system and institute a playoff system. Hell, six of the nine years of its existence, it has failed. Remember the debacle with Nebraska? Does Oklahoma’s loss to USC do anything for you? Despite previous failures, never have the cries of college football fans around the country been heard louder than this year. It is time to change. This archaic bowl system still exists because of the money universities and conference commissioners receive from each bowl appearance. What is pathetic is that these university presidents and conference commissioners are not intelligent or creative enough to install a playoff system that could not only match the revenue from the current system but improve upon it. Sadly, if the mess that is this college football season has brought us no closer to a playoff system, what will?