Ok, we're almost NEVER going to get a play-off. Not a true one
anyway. But the current system screws the bowls really as a whole,
unless your bowl is the "National Championship Game", and the bowls
don't want to just be play-off games with whoever playing.

Let's try this Rose Bowl: Pac 10 Champ vs Big 10 Champ
Orange: Big 12 Champ vs Big East Champ or at-large
Sugar: SEC Champ vs ACC Champ
Cotton: At-Large Teams
Fiesta: Mountain West vs At-Large

Anyway Something like this. Feel free to tinker but not with the Rose
Bowl or SEC in the Sugar Bowl or Even the Big 12 at the Orange Bowl
(well that one maybe). In most years most big conference Champions
finish 10-1 with maybe a second team finishing 10-1. The at-larges
could include those conference runners-up, Notre Dame or the odd big
season from a mid-major. So One Year you Could Have:

Rose Bowl: USC (11-0) - Michigan(11-0)
Orange: OU(11-1) - Notre Dame(10-1)
Sugar: Auburn(12-0) - Virginia Tech(10-2)
Cotton: Cal(10-1) - Texas (10-1)
Fiesta: Utah (12-0) - Florida State (11-1)

Now it is a safe bet that after those games there would be two
standout teams from the five winners since even if two of the
unbeatens lost and one is certain to, there would be less debate
about who should play in the national champioship game, to be played
the week before the Super Bowl. I originally thought the same town
the Saturday Night before, but I don't think even football geeks like
us could deal with that. Plus it falls right before the media mess
really start at the Super Bowl and gives us some really fun football
where there was none before.

Also it returns ALL the bowls to the glamour and status they enjoyed
before the BCS and to the tradition while still allowing the BCS to
sponsor the National Championship and award it and help select the
non-champions to fill out the New Year's Day Bowls. Everyone is
happy...no.Happier, though.