Absolutely! How in the world do u play football, outside, in the snow??

2) ranking/selection from current BCS system does not have to change, unless a better system is conceived.

3) Playoffs will not be limited to conference champs – they will not want to keep out ND or second powerhouse SEC team. If not, playoffs would loose legitimacy.

4) Other bowls will be no less consequential than they already are.

Choosing the four and selecting the seeding is much more interesting. If we use the same kind of system that is currently used the 5th team will naturally have a valid complaint. If there were 8 there would be a similar complaint by #9. Given that the differences get smaller and smaller as we move down the list, four sounds like a good number.

Regarding the impact on the other bowls: There shouldn’t be much. As long as the semifinal and final are not on the same day as another bowl, the world of the other bowls shouldn’t change much.

Note that none of the above change the situation for ND much. Being in a conference is a benefit only if the conference provides a higher strength of schedule in the big scoring system in the sky. Otherwise it is irrelevant. If a conference winner turns out to be a fluke, the rating system should keep it out of a semifinal.

No system is perfect. The big benefit, if there is such a thing, is that the bowl game money will not go to the bowl management but to the NCAA and the teams. Gee, the rich get richer. Big surprise.

Makes total sense. Delany has an obsession w/ the rose bowl. Let him continue this obsession and screw the B1G at the same time.

Completely agree, makes no sense for Big 10 teams to be playing “home” games in the Rose Bowl.