Ok, Ivan the Terrible isn't really here to answer any of these questions I have about his latest column concurring in the assessment of the "unprecedented state of health" of the BCS. But perhaps some of our more intrepid (i.e., brain-washed) readers will be so kind as to defend him. Either that or, like me, suffer the ignominy of having to agree with Pat Forde, who is advocating for a play-off. I'd say pick your poison, but that cliche implies too happy a death to account for this dilemma.

1. Will you admit to the reality that the present system is, in truth, nothing but a two-team playoff? If it is, why only two teams? If it's not, why not?

You cite that "[t]here's a reason that the ratings are up, that the last decade has given us more excitement and controversy and enjoyment and outrage than we can stand." You claim this is due to heightened importance of the regular season in the reformatted BCS.

2a. Is the new system the sole factor responsible for this increase in ratings? Might college football's exploding popularity also have something to do with any of the following: multiple offspring of cable sports television networks; nights other than Saturday chosen for broadcasting games; increased exposure on alternative media like the Internent and (excuse the hubris) blogs; a rash of stadium constructions/renovations; NFL-caliber coaches taking jobs at universities; increased parity, to the point where even a team from the part of college football that does deign to devalue their regular season by following it with a play-off can defeat, (ahem) on the road, a team from the part of college football that does not?

2b. The NFL has also grown similarly in television ratings this past decade. How do they determine the their league champion, again?

2c. If the lack of a "play-off" increases the importance of regular season games, and the BCS is, in fact, a two-team play-off, wouldn't your logic dictate that, upon switching from a system with no play-off to the present one, ratings would decrease?

2d. Why should anyone, other than your bosses, care more about television ratings than about accurately deciding which is the best team in college football?

You assert that "what is wrong with the BCS ... is not that only two teams get the chance to play for a national championship in the postseason. What is wrong with the BCS is how those teams are selected." You go on to argue that our problems with the present system would be ameliorated if we were to hand over the selection of the two teams to a disinterested panel of "commissioners and athletic directors".

3a. Why would these individuals be any less biased and self-interested than the coaches of the teams from their own schools and conferences? Should I really trust Jim Delany's vote to be more neutral than Jim Tressel's?

3b. To support this assertion, you give the example of NCAA basketball. Do they trust their own method of post-season selection enough to invite only two teams to it?

4. If the regular season is so important, why do you and your colleagues release preseason polls? Would it not be even more exciting without them?

In 2006, in what has been hailed as "the greatest regular-season game of all time" (apparently despite the fact that neither team saw fit to play any defense), Ohio State defeated Michigan 42-39. Although many argued that the championship game should be a Buckeyes-Wolverines rematch, the Florida Gators, clearly in hindsight the best team in college football, squeaked into the title game by .0101 points in the subsequent BCS standings.

5. Is one one-hundredth of a point a margin of error that you feel comfortable with?

6. You claim that, with the BCS, the regular season "matters". How much did it matter to the following teams?

a. 1999 Marshall
b. 2004 Utah
c. 2004 Boise State
d. 2006 Boise State
e. 2007 Hawaii

All finished the all-important regular season undefeated; Utah and 2006 Boise State finished even the post-season unbeaten.

In 2007, the New England Patriots finished the regular season with a perfect 16-0 record. The Cowboys, Packers, and Colts all had 13 wins. And the New York Giants were 10-6.

7a. Did the regular season not "matter" to the Patriots?

7b. Who would have been selected to the championship game under the present system?

7c. Who deserved the Lombardi Trophy?