The BCS has been hated by nearly every single college football fans.  While it has been an improvement by giving college football a subjective number one and number two match up for a mythical national championships.  There have been tweaks nearly every year over the past decade such as the AP dropping out because they wanted to break news not make news, the addition of the Harris poll made up of former players, coaches and media members who sometimes vote, the removal of margin of victory, plus other tweaks to expand access to non-BCS leagues.

Not hard to see how the BCS is not liked and have finally smarted up and began a full on defensive war.  First off the BCS promoted Bill Hancock from administrator to Executive Director which is the first full time head of the BCS.  Previously, the conference commissioners from the six BCS leagues would rotate that duty.  He is now the first full time face of the BCS and will be peppered with interviews where he will have to defend the BCS.

Then they created a twitter account with @INSIDEtheBCS and they actually respond to questions about the BCS  -- which is a first for them-- as well as post article links about the BCS.  However, most of the responses are the same repetitive boring jargon that makes no sense such as:

When Plus-1 was discussed in '08, one big hurdle was the inevitable bracket creep. 4 teams, maybe. Then 8? 16? 32?

More than any other sport, the regular season is the most critical in college football. Each week matters. That's a great strength.

Almost every playoff system that started small has expanded.

Those twitter posts are all a joke.  Playoffs will get out of control with 32 team and the expansion will ruining the ever so sacred regular season that just featured non-conference games such as Florida against Florida International or Alabama against Chattanooga. A nice explanation on how those games make each regular season game a playoff matchup.

The twitter account was only the beginning the next step was for the BCS to hire former White House press secratary Ari Fleischerr to help make a happy image for the BCS.  This guy is the man for the job since he was able to sell the Iraq War:

Ari Fleischer Communications, a sports public relations firm headed by the former press secretary for President George W. Bush, has been hired by BCS officials to help remodel the tattered image of college football’s postseason system.

[New BCS executive director Bill] Hancock said in a statement the goal of the hiring was to help highlight the positive aspects of the BCS, which he called the best way to match college football’s top two teams, while preserving the bowl system.

Ah the good old preserving the bowl system; who really cares about the bowl system.  Yes, the players get a few hundred dollars full of swag and usually go to a nice locale.  In reality the New Mexico, International, and Eagle Bank Bowl are typically half full and can easily be done away with and people would not care. 

Good luck Ari defending the undefendable or just spin it by intimidating US citizens like when he said:

"watch what they say, watch what they do"

Now there is the website Playoff Problem that reeks of those fire college coach dot com websites.   The site attempts to defend the BCS and says a playoff is not feasible because it will eventually get too big.  This article mentions why not skip March Madness which is the most successful tournament and match the top two hoops teams in the rankings and decide the champion that way.  Seems pretty far fetched and most hoops schools would complain that is not a fair way to determine a champion.

Here is Playoff Problem's response to an eight team playoff:

Just try to create an eight-team playoff based on latest rankings (November 23rd). Should a one-loss Georgia Tech (10-1, #7) get in but not a one-loss Pittsburgh (9-1 #9)? Should a two-loss Oregon (9-2, #8) get in but not one-loss Pittsburgh or any of the SEVEN teams with two losses: Ohio State (10-2, #10), Iowa (10-2, #11), Oklahoma State (9-2, #12), Penn State (10-2, #13), BYU (9-2, #19), Utah, (9-2, #19), or Houston (9-2, #23)? If you think the BCS is controversial, try sorting that out. A playoff would guarantee bigger problems, more controversy, more disappointed teams and more frustrated fans.

Memo fellas the 66th team in the NCAA basketball will complain as does every other first team left out of a tournament.  If the BCS is in charge of a playoff they can dictate the amount of teams and the selection process which oh by the way is what they do now when selecting who plays for the mythical national title.  That playoff would produce seven more great games with eight great opponents instead of one bowl that the nation really cares about.

Now, the ultimate fabrication is this quote that is pulled directly from the Playoff Problem website:

Every conference has an opportunity to earn annual automatic qualification into the BCS.  At the beginning of every season, every team has an opportunity to earn a spot in a BCS Game, including the National Championship Game.

Tell that to these 2004 teams Auburn, Boise State and Utah and then Boise in 2008, as well as the 1998 undefeated Tulane team.  All of those teams were either left out of a BCS game or the national title game.  That does not included this year where there most likely will be five undefeated teams yet only two make the title game, and it is possible that Boise State might be left out all together of the BCS.

How can the BCS say that all teams from all leagues have an opportunity to go to the BCS.  That is so not the case because there is nothing more that TCU, Boise State, and Cincinatti can do this year to go to the title game (well barring historic upsets this weekend).  Go to the Sun Belt schools that must go play the SEC and Big XII for million dollar pay days to just barely keep their athletic department afloat.