The creators of the BCS system went to a lot of trouble to end up right back where they started. The BCS is a mess. And considering what it took to get to this point, is it really worth it?

At this point, there are a variety of directions to turn -- a playoff system being the obvious one -- but first, let's look at the domino effect that got us here: Oklahoma lost to Oklahoma State, Texas lost to Colorado, Florida lost to Tennessee and then Tennessee to LSU. Clearly a lot happened for this mess to unfold, but that doesn't make it right.

A playoff system is the logical solution. But if they can't pull it off, why not go back to the old bowl system?

You can make a case for Nebraska, Oregon and certainly Colorado to play in the Rose Bowl against undefeated Miami. But Colorado was hurt by its two losses, and Oregon was hurt by strength of schedule in its own conference.

While the Pac-10 may have been the best from top to bottom, UCLA and Washington (which Oregon didn't even play this season) didn't live up to expectations.

So we have the Cornhuskers, who didn't win their conference and got blown out in their last game, vying for a national championship. You'd have to go back to the mid-1930s to find the last time that has happened. But it also begs the question: Would you have had a problem if Tennessee beat LSU? If the Vols had won, the BCS would have dodged the bullet and delivered an undisputed national-title game.

But now it has turned ugly, and it could get even uglier. If Nebraska upsets Miami, we're headed for a split poll. The coaches will vote the winner of the Rose Bowl the national champ, but the writers (who don't like the BCS) will not concur. The writers would like nothing better than to pick the Oregon-Colorado winner as the national champ.

Remember the good ol' days of the old-school college bowl system? If we went back to the original bowl system this year, there would be some decent matchups and we'd still have a national title game: