By Marquavis Burnett, The Crimson White
Follow on TWITTER @Marq_Burnett and @TheCrimsonWhite / Log on to http://cw.ua.edu/ for visit their website
 
When the final BCS standing were announced and Alabama held a slight edge over Oklahoma State to play in the national championship, there was one thing lost in all of the backlash and chaos that ensued, the BCS needs to be taken away in favor of a playoff or some type of plus-one system.
 
Think about it and imagine for one second if there was a plus-one system. Alabama and Oklahoma State would have played for a shot at Louisiana State in New Orleans on January 9. It would have truly been a “win and you’re in situation.” No discussion about which team had the better resume or who deserves it more would have been necessary because both teams would have had to earn it on the field.
 
The BCS usually gets it right in terms of placing the two best teams in the national championship game, but there have been years where the system has gotten it wrong.
 
In 2004, Southern California, Oklahoma and Auburn all finished the season undefeated, but when the final BCS rankings were revealed, USC and Oklahoma got the chance over Auburn to play for the championship. USC dominated Oklahoma and some voters were left wishing they had giving Auburn a chance, but with a playoff, these teams would have had to earn it on the field.
 
This season the college football pundits in support of a playoff had more ammunition than ever. Three teams had legitimate arguments to play in the BCS National Championship Game; Alabama, Oklahoma State and Stanford. Each team had one loss at different points of the season, but the majority of the voters choose the Crimson Tide as the second best team in the country. With a playoff, it would not be left up to the voters. It would be decided on the field.
 
In 2009, both TCU and Boise State finished their regular seasons undefeated. The two powerhouses from non-automatic qualify conferences were both left out of the big game in favor of Alabama and Texas and had to face each other in a BCS Bowl.
 
With a playoff system, the argument Boise State and other teams from non-automatic qualify conferences would not exist. No longer would people have to hear about how an undefeated Boise State deserves to be in the championship game. No longer would their players and fans feel left out because they don’t play in “big boy” conference.
 
Everything would be settled on the field. Before I get into my proposal, don’t give me the “the regular season won’t matter” or “the regular season is a playoff” excuses. I don’t want the “it would take student-athletes out of school” excuse either.
 
I propose a plus-one system or a four team playoff. The top-four teams in the country would be seeded and play elimination games until a champion is crowned. All games should be neutral site games with the sites for the BCS bowls being used. It would only add one extra game to the current system. All of the other bowls, except the extra BCS bowls, could be kept to give every team a chance at post season play.
 
For those who say it would take students out of school more, well that’s not true. With the current schedule, the final four could be held a week before the national championship game and not have students take extra time off.
 
My plan is still in its infancy stage, but if all of the athletic directors and presidents from the AQ conferences get together and talk it out, they will see why a playoff system can be beneficial for everyone, both financial and for the deciding a true champion.