Couldn't the 6 non-BCS conferences claim they bought into the BCS based on duress? The idea of "take it or leave it" sounds an awful lot like "you can be in OUR club, but you have to play by OUR rules."

And why wouldn't they want to "be in the club"? That's the only way the non-BCS conferences stand to make money.

It's an unfair and biased system.

It doesn't matter which is the best conference. There is a good chance the BCS is illegal. That is, teams participating in Division I football do not have equal opportunity to win and compete. We're talking about student athletics here sponsored by institutions supported by tax dollars. Certain conferences have a monopoly over the BCS system in the form of automatic bids. It will be interesting to see what happens in court.

Let the investigation go forward. The AG is doing the right thing and defending his state and universities. As for BCS proponents, if the system is legal, you don't have a thing to worry about either way.

One problem with a legal challenge is that it may lead people to think that this is our best and last hope. It is not!

Alabama and Florida "proceeds" went into the SEC pool and all SEC teams get a equal cut. Texas And USC can't complain about the system because their coaches and AD voted for the BCS system. If Utah is so against the BCS system Why go play in the BCS Sugar Bowl and take BCS money? Thats talking out of both sides of your mouth!! By them playing that show support to the system they hate. "I hate your system I'll take your money, but I still hate your system" If the ACC and Big East can add teams to improve their conference then the MWC can or do they like crying about the system.

By added miami and boston college the ACC did nothing to improve their strength of schedule. Sure they were great in the late 80's and early 90's but what have they done lately. The ACC and Big East have done nothing since the inception. The MWC has three teams in the top 25, besides the Big 12 South and the SEC, nobody has more than that. Does that really make them that weak of a conference. The only teams out there to add are Boise St and maybe a Tulsa. But even at that they are still outsiders. The only way to play in the NC game is to be apart of the "clubs" conferences. And seeing as none of those conferences are too eager to bring in a Utah, BYU or a TCU then not much is going to change unless the system does.

"This is a MWC problem to fix, they need to improve there conference by getting better teams and not have one or two teams that is the cream of the conference"

One or two teams that is the cream of the conference? You mean like Alabama and Florida of the SEC? Those are the only two teams of merit in the SEC this year - all the others were mediocre. So is that what you meant?

Alabama and Florida are not the cream of the conference, any team can beat another in the SEC. A conference has to be "soild" top to bottom. Take Ole Miss they came on strong, Georiga was pre season #1, LSU won the NC last year, TNN had a bad year but in the past they are a soild. Vandy had a good year,they have beat some big teams that look over them. The SEC has been a soild conference for years then added South Carolina and ARK in 92 to make the conference better and have the first championship game. In the past 10, 20 or 30 years the SEC has had the best/strongest conference. Thats what the MWC needs to do, get good teams to join and have a stronger conference.