So what your saying is that with Boise's schedule this year (which had maybe 1 hard game) should be ranked with the conferences that plays atleast 3 to 4 hard teams within their own conference let alone outside of theirs? Lets look at Boise, yes they beat VT, but that was it and then when they get to Nevada, they blow it (which Nevada isn't all that great, but there really the best they had in the match-up this year). No way should they be looked at IMO.
Not only this, but when big names do try to play them, they coward out or ask for a ton of money that they don't deserve. Nebraska tried to play them and they said only if NU gives them $1 million and I believe if they play in Boise. They should be begging for the heavy hitters if they want to be considered instead of being comfortable at playing the nobodies.
I can see why they aren't doing a play off system. IMO conferences would lose a ton of money. If they only went with an 8 team play-off, which 8 teams would you pick out of all the conferences? Hell you would have more arguments then you have now. The NFL does 10 and that is with just to conferences. As of now, you have a ton of teams playing in bowls and they all receive money. How would they distribute the money if say just the SEC and Big 10 (or however they would separate it) teams made it to the semis and bowl?
Edit: didn't think I took 30 mins to type this and krill beat me to the money part.