What was the best method for the college football postseason?

Historically, we've had:

Pre-AP (very few bowl games, national champs either just declared by newspapers or through retro polls)

AP/UPI, before bowl games (bowl games were seen as rewards and exhibition games more than part of the season)

AP/UPI, after bowl games (bowl games mattered, chaos could ensue thanks to bowl tie-ins, where the #5 team could jump all the way to #1)

BCS precursors (bowl games worked together to schedule #1 vs #2, but bowl tie-ins could still cause issues)

BCS (multiple iterations on how the rankings were reached, but ultimately #1 vs #2 at the end of the season)

4-team playoff (top 4 teams determined by committee)

12-team playoff (top 12 teams determined by committee with exceptions in place for G5 programs, and starting next year, Notre Dame)



There is a small, nostalgic part of me that misses the old bowl system of the 80s. It felt like getting to a bowl game could still be a reward, they were relevant to the title, but there wasn't QUITE YET the insane number of bowl games that seemed to cheapen the point of going.

For example, there were 18 bowl games in 1985; by 2002 there were 28 and by 2012 there were 35 and by 2015 there were 42 (though playoff games are counted in this number, that only nets a +1 in total games in the 4-team playoff era).

Yeah, it had the potential for chaos personified based on bowl matchups, but I can remember getting invited to a bowl meaning something - a real reward in a real place the players would actually enjoy visiting.

I mean, no one wants to go to Birmingham or Shreveport.