The BCS Mess

The BCS has done it again. After slighting Auburn after an undefeated season a few seasons ago, the BCS has once again shut out a deserving team.
I know that by my own admission I thought OU was more deserving of the bid, but that doesn't change the fact that actual voters, and a good number of other so-called "experts" thought Texas deserved the bid. Texas is a good team, but unfortunately, under this current system, they're SOL.
But Texas isn't the only one who is going to be royally screwed out of a bid. Chances are, even with Oregon State's loss, that Boise State will be left out of a BCS bid, with the directors choosing 10-2 and less-deserving Ohio State to play in a game over them. And while we're at it, Ball State has the potential to be 13-0, ranked in the top 12 of the BCS, and also be shafted.
This is absurd. I've heard the suggestion put forth that since non-BCS conference teams have to finish in the top 12 of the BCS to be considered for a BCS bowl, why not have conference champs adhere to that same criteria? Shouldn't we reward teams for playing well instead of rewarding them because their fan bases will bring in more money?
But alas- this isn't a perfect world. No director in their right mind would pick Ball State or Boise State over #16 Cincinnati or #17 Boston College/#25 Virginia Tech. It's not fair, but that's how it works. Over the course of the season, Ball State and Boise State have played better than any of those teams, but they won't be rewarded for it, despite finishing higher (and undefeated!) in the BCS itself. What a shame.
I know that we're years away, but I still think a playoff would be the best way to settle it. Forget automatic bids for winning a "BCS conference." That's crap. The gap is closing. Utah and Boise State showed us that (Hawaii not so much). But when App State can be Michigan in the Big House and TCU's can upset Oklahoma's, it's time to make things fair.
My proposal? Have the top 4 teams in the BCS (right now, Alabama, OU, Texas, Florida) get automatic byes, a-la the NFL. Next, take the next 8 highest ranked teams, and have them play it out. That's a field of 12 teams. So the winner of #8 Penn State and #9 Boise State plays #1 Alabama in the second round, the winner of #5 USC vs #12 Ball State plays #4 Florida, the winner of #6 Utah and #11 TCU plays #3 Texas, and the winner of #7 Texas Tech and #10 Ohio State plays #2 Oklahoma. Seems fair to me.
One of the arguments proponents of the BCS make is that it leads to an unparalled regular season. You think there's room to slip up when only 12 teams would make this field? No. TCU and OSU are the only 2-loss teams in that field, and they lost to Oklahoma and Utah and USC and Penn State respectively.
Another thing is, it wouldn't extend the season by more than a couple weeks.
As far as money and tie ins? Call the second round games your Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, Fiesta Bowl and Sugar Bowl, and then rotate the semi-finals and the national championship sites between those venues.
The rest of the college football world can still have their bowls. To me, this seems like the best solution. Teams are rewarded for playing well, the fat cats still make their money, their beloved BCS formula is still relevant, and you still need a stellar season to win the championship.