RCS: Obviously, you're busier now than you've ever been, fielding questions from all comers. Are you comfortable defending the BCS?

BH: You know, the more people talk about it the better, I believe it. People who understand college football and the complexities of how it's run generally are not too critical. It's the people who are the drop-in journalists, who only jump in one month out of the year, they're the ones who don't get it. My job as the administrator is to explain to people about the BCS. Whenever somebody asks me about a playoff, invariably 9 out 10, after I have a chance to lay out the situation, they'll say, 'golly, you're right, never thought about all these things.' But they can't be recorded in just sound bites when I lay them out. I don't blame people: It's a hard concept to grasp and it's clear that the devil's in the details.

RCS: It's safe to say, then, that the BCS is here to stay for a while?

BH: I really think the BCS is good for college football. We have tremendous amount of interest in our regular season - more so than in any other sport. I was the director of the Final Four for 13 years and we just don't have this kind of passion in the regular season. And the BCS has moved college football from regional to national. The SEC fans are now very interested in the Pac-10. Before the BCS, that interest was there but not at the level it is today. College football is more popular than ever and we believe how our postseason is handled is a big factor in that. When you consider a change, the single biggest thing we have to think about is what would it do to the regular season. That's the great unknown and there would be unintended consequences to any change, with out a doubt. This is the crown jewel and it's too risky to just tinker with it. I think the commissioners are on the right track in being very deliberate about change. We don't know if this is perfect, so let's not tinker with it until we're sure we know how it's going to be better.