This Article examines the compatibility of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) with federal antitrust law and the appropriateness of the federal government using its formal and informal powers to encourage a new format for postseason college football. The Article begins by examining the legality of the BCS under sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. While the BCS suffers from blatantly anticompetitive features, its procompetitive virtues would likely prove dominant in a rule of reason analysis. The BCS also benefits by virtue of myriad obstacles associated with instituting a college football playoff system. The Article then discusses the appropriateness of government actors concerning themselves with, and expending taxpayer dollars on, the scheduling of college football games. The Article concludes by offering possible changes to the scheduling structure of postseason college football, with an emphasis on voluntary, efficiency-promoting changes by the colleges, universities, and conferences currently associated with the BCS.