And stressed the primacy of academic mission and amateurism.

I was just wondering where it came from.

Which in turn caused the handful of elites to ramp up their operations and expenditures creating a lot of inequity.

Prior to BCS/playoffs, Alabama was never a measuring stick. You were mainly focused on your schedule , rival and conference bowl opponent . This National Championship or bust mentality wasn't as prevalent.

Saban just happened to arrive during the BCS/playoff era; he's demonstrated he would have been dominant in most any era.

And inequity has always existed. Big two and little eight ring any bells?

The ramp up of operations and especially expenditures is enabled by the the selling of television rights; the selling of year-round, 24-hour network subscriptions; ever escalating ticket prices; incremental, mandatory fees that are required to obtain the rights to purchase tickets, such as "contribution models" and "building funds"; and by boosters with deep pockets.

The arms race was not enabled by the playoffs, national championship, or BCS. The arms race is fueled by those gladly willing to part with their money. There's one born every minute.

for sports is really the driving force.

The playoff was instituted because there was money to be made, time slots to fill and networks in need of programming. The playoffs were a consequence of TV money and the forces at play today rather than a cause. Just another step down that road.

BCS and CFP were a continuation away from where the sport was, but I don't think it likely they would have been held off much longer even if delayed.

Of course, I don't know.

This is one reason why, for example, Nebraska holds way less sway than they did 30-40 years ago. Very few programs can sell out a bowl game the way Nebraska can. In the 80s and even the 90s that meant something. In today's world it's trivial compared to TV money, and Nebraska is only a middle of the road TV draw.