Mountain West Argument Takes the C Out of BCS

So, Utah wants a fair shot at a national title?

That's laughable to any reasonable college football fan.

The Utes' Sugar Bowl victory over Alabama made fans believe they could run with the big dogs of college football, but Stanford never thought it was as good as USC.

Just take a look at Utah's athletes, four of which were drafted this year; they are never part of anybody's list for top recruits in February. They are smaller and slower than players at USC, Florida, Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Texas.

Utah's players could never compete in any power conference, especially the SEC, even though they believed they could after beating Alabama.

Imagine Utah playing a schedule that included consecutive weeks against Florida, Ole Miss, Alabama, LSU, and Tennessee. It's players wouldn't make it past the second week because of the injuries.

Any team, when given six weeks to prepare, can beat another team, especially if that other team is not as excited to be there. Do you think Alabama, which has won 12 national championships, was excited to play the Utah Utes?

That's the same reason why Oklahoma lost to Boise State in 2007. Boise State has to run a perfect game plan to beat the Sooners, and did. If the two teams played 10 times, though, put your money on the Sooners.

Sure, it's great for college football fans of the mid-majors to have teams like Utah, Hawaii, and Boise State in the BCS, but do Alabama fans really want to have a one-loss season in the SEC and be rewarded by playing the Utah Utes?

Does Fox really want Utah in the BCS? The answer is no.

College football is greatest when traditional powers are on top. When USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State, and Michigan are winning, the college football fan is winning, because those are the teams they want to see.

The two BCS bowls with the lowest ratings? Virginia Tech versus Cincinnati and Alabama versus Utah.

Just look at the teams, and you will see why.