Vote Utah in '09!!

[cubuffsman78]

"Here's a column I wrote for my newspaper and for the main site here. Enjoy. Or don't. Whichever."

We only thought the election was over.
However, with the Bowl Championship Series in charge, every season is an election year in college football.
Coaches of deserving programs are once again hitting the campaign trails, preaching why their team deserves a national championship.

Of course, only two teams get to play for the BCS Championship tonight and that's Oklahoma and Florida. But for yet another season, there is a dispute as to who deserves a shot at playing for the national title.

Despite what all the “experts” at ESPN want us to believe, USC is not the most deserving team not playing in the championship game. The Trojans slaughtered Penn State and might have just as much talent on both sides of the ball as anyone in the country. There's a blemish on their record, though.

Texas has a better complaint. It's hard to find a squad that played a tougher stretch this season, than when the Longhorns took on four consecutive squads ranked in the Top 15.

That run ended with a heartbreaking 39-33 loss to Texas Tech, though, and safety Blake Gideon, who dropped an interception that would have sealed a victory, is still ducking for cover on the UT campus.

Still, Texas does not have the best complaint.

No one has a stronger case than the undefeated Utah Utes. Yet most people won't even begin to buy it and only because they play in the Mountain West Conference and not the Pac-10.

The fact the Utes have defeated four teams — Oregon State, TCU, BYU and Alabama — that will finish the season ranked in the Top 25 will be ignored. Comparitively, Oklahoma and Florida — not counting the BCS Championship — have each defeated five.

Why Utah over USC? The Trojans lost to Oregon State. Utah didn't. The Utes topped the Beavers, 31-28.

Why Utah over Texas? Look at the loss column. And is it really that impressive the Longhorns beat Ohio State by 3 in the Fiesta Bowl. While the game itself was one of the more entertaining of the bowl season, it doesn't change the fact the Big Ten finished 1-6 in bowl games.

Utah didn't just hang on and edge an Alabama team with a defense more highly regarded than Ohio State's. They pounded the Tide into submission.

Do the Sooners and Gators play in tougher conferences? Yes. The Big 12 and SEC respectively dish out tougher competition than the MWC.

That's not Utah's fault, though, and it's not like the Utes haven't been challenged in their conference. Turns out TCU fields one of the most competitive defensive units in the country and BYU was an early favorite to be this season's BCS Buster.

Instead, Utah stole that title from BYU and then blasted Alabama, 31-17, in the Sugar Bowl.

Very few people outside of Utah gave the Utes a prayer against the highly touted Crimson Tide.

Admittedly, I was one of the doubters. My selections were published on this website several times, and while I did correctly pick more games than the rest of the prognosticators, there is a little line through my selection of Alabama, indicating I was wrong.

My apologies to Utah. I shouldn't have been a hater. I should've known better.

Hopefully, the voters in the Associated Press poll will also be enlightened by the Utes' performance Jan. 2.

It was a dominant showing. Utah scored on its first three possessions and had the Tide down 21-0 before they knew what hit them.

This is the same Alabama squad that spent more time at the top of the polls than any other team in the country this season.

It's the same Alabama team BCS title hopeful Florida couldn't get a lead on until the fourth quarter in the SEC Championship.

Former Dallas Cowboys coach Jimmy Johnson said before the Sugar Bowl “Utah does not have a single player Alabama would have offered a scholarship coming out of high school.”

Think Nick Saban is looking to make some recruiting connections on the western half of the U.S. now?

I have been one of the biggest supporters of the BCS. I don't hate the BCS like many do. It's progress.

Before the BCS, we would have never seen the matchups we have in the past few years. The greatest game in college football history, when Texas upset USC for a national title, would have never occurred.

Instead, Texas would have played an SEC opponent in the Cotton Bowl, while USC played a Big Ten foe in the Rose Bowl and the pollsters would have decided the national champion. By the way Texas fans, you can absolutely bet they would have selected USC.

The BCS is no longer progress, though. It's now stagnant. It's time for advancement to continue.

While a long drawn out playoff is still a bad idea, inserting the top 4-8 teams into a bracket is brilliant and would make a ton of money for the greed-based NCAA.

Unfortunately, a playoff scenario doesn't look like it will come out of the organization naturally, though.

However, the stars are aligning against the NCAA. Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff launched an investigation into the BCS Tuesday for a possible violation of federal antitrust laws. Shurtleff contends the BCS unfairly puts schools like Utah as a member of the MWC, which doesn't get an automatic bid to a BCS bowl, at a competitive and financial disadvantage.

At first when I heard of this filing, I didn't really think much of it. After looking more into it, I think Shurtleff has got a case and NCAA commissioner Miles Brand should be wary of it.

It might be in Brand's best interest to push forth a playoff before the investigation uncovers something that could cost one of the country's greediest organizations millions.

Brand also better watch out for new President Barack Obama. Obama has already publicly said he wants to see a playoff at the highest level of college football. While I wouldn't call myself an Obama supporter — I'm actually a bit indifferent to the world of politics — he would definitely sway me to his side if he could somehow pull this off.

What would Brand tell Obama if he forced his hand federally? No? I think not.

As for the Utes, let's hope the AP voters do the right thing. They pulled out of the BCS rankings two seasons ago because they didn't like the system. Technically, it made the AP vote a bit meaningless.

That could change early Friday morning. With one massive vote, the AP could have one of the biggest impacts in the history of sports.

It's time to join in on the campaign trail. Someone get me a picket sign.

Thanks to ESPN Magazine and ESPN.com columnist Rick Reilly, we already have a slogan as well: “Utahk about a team!”

[Kevman21]

Nice article.

One thing I'd also like to say is that recently teams from the "smaller" conferences like Utah and Boise State have done well in BSC games. Utah has gone 2 for 2 in the past 5 years and Boise State beat Oklahoma not too long ago. These teams deserve a chance at the BCS Championship, especially if they go undefeated. If they don't put in a playoff they should at least start giving automatic bids to the Mountain West or Western Atlantic. Maybe have them play a game between the top team in each conference to decide who gets that bid. I don't know.

[mrdv1]

or you go with my idea to amke a new BCS conference with both boise and utah in it... see one of my previous posts, it would work. It would be called the Big west conference composed of

Fresno state
Boise State
Hawaii
Utah
BYU
Air Force
TCU
Houston
Rice
Tulsa

Thats as good a conference as the BCS conferences

see my other post for details (playoff alternative)

[Kevman21]

That doesn't seem bad, but then you will get other teams in the Mountain West and Western Atlantic saying that they deserve a shot as well. And what happens when say you dump all the other teams into it's own conference and one of them gets good. Thus the same things happens when they get snubbed. Plus your taking some of the better teams out of Conference USA and possibly giving them not so good teams. Which means less profit for them.

It would be too easy to just put them all into a conference and make another power house. Easy to the point where there would be problems. At least that is how the BCS thinks about it. If they make changes, no matter what somebody isn't going to be happy. Whether it be colleges, coaches, fans, sponsors, Presidents, etc. Though I do agree we need a change, I'm starting to look at it from the BCS and realize it's not easy as it looks. Though at the same time, it really isn't that hard. Change is needed and it needs to happen soon, but it needs to be a well thought out change.

[mrdv1]

True, the way you would justify it is by having the NCAA enforce it. I'm not sure if it would be these ten teams, but you make the conference the 10 teams that have had the highest win percentage since the BCS started. This way no one can gripe, because the answer is you didn't have the numbers. This conference would be to reward the teams who have been consistently competitive in the last decade by giving them a shot at the BCS title. A stipulation could be that the NCAA would have to look at and reevaluate this conference every 10 years, and force certain teams to exit or enter, based on the original criteria for making the conference. It would be written into the constitution (if you want to call it that) of the conference that every decade the non BCS conference teams with the highest win percentage make up that conference, and the teams left over are assigned to the MAC(eastern teams) or WAC(western teams). The MAC and WAC may not like it, but if it is imposed by the NCAA there wouldn't be much they could do about it. The mountain west wouldn't have to worry, as it would be dismantled. True it's a bit farfetched, but would be kind of cool.