Mountain Highs and Lows

It is widely considered a travesty that the world of college football is demographically myopic. Only two conferences really matter to most pollsters - the Big 12 and the SEC. Out of these two leagues, only five teams are typically considered BCS worthy on a year-to-year basis: Florida, Alabama, LSU, Texas and Oklahoma. And only Alabama has not won a BCS trophy in the modern college football era (starting in 1998, from then on). With a Tide-rolling win this Saturday night, that trend could be reversed. Why? Because anyone watching last weekend's game in College Station knows the truth: Texas has too many flaws to win the national title.

But there's another team in Texas. It's purple, shoots blood from its eyes, and has the coolest name ever invented in the sporting culture - the TCU Horned Frogs. The Horned Frogs, like Texas, are undergoing a remarkable season - an undefeated season - and should Nebraska pull the upset over the favored Longhorns, there is little debate on the whether TCU will go to the national title. In short, it will.

But playing Devil's advocate is a fun game, and although many in the media speculate that it should, playing to the sympathies of many a rural spectator, I tend to think otherwise. There is an overlying notion that the Mountain West isn't far from the Big East in terms of overall strength. People single out the Big East conference due to it's relative obscurity in the college football world - it's more of a basketball conference and only has eight teams. But what is mostly forgotten about the Big East is that it too has a high success rate in bowl games, which is the best way to determine a conference's overall strength. The Mountain West, on the other hand, seems top-heavy.

Take three years ago. West Virginia dusts off Oklahoma by 20 on the road (virtually a home game for the Sooners). A year before that, it cruises past Georgia, the SEC champion, in Atlanta. Those were solid wins. Contrast that with Utah beating Alabama (in Baton Rouge) and Utah beating Pitt (in Tempe), the leagues are fairly comparable.

But taking a look at the lower halves of the conferences shows the following:

The Big East went 4-2 in 2008. It went 5-0 in 2007 and won the Bowl Challenge Cup. Over the last six years, along with the SEC, it has managed to provide more different winners in BCS games than any other conference (3 different schools per conference). There's depth to be had in the Big East. Every year, the league is up for grabs. That's a good trait to have.

The Mountain West, conversely, does have a good bowl record, but it screams Utah in its signature bowl victories. Utah has won twice, and very convincingly, but nothing suggests that BYU, TCU or other teams have kept up their ends of the bargain in big games. Those teams win smaller games in San Diego or Las Vegas, and do it against reeling programs (Oregon in '06, UCLA in '07). In short, the results stand for themselves - Utah, as a school, should join the Pac-Ten conference. It's academic enough, just as talented, and it's orbiting the rest of its league.

And if Cincinnati wins at Pitt (which is not a given), they're the team that is statistically more deserving of the game. Although the pollsters might not see it that way, Oregon State and four ranked bowl-playing teams (Pitt, WVU, South Florida, Rutgers) from its own conference is a sturdier slate than Clemson, Utah, BYU and Virginia.

This all of course, could be a moot point if TCU wins its bowl game, championship or not. And given the way the Horned Frogs have played, that's a good possibility. But before the BCS caves in to the demands of the MWC conference commissioner / "district attorney" Craig Thompson, and his justified albeit irrational demands for a playoff and BCS equality, let's watch to see how New Mexico does, how San Diego State does, how Wyoming does year in, year out.

The point is, TCU is probably a good team, and that helps the Mountain West. But does the league deserve to have a BCS bid? No. The depth of the league is fodder for preseason wins elsewhere in stronger conferences. What should be examined is the validity of adding a TCU or a Utah to the Pac-Ten. Should the conference expand - which it should, undoubtedly - these schools are the best of the rest (and in other sports, not just football). Utah obviously makes geographical sense, and a Texas footprint for the conference would be enormous. Whether the staid, laid-back Pac-Ten office does this is anyones guess, but after watching college football take a year off from all the drama and have things play out the way most thought they would - the Big East, the weakest link in the system, is still a step above the Mountain West and the Pac Ten clearly should reevaluate where it stands in regards to expansion. This is what the landscape is telling us.