Pac-12?

Every year about this time, there is a lot of discussion about the BCS's role in the determination of a college football national champion. Overwhelmingly, the anti-BCS voice is heard and talk of a playoff system heats up. I personally favor a playoff and think it would only boost the exposure of college football while making boatloads of cash for the NCAA and its sponsors.

Every season, there is at least one team that seems to get snubbed in the BCS process. This season, that team was Utah which did something no other NCAA FBS team did this season: win every game on its schedule.

Did Utah deserve a shot at the national title? Sure, just like every top 10 team deserved a shot. Utah's conference, the Mountain West Conference, is the reason the Utes were snubbed by the BCS. Because the MWC is not a BCS conference, the conference champion, regardless of record, will never get into the national title game.

The way I see it, there are two solutions to this.

First is a playoff. Since that is unlikely to happen any time soon, the second solution seems even more doable: apply for admission to the Pac-10.

If the top two teams in the MWC, arguably Utah and BYU, were to join the Pac-10, then both teams would get a legitimate shot at the national championship. Go undefeated in the Pac-10 and you're as likely to get into the title game as any team from the Big 10, SEC or Big 12.

If the pre-BCS poll method was still the way a national champion was chosen, then Utah likely would have had the strongest claim to the title. It's how BYU won its only national title in 1984.

Aside from football, BYU and Utah would likely be instantly competitive in the "lesser" sports in the Pac-10.

So let's get it done, gentlemen!