Granted, the Trojans and Longhorns were also worthy of a title shot. But after watching Utah dominate Alabama, 31-17, in the Sugar Bowl, it's mind boggling how the coaches could, in good conscience, vote both ahead of the Utes.

Three one-loss teams better than a team that played to perfection for an entire season?

Nobody in their right mind — least of all Meyer — would suggest that Utah couldn't beat any one of them on a given day, or couldn't win a playoff among the top four teams. Just as no sane person would suggest there's no way USC, Texas or Florida could win it all if they played it off.

But what the BCS giveth to Florida and Oklahoma, it taketh away from Utah, Texas and USC. Because of a bogus system, they were denied an opportunity to play for the crown.

"There really is no hard and fast true champion with the system that is in place," said Whittingham.

In Utah's case, not getting a title shot is even more disheartening, because it's now crystal clear that without a playoff, the chances of any mid-major team gaining a spot in BCS title game are slim to none.

If all but one team from the six BCS-affiliated conferences had at least two losses, a team like the Utes might have a prayer. Otherwise, forget it.

That's inexcusable, unjustifiable and, who knows, maybe even illegal.

We need to rid college football of the ridiculously unfair BCS system for determining a national champion.

Whether through presidential persuasion, congressional legislation or anti-trust litigation — or any combination thereof — we need change that will level the playing field in the Football Bowl Subdivision.

Can we break through the resistance and win the day?

In the spirit of a Barack Obama quote, albeit on a different topic, "Yes, we can. Yes, we can change. Yes, we can."