Lash, I think that you hit the nail on the head in this entire post - especially your characterizations of UMass & UConn prior to UConn's rise to prominence in the Jim Calhoun era, using the Big East as a springboard. Probably no 2 teams benefitted more from their membership in the Big East than UConn & Virginia Tech.

Westwolf, you're right that Louisville would not deserve the Rose Bowl, given its weak schedule. However, don't count them out too quickly. College football is obsessed with the idea that your bowl worthiness is tied to your number of losses.

It was much easier to dismiss Utah & Louisville last year because they played in non-BCS conferences. Besides, both had come out of nowhere - relatively speaking. However, coming off the season they had last year, a Louisville team that marches on undefeated through a BCS conference will become tougher & tougher for the pollsters to ignore as other teams succumb & fall in defeat even though they are facing stiffer competition.

We all know the dynamics of the polls & how late season losses do you in. If Louisville is 11-0, that's all that people will be looking at. Furthermore, given the weak competition in the Big East, it's not unthinkable that one or 2 other teams in the conference like Pitt &/or West Virginia might emerge with 10-1 or 9-2 records, in which case pollsters will say that Louisville actually did beat some top teams. Combine this with a scenario in which no one else is undefeated & there are only one or 2 one-loss teams . . . Well, what's a pollster to do?

I missed Lash's point when he first floated this idea, but as I now look at it, I realize that he may well have been prophetic.

There's a LOT of media discussion in the what-if category around Louisville this year. Don't be surprised...