And I thought the Oregon-BSU debate would be over on Sept. 4, ha! Shows what I know.

Several co-workers of mine are Oregon alumni - and as usually the case coming from a school with a good major sports program - are vocal, passionate fans.

I had a conversation with one of them on Halloween night about the Oregon vs. BSU debate that has exploded following the Ducks dominating win over powerhouse Southern California.

"But don't you think that Oregon is a better football team because of who they play on a regular basis?" my co-worker asked (and I'm paraphrasing, because it was late and beverages may or may not have been involved).

That concept is not far from fact.

I don't feel bad saying the Broncos have played down to opponents after watching the first half of this season. I haven't seen as much as I thought I would of the team that dominated Oregon in week one... and I think with as young a team as Boise State is, a bit of a roller coaster ride in this respect is not a big surprise.

That said, the Ducks might be a better team on paper - but still couldn't beat Boise State when they played. Two years in a row, I might add - and in 2009 the teams had what seemed like eons to prepare for one another.

The argument that Oregon deserves to be ranked above Boise is a slippery slope, because it really asks: at what point do we as college football fans forget about the games that were actually played?

There's all this hubbub about getting the right teams into the national title "game" to decide who is college football's champion, but if the games played earlier in the year don't mean anything - who's to say that the BCS championship game means anything either?

This logic calls into question every national championship in the last 30 years, if not more.

For example: BYU won the 1984 national title with a bowl win over un-ranked Michigan and an undefeated season in the WAC - but I think Washington was the best team that year, because UW plays in the Pac-10.

The Cougars won the title as the only undefeated team that year, but under the current system - two non-BCS teams could go undefeated and neither would make the title game, even if no other teams remained unbeaten.

The whole system is a farce, and I've shared my disgust with it in previous blogs - and that's not going to change.

But as a fan of college football, there's nothing I can do about the system. As a member of the media, there's nothing I can do about the system. I don't think the President of the United States can do anything about college football (and probably shouldn't, either. He's got bigger fish to fry).

And that still leaves us with the question of who's better, Oregon or Boise State? We should feel lucky that there is an actual answer to this question, because these two teams have actually played each other.

To be a champion, to be better - you need to win when it counts. Boise State has done that thus far in 2009. Seven other teams have, too - and Oregon isn't one of them. What's really too bad is that when both teams win out, Oregon will be preparing for a BCS bowl, and I don't think Boise State will.