Calling the USC-Utah game -- and has Libya joined the Pac-12 yet?

Unbuckling the mailbag:

Question: After Utah’s less-than-stellar showing against Montana State, I thought we were doomed against USC. But USC didn’t exactly light the world on fire either. With 10 days to prepare, do you think Utah gives USC all it can handle, or will it be a blowout? Somewhere in between?

Jim Gwilliam

Answer: Yes. Utah will give USC all it can handle, or it will be a blowout, or it will be somewhere in between. Actually, the game is interesting on a lot of fronts. Utah’s entry into the Pacific 12 Conference is a true litmus test. The argument for years has been a team from a non-power conference would struggle if it had to compete week-to-week against the big boys.

This is a convenient way for major conferences to downplay embarrassing defeats to schools from “lesser” leagues. Utah capped a perfect year in 2008 with an emphatic win over Alabama in the Sugar Bowl.

“Nice win,” the Southeastern Conference said, “but you’d go 8-4 if you had to play us every week.”

It happened again last week when Boise State dismantled Georgia in Atlanta.

“Nice win,” the SEC said, “but you’d go 8-4 if you had to play us every week.”

It also might be true. Well, now we get to find out. Utah is 7-3 against the Pac-12 since 2003, but those games were spread out over time. It will be interesting to see how the Utes fare, although they certainly picked the right year to join.

Based on last week, Sacramento State might finish second in the Pac-12 North.

Also, Utah misses Oregon and Stanford this year and plays Arizona State in Salt Lake City.

For Utah, facing USC at the Coliseum is the culmination of years of hard work.

It’s like that joke about the guy in New York asking directions, “How do I get to Carnegie Hall?”

Answer: “Practice, practice, practice.”

Q: Your new book, “Too Big to Screw Up Completely”?

Bob Timmerman

A: That was last week’s title. I’m not so sure now after watching this week’s Big-12 carnival show. I actually think, maybe, college football can be screwed up completely.

Some book titles I’m fiddling with now:

“The SEC: Soooie! ... or Sue Me?”

“Baylor vs. Goliath: How a small Baptist school in Waco bravely staved off Big-12 extinction for another couple of hours.”

“I Can’t Believe What I Just Said! Ohio State President Gordon Gee bloviates about bow ties, the Buckeyes and, besides him, what’s wrong with college football.”

“The Rise of Mark Emmert: Former leader of scandal-tinged Washington and Louisiana State leads reform efforts as NCAA president.”

“The Pac 40-Love … Game, Set and Match: How former women’s tennis commissioner Larry Scott transformed a sleepy league into 40 teams and moved it to Centre Court.”

“Diners, Drive-ins and Dive plays: The author puts sunglasses on back of head and explores best road-trip fare on Texas Christian’s drive to the Big East Conference.”

Q: If Texas and Oklahoma come to the Pac-12, can we rename the conference “Tex-Mex?”

Chris Anderson

A: No, and frankly, that question was two tacos short of a combination plate.

Q: I don’t understand what Texas Tech brings to the table for the Pac-12 besides West Texas sagebrush. But … seems to me the Pac-12 will stop at Pac-14 and add Oklahoma and Oklahoma State.

Stephen Noyes

A: Texas Tech to the Pac-12 is last hour’s story. The story might be changing as you’re reading this.

Tech’s ticket west was attached to Texas, and I think it’s more likely Texas won’t come to the Pac-12 right now because it means giving up the Longhorn Network.

I love your notion that the Pac-12 could just add the Oklahoma schools, because that’s what I think they’re thinking. If Pac-12 Commissioner Scott is convinced that the future is 16-team conferences, and he is, he might as well tie up Oklahoma now.

If the two Oklahoma schools bolt, the Big 12 is on life support. Texas might be able to stitch it together for a year or two, but ultimately we’re moving toward massive reconfiguration.

A Big 12 person I know was hopeful the league could be saved -- but for how long?

Q: Why would the Pac-12 want Boise State?

Thomas F.X. Sullivan

A: It doesn’t. There were Internet rumors flying Thursday that Scott was in Boise talking to the school about membership.

I know it was bogus because I called the league office in Walnut Creek, Calif., and demanded to know, “Where is your commissioner right now?”

Answer: “Sitting in his office.”

Oh.

It turns out that a private plane Scott has used in the past was seen parked in Boise, and that’s how these things get started.

Q: When did higher education enter the (conference refiguration) picture? I thought it was just about the money…

Mark Darren Walker

A: Higher education is in the picture -- it’s just really, really small. In the context of that picture of dogs playing poker, higher education is a flea on the jack of diamonds.

Q: How about a God Conference where independents Brigham Young, Notre Dame and others like Holy Cross, Oral Roberts and Liberty for starters, form a conference?

Dabney Hopkins

A: God doesn’t need a second conference. He already has the SEC.

Q: Does Colorado have realignment voting power in the Pac-12? Heard they’re not happy possibly being in a potential Big 12 within a new Pac-16.

Andy Braum

A: What Colorado has right now is a lousy football team that has lost 18 straight road games and this week is facing California, which defeated the Buffaloes, 52-7, last year in Berkeley.

I understand Colorado’s fear of a Pac-16 that might take it out of the Los Angeles recruiting market, but CU had to know when it joined that Pac 10-12-14-16-18-20 that Commissioner Scott wasn’t through expanding. The time to worry is when the 2014 schedule comes out and your first three games are at Stillwater, Norman and Lubbock.

Q: Oregon drops to 12 after losing to the No. 3 team in country at a glorified home game for LSU? Crazy.

Stephen Donahue

A: You must be reading the Autzen top 25. Oregon actually fell to No. 13 in the Associated Press and No. 14 in the USA Today coaches poll. The moral, if you’re a Pac-12 school, is don’t pick opening day to slip on a green banana peel against an SEC school.

I actually thought Oregon’s defense played well, just as it played well in last year’s title-game loss to Auburn. The LSU game was 16-13 at the half, but you can’t give a team like the Tigers that many turnovers and expect positive results.

If Oregon is any good, it can bounce back. The Ducks need Stanford to be a top-five team when they visit Palo Alto in November.

If the Ducks really aren’t very good, well, Oregon has a terrific track program.

Q: Why do we even have rankings of any kind prior to Week 5? They’re never accurate, and they always mess up someone’s season.

Pete

A: You’re right, although the polls have messed up late in the season too. Remember 2003, when the coaches had to vote their No. 1 team, USC, No. 3?

Early polls are publicity tools for the Associated Press and USA Today. They are conversation fodder and newspaper filler. They get people talking about college football, which is good. The power schools don’t get hurt much by low preseason rankings. Auburn won last year’s title after starting No. 23. Early poll positions do hurt mid-major schools that don’t have the schedule strength to make up the difference. It took Boise State 10 years of excellence and clawing to earn the preseason right to be considered a national title contender.

Boise started No. 3 last year in the AP and No. 5 in USA Today and came within a couple of plays from reaching the BCS title game.

This year, Boise started 5/7 and stayed in competition last weekend by defeating Georgia.

Q: Will a non-SEC one-loss team jump Boise State by the final polls. Surely not …?

Raja Prabala

A: Prabal-bly so.

Q: How about those feisty Hornets of Sacramento State?

Matt Kovach

A: Tremendous win over Oregon State. I read all about the Hornets in the (Sacramento) Bee.

Q: Does this mean UCLA’s national title hopes are over?

Rails Warner

A: Not in women’s softball.

chris.dufresne@latimes.com