Or teams like Utah could up their strength of schedule by scheduling some top tier teams from the big six conferences. That's all they have to do. Playing let's say Georgia and a Wisconsin would certainly get them into the top two if they won the rest of their games.
FSU did this exact thing when they were building a program. They couldn't even get teams to play a home and home with them, so they agreed to go up to places like Michigan and play with the big boys.
Teams like Troy State and Southern Miss do it all the time as well. Fresno State scheduled USC rather than a weak non-conference team - this shows that Fresno State realizes that even going unbeaten won't be enough unless you've played a good schedule.
It's still not clear what this has to do with USC's claim to a 2003 championship. Are you trying to discredit the BCS in an attempt to legitimize USC's AP championship in 2003?
It doesn't matter if the BCS is totally bogus or not - it is the system that USC and Auburn signed onto through their conferences.
What do you have against a real playoff? It's what every other sport does. It's what every division in NCAA football has but Division I. Why is that, really? Do you think the SIX really have the athletes, interest at heart, or is it just a way for them to keep all the money for themselves. Be honest about it. I know people who are graduates with BCS schools, including USC, and they totally agree with me on this point. Even Pete Carroll thinks there should be a playoff system.