If Utah wants to be in a BCS conference join the Pac 10 with Boise State, split it into two divisions and play a championship game like the big boys. With all due respect, the Mountain West conference as a whole does not meet the quality of the SEC as whole where anyone of 8 teams can win the conference most years. Utah is like USC of the Pac I -- the only elite quality team in the conference.
Two points I'd like to address here...
First, you can't just "join" a conference, you have to be invited. If that was the case, Utah and BYU would have both joined the PAC10 years ago (just as Arizona and Arizona St. left the old WAC for the PAC10).
Second, you are right, the MWC does not meet the quality of the SEC, but what conference does? But this isn't really the point. The real issue is - how does the MWC match up vs. other BCS conferences. One could argue that it was the 3rd best conference in the nation this year, after the SEC and the Big12 south. We had 3 teams in the top 10, Utah, BYU and TCU - any of which can compete well with the BCS. Utah is good, but it's not the "only elite team of the conference". BYU has won 33 games in the last 3 years, and TCU can match up athletically with almost anyone. Even our worst team (Wyoming) beat an SEC team this year on their own field (Tennessee).
Finally, the MWC was clearly better than the ACC, Big East, Big 10, and we owned the PAC10 this year (6-1). So I guess I'm just a bit bitter that we don't get automatic bids to the BCS and we never are allowed to play for championships. The way we see it is, the rich stay rich, and the rest are repressed - like a fancy social club that only allows the bourgeoisie.
So let's pretend that Boise State joins the MWC next year and the MWC gets an automatic bid. Is that the real answer? In my view, not really. Everything is still subject to polls and votes, with an east coast bias. It's time for a playoff once and for all.