Over the course of the last few days, ESPN has been conducting an informal poll asking fans across the country how today's USC team would stack up against National Championship teams of the past.

In the first edition, they asked fans how the '05 Trojans would fare against the '91 Washington Huskies.  Then they matched them up against the '02 Ohio State Buckeyes, followed next by the '69 Texas Longhorns.  And today they pondered who would win between USC and the '97 Michigan squad, which actually shared the National Title with Nebraska.

In the coming weeks, they'll countdown eight more National Championship teams hand-picked by their "esteemed panel of College Football experts" from SportsNation to match up against the high-powered Trojans.  I guess this is their way of finding out if USC is the best college football unit ever assembled?

Never mind the fact that it's utterly ridiculous predicting the outcome of a fictional game between two teams from different eras.  But to actually break it down by examining individual matchups like Kirk Herbstreit and Mark May have been doing and using that as a precursor to determine the winner is beyond the realm of stupidity.  Last time I checked, winning a football game had more to do with coaching, game-planning and overall team intensity than simply who has the better players.

Now let me preface by saying I realize that the Trojans are the defending National Champions and own one of the longest winning streaks (34 games) in NCAA history.  And by virtue of these outstanding accomplishments, they are more than deserving of such strong accolades and continuous media attention.

But before we start matching them against the likes of the 1994 Penn State Nittany Lions, the '95 Nebraska Cornhuskers, or the '55 Oklahoma Sooners, why don't we see how they fare against the 2005 Texas Longhorns?  Remember them?  In case you've forgotten through all of this SC media lovefest, Texas is the other team vying to be recognized as the undisputed NCAA Champions.  And I'd dare to claim that they have a better chance of winning that game than many "experts" are giving them credit for.

Therefore, in the interest of fairness, ESPN would've been much better off waiting to conduct this poll (and subsequent Sportscenter segment) after the Rose Bowl has been completed.

Of course, if Texas actually wins the game then all of their work in preparation for this poll would be for naught.  But hey, isn't that better than conducting it before-hand and ultimately looking stupid for hailing the nation's runner-up?

Just some food for thought!