BCS coordinator Mike Slive has declined to say why the request to adjust the pairings was rejected or which commissioners blocked the move. Greg McWilliams / Icon SMI

MAILBAG Submit a question or an opinion to Stewart. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

"There was a lengthy discussion, I made my case for it, and others made a case against it. It didn't prevail," said Beebe. "I don't necessarily agree, but I respect the views of those who were against it."

According to SEC commissioner and current BCS coordinator Mike Slive, "A request was made [to adjust the pairings]; it was considered and rejected.

"After thinking about it, the commissioners exercised their discretion to leave the pairings the way they were. There was a clear consensus."

Both Slive and Beebe declined to say which commissioners blocked the move -- though multiple sources said that ACC commissioner John Swofford and Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese did not oppose it.

Slive, who in his role as coordinator acts as a spokesman for the other commissioners, declined to elaborate on why the request was rejected. Pointing out that similar requests to adjust the pairings have been denied in the past (including in 2003, when the Fiesta Bowl's at-large selection of Ohio State stuck the Orange Bowl with a Miami-Florida State regular-season rematch), Slive said such an override would require "a very high threshold."

"My sense was that the reason wasn't compelling enough given the fact that on two prior occasions -- including the Miami-Florida State year -- the commissioners had set a very high threshold and felt that this did not meet the threshold," said Slive. "There weren't such compelling circumstances as to merit a change."

Two sources not directly involved in the decision speculated that the commissioners feared such a matchup might damage the legitimacy of the Ohio State-LSU title game.

The second-ranked Tigers have the same 11-2 record as both the Hokies and Sooners. Theoretically, a decisive victory by Oklahoma -- which is ranked No. 3 in the AP and Coaches polls -- combined with a less decisive LSU victory over the Buckeyes could have opened the door for a split national championship. (Unlike the coaches, AP voters are not obligated to select the BCS title-game winner No. 1).

"We certainly recognize the rules provide for the top two teams playing in the BCS national championship, and from that a winner will be named BCS national champion," said Oklahoma's Castiglione, whose team routed then-No. 1 Missouri 38-17 in the Big 12 title game. "There could be an argument for a split national champion, and that may be stated by any number of people. The AP is a very reputable poll. We just wanted to play the highest-ranked team. That was our goal all along."

Asked whether the split possibility played a factor, Slive insisted, "It never came up."

Asked why the opportunity to see the No. 3 and 4 teams play would not qualify as a game with "greater appeal to college football fans," as the BCS manual spells out, Slive replied, "Everybody looked at that, and knowing that, still came to the same conclusion. In any such consideration of something like this, you have to look at the question of what precedent does it set -- particularly when there have been more compelling requests that have not been granted -- and what are the unintended consequences?"

Castiglione stressed that Oklahoma is still pleased to be facing West Virginia in the Jan. 2 Fiesta Bowl ("This discussion had nothing to do with our eventual matchup," he said), and apparently Sooners fans are as well. As of last Friday, the school had sold all but about 2,000 of its 17,500 allotted tickets.

Meanwhile, Kansas on Monday sold out its allotment (also 17,500) for the Jan. 3 Orange Bowl against Virginia Tech.

The timing of the rejected Sooners-Hokies request is interesting, however. Over the next six months, BCS officials are expected to formally discuss the possibility of adding a "plus-one" game beginning with the 2010 season. Under the most commonly discussed model, in which the top-four teams would be "seeded" into semifinal bowl matchups, both Virginia Tech and Oklahoma would remain in contention for the national championship.

Slive has expressed his openness to the possibility on numerous occasions, as has Swofford, the ACC commissioner who will take over as coordinator following this year's title game. Such a plan would meet considerable resistance, however, from Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and Pac-10 commissioner Tom Hansen, due to its potential effect on those leagues' relationship with the Rose Bowl.

Castiglione said the foiled OU-Virginia Tech matchup, "is a real interesting element worthy of further exploration."

"I just hope at some point in time we can hear an explanation of why this wasn't possible given the fact the rules provided that opportunity if it was in everybody's best interest. Clear-thinking, well-intentioned minds would like to know whether something like this is possible."