The Bowl Championship Series owes the Mountain West a full hearing and an answer.

Now.

It has been nearly six weeks since the Mountain West requested a two-year exemption from the BCS. The right to request an exemption — which would give the league’s champion an automatic spot in one of the BCS’s five lucrative bowl games — was earned through on-field performance.

But, so far, the 12-member BCS Presidential Oversight Committee has chosen to basically ignore the request, leaving the Mountain West and its members without a chance to argue its case and know its BCS status for the 2012 season.

In September, BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock told the Idaho Statesman that the committee would likely vote in December, in keeping with tradition. The Big East earned an exemption for the 2008 and 2009 seasons.

In mid-December, a week after the Mountain West officially made its request, Hancock told the Statesman that the presidents would not be able to meet until at least January.

“The group wasn’t able to get together before the holiday break, so we’ll try again next month," Hancock said.

This week, however, Hancock said the group has yet to set a date for its next meeting. The 12 members “have not been able to settle on a date when everyone can be available,” Hancock wrote in an email.

While acknowledging that university presidents are busy individuals, it is impossible to believe that with the technology available to them, they have not been able to meet — in person or via teleconference or video conference.

It certainly looks like the BCS is dragging its feet on this decision, doing itself and the Mountain West a disservice.

While it seems unlikely that the league will be able to convince the required nine members of the oversight committee to vote yes, the league deserves to have a final answer.

But what if the Mountain West gets AQ status, even for the next two years?

Isn’t that something that the league’s athletic directors could use to help attract better head-coaching candidates? Or the league’s head coaches would use to help lure better assistant coaches (or hold on to the ones they have)? Or the league’s assistant coaches could use to help land better athletes in the final weeks before National Signing Day?

Would it alter the way the teams, including Boise State, schedule? If the Broncos belong to a BCS AQ conference, would they be more willing to schedule another high-profile, big-money game with their yet-to-be-announced 13th game?

By dragging its feet this long, the oversight committee has robbed the Mountain West of those potential advantages.

There is a simple solution. Schedule a darn meeting. Listen to the Mountain West’s presentation. Debate.

Then vote and end this nonsense.

The league, its coaches, players and fans deserve it.

Brian Murphy: 377-6444