No USC fan wants to relive last weekend’s embarrassment in Eugene.

The Trojans were outworked, outhustled and outplayed. USC needs a small-scale game like this Saturday’s in Tempe, Ariz. to regain its skills, swagger and dominant attitude.

If the Trojans recover their form, there’s no doubt they would love a rematch with Oregon at the end of the season. Too bad it won’t happen.

Yet, after Oregon restored competition in the Pac-10 last weekend, this much has become clear: the Pac-10 needs to expand to 12 teams. This isn’t solely for USC’s sake, but for the sake of the conference in general.

From a competitive standpoint, it makes sense. Two extra teams would give the hypothetical Pac-12 the ability to split into two divisions. Teams would no longer play a nine-game conference schedule, but rather eight games — giving them the opportunity to schedule a weaker non-conference foe.

This is what Florida does when they schedule powerhouses such as Charleston Southern. In an informal poll conducted this summer by ESPN.com’s Ted Miller, Pac-10 coaches voted 6-4 against the current round-robin scheduling in favor of a new format. So the coaches are on board.

This format would also allow the Pac-12 to play a championship game. Teams that are tied at the top of the conference, or that had one or two losses, would be able to go head-to-head in a dramatic and meaningful late-season battle.

This would not only give the conference more exposure — which it desperately needs as everyone annually views the Pac-10 as an inferior BCS conference — but it would give the teams an extra shot to play for the BCS championship game.

If this were the case, USC could theoretically play Oregon again in a month’s time. If both teams win out to that game, they will likely be in the top seven and the winner will get a big resumé boost for the championship game.

In fact, a scenario like this is playing out right now in the SEC. No. 9 LSU plays No. 3 Alabama tomorrow. If LSU beats the Crimson Tide and wins the rest of its games, the Tigers will have a rematch with Florida, a team they lost to earlier this season, in the SEC Championship Game.

It will be hard turning down the winner of that game for the BCS title match.

But who would be the other two teams to include in the Pac-12?

The first two obvious choices would be Boise State and Utah. Both teams have played in BCS bowls recently and have high caliber football programs.

By joining the Pac-10, Boise State would be able to boost its profile because it no longer would be playing against Tulsa or Fresno State.

It would silence the critics who claim that the Broncos play an easy schedule and don’t belong in the BCS championship game. Plus, it would be cool to see the Trojans play on a blue field.

Utah is a solid choice too. The Utes have two BCS bowl victories under their belt, which is more than any Pac-10 team not named USC. They have good talent, recruit in California (see former No. 1 NFL Draft pick Alex Smith) and, for TV’s sake, sit in the 35th largest television market.

Unfortunately, that might be the problem. College football is all about ratings and money these days, and university presidents and athletic directors aren’t so quick to add the two teams.

It would just be two more teams with which to share revenue, and Boise and Salt Lake City aren’t exactly the television hot spots that would give the Pac-12 more exposure or money from TV deals.

Last year, USC had the same win-loss record as the two teams playing for the BCS national championship, Florida and Oklahoma, yet after its loss to Oregon State, USC was never considered a true contender for the title match. If the Trojans played Cal, Boise State and Utah to compliment Ohio State and a conference title game, there’s a good chance USC would’ve gone the route of LSU two years ago.

Remember that? In 2007, No. 5 LSU played No. 14 Tennessee in the SEC Championship game. After the victory, LSU jumped all the way up to No. 2, while idle and fellow two-loss team USC stayed below the Tigers. LSU played in and won the BCS title game.

Expanding the Pac-10 by two more teams would no doubt bring more national intrigue and prestige to the conference. If it had been the Pac-12 from the start, the one-loss USC teams in recent past that made an annual tradition out of pummeling Big Ten opponents would definitely have had a better shot at reaching the national title game and proving to the country that the Pac-10 is reputable.

“Spittin’ Sports” runs Fridays. To comment on this article, visit dailytrojan.com or email Kenny at klegan23@gmail.coom.