Before the conference expansion dramas of five or so years ago, college football was viewed through a simple lens: The BCS and non-BCS, the powerful haves and the outsider have-nots. When a scrappy non-BCS team -- for a successful non-BCS team was invariably termed "scrappy" -- beat a few BCS teams and began demanding a seat at the adult table, it was largely dismissed.

Which is why TCU coach Gary Patterson knew what everyone was thinking at Big 12 media days in 2012. His team, 36-3 over the previous three seasons in the Mountain West Conference, was stepping up to the big leagues. Scrappy wouldn't do against a Big 12 grind. The Horned Frogs were to join former MWC rival Utah as test cases for the validity of the BCS/non-BCS paradigm.

"Can they do it on a day-to-day basis?" said Patterson. "We're going to find out. But I don't think it's a quick race. We're not going to define TCU by what happens in 2012."

Utah coach Kyle Whittingham had been asked the same question a year prior, at Pac-12 media days, after the Utes made a similar move up from the MWC.

"We're under the microscope, no question," Whittingham said. "All I ask is that you don't judge us on one game or one season or two or three seasons. Look at us 10 years down the road."

Utah's Kyle Whittingham and TCU's Gary Patterson have each found their footing since making the transition from the Mountain West to Power 5 leagues. AP Photo/Tom Pennington

Well, we did find out, Gary. And, Kyle, we didn't have to wait 10 years.

The answer is twofold. First, no, not even a very good non-BCS program is up to the week-to-week grind of a BCS conference, now an even smaller oligarchy called the Power 5. Utah, which went 33-6 in its last three seasons in the MWC, went 9-18 in its first three years of Pac-12 play. TCU went 6-12 its first two seasons against Big 12 teams. Both bottomed out at 2-7 in 2013 conference play and had some of their fans worried.

But both broke through last fall, most impressively TCU. The Horned Frogs went 12-1, just missed the College Football Playoff and finished ranked No. 3, despite not being ranked in the preseason. Utah went 9-4, posted its first winning Pac-12 record at 5-4 and finished ranked No. 21.

Previously wringing hands began to clap. TCU heads into 2015 widely viewed as a national title contender, ranked No. 2 in the preseason AP poll. Utah is the equivalent of No. 30 , underrated perhaps because the South Division features four other ranked teams.

"I think our fans are now sitting here going, 'OK. We belong. We can do this.' That's the feeling," Utah athletic director Chris Hill said.

There was an interesting internal dynamic at work when TCU and Utah moved up. While neither coach was much known for politicking during his MWC days, they obviously benefited from the vocal minority who asserted that the best of the non-BCS were every bit as good as the top BCS teams. Then, upon moving up, they had to reverse course, acknowledge some roster shortcomings and talk about a "three-to-five-year" plan to become competitive, all the while selling inside their locker room that they were capable of winning every game.

Patterson had a fast team that needed to get bigger. Whittingham had a big team that needed to get faster. Both also knew the biggest difference between BCS and non-BCS teams was depth.

"It was very apparent when we started playing teams like USC and Arizona State. We just weren't as fast as those guys on the outside. It was really glaring."

"We knew as a coaching staff there was going to be a transition period," Whittingham said. "We had to add depth to our roster and we had to add speed. We felt good up front. We matched up at the line of scrimmage right when we got into the league. That wasn't the issue. It was the perimeter where we were really behind. We knew we were deficient, but we were more deficient than we thought. It was very apparent when we started playing teams like USC and Arizona State. We just weren't as fast as those guys on the outside. It was really glaring."

Said Patterson, "We had to get bigger. That was probably the biggest difference going into the Big 12 -- up front. We played some good skill teams in the Mountain West Conference and the WAC. To us, the change is we had to get bigger up front, especially offensive line-wise."

Both said the positive impact of moving up was immediately felt in recruiting. For both teams, their highest recruiting ranking as MWC members occurred in their final year before promotion when recruits knew they'd be playing in a BCS conference.

The recruiting impact for TCU, the smallest school in the Big 12, is almost certainly bigger because it's now a legitimate force in talent-rich Texas, a benefit Utah doesn't have in a less populous state.

"I had kids tell me, 'Coach, I love your place but I want to play in the Big 12,' when we weren't in the Big 12," Patterson said. "We're in a lot more homes now because we are playing in the conference. Also winning in the conference."

Patterson also made a schematic change before the 2014 season that rated as seismic for those who know him well. It was amusing at conference meetings in Phoenix this summer to hear several Pac-12 coaches known for the up-tempo spread offenses gently teasing the defensive-minded Patterson about his adoption of a similar scheme with co-coordinators Doug Meacham and Sonny Cumbie. The Horned Frogs scored three more touchdowns per game -- 46.5 points versus to 25.1 -- in 2014 compared to the previous season.

TCU Offense, Last 2 Seasons 2013 2014 PPG 25.1 46.5<< Efficiency rank 101st 15th Plays PG 68.5 79.9 No-huddle pct 27% 77% >>School record

"That was a big key," Patterson said. "For me, that was a big change."

Moving up isn't all hugs and high-fives. For one, increased media scrutiny is -- literally -- a good news/bad news deal. Moreover, everything is more expensive, including non-revenue sports. The facilities arms race that starts in football extends through an entire athletic department, with demanding coaches wanting their slice of the pie.

Whittingham, a measured, meticulous guy, admits that many elements of the transition took him by surprise.

"It's everything," he said. "When we entered the Pac-12, it's like I got a new job. That's how different it was and is. The bar was raised in every single area."

As the only two non-BCS teams to move up, TCU and Utah are bound together. Not only that, their promotions were facilitated in large part by Texas, the biggest fish in the expansion pond in 2010-11. Utah is in the Pac-12 because Texas backed away from being part of a Pac-16 plan put together by then-Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott. TCU is in the Big 12 because Texas, after some politicking from Del Conte, gave the Horned Frogs its requisite stamp of approval.

Hill and TCU AD Chris Del Conte both said they feel for the MWC and non-BCS teams they left behind.

"It's a scary time if you're not in a Big 5 conference," Hill said. "People are nervous. The gap is wide. I tell people we jumped the Grand Canyon going from one to the other."

Yet when Del Conte is asked about folks lobbying him after rumors circulated this summer of potential Big 12 expansion, he offers peremptorily, "We're not in any hurry to expand."

That said, there is still some non-BCS scrappiness there.

Whittingham's Utes went unbeaten in 2008 and Patterson's Horned Frogs did the same in 2010. When asked how those two MWC teams would do against last year's Power 5 teams, neither gives a decisive answer.

But both seemed to hedge toward scrappy.