I am not too sure if I completely agree with your dismantling of the entire Big Ten. Of the five major conferences (excluding the Big East for ease of affiliation issues), the Big Ten has the best bowl record against the SEC (arguably recognized as the creme-de-la-creme of football conferences) since the 1999-2000 year. Here is the breakdown by conference and the according winning percentages:

ACC v. SEC .353 (6-11) (This includes BC, Miami & Va. Tech for ease)
Big 12 v. SEC .368 (7-12)
Pac-10 v. SEC .000 (0-0) (I find this odd that they have never played)
Big Ten v. SEC .480 (12-13)

Further, your big game argument does not really hold water either. Here is the national tital game breakdown:

ACC .250 (1-3)
Big Ten .333 (1-2)
Big 12 .400 (2-3)
Pac-10 .500 (1-1)
SEC 1.00 (3-0)

As you can see, with the exception of the SEC, the major conferences all fair similarly throughout the bowl season and the national title game.

If you were to cut the sample size to a smaller sample, say the last five years, it looks as though the Big Ten's numbers would actually increase as well. It is easy to say they are awful because they have been blown out in four major bowl games in the last two years; however, the numbers do not really illustrate a statistically significant difference.

To me, because I'm a fan, nothing matters but the National Title. I understand how all the conferences are making tons of money just for appearing in these bowls, but I really don't care. I want to see the two best teams in the nation play regardless of what conference they are in....period.

What I'm seeing from your stats is that the SEC is better than just about everyone else. I can live with that. The Big 10 vs. SEC overall records surprise me and I'll just have to say, "you got me" on that one. Very surprising

I think, in my opinion, the title game records match up with how I'd rank the conferences....SEC, Pac-10, Big 12, Big Ten, Big East. You are dead on there but I think there is a lot of space between the Pac-10 and anyone under them. I would love to see USC play LSU/Florida/Georgia just to see what would happen. It is amazing that these two conferences haven't played in a bowl game....

Look at how Illinois was dismantled in the Rose Bowl and how OSU has been dismantled in their last two bowl games. It hasn't even been close and that's just going by the score. If you look at depth charts, or the way the players play....these other teams are just too deep and too athletic. It's kind of like when Notre Dame played LSU last season, LSU just ran them out of the stadium. There is a difference between the top teams in the sec/pac-10 and the big ten just based on the type of football they play. These teams are running sophisticated offenses/defenses that big-10 teams seemingly don't/can't/won't.

Now, if OSU/Illinois/Michigan played Boston College or a team like that, things very well could have been different but they aren't. BC plays a different kind of game compared to LSU/USC/etc.

I'm just tired of the teams from the Big Ten being put in the BCS championship game because of the conference they are in, even though it's a mediocre conference, and they just can't compete.

I understand your position on this, but it seems it would be much better stated that you do not believe the Big Ten can compete with USC and LSU because they have much better talent (I will leave Florida out of the discussion since Michigan did beat them this year). I do not believe that Georgia, or the other SEC or Pac-10 schools really have an extremely unorthodox or sophisticated defensive or offensive scheme.

I think that it is better said that Florida last year, LSU this year and USC the last five years (the Big Ten is 4-9 against the Pac-10 from 1999-2000 to 2007-08 in bowl games, with 4 of the losses coming from USC) have been better (had better talent and preparation) than the best from the Big Ten. However, to over-generalize and say there is no way to compete with those conferences is the knee-jerk reaction.

Knee-jerk reaction....yep, that probably sums it up best. There is a way they can compete, they just aren't doing it now. It's all cyclical. Their talent allows them to do things that Big Ten teams can't/won't

Dont forget that there are very sophisticated offenses in the Big Ten. Purdue, Indiana, and Michigan State run very complex shotgun spreads that are as intricate as any of the other shotgun spreads you see. (The Shotspread being the prevailing "hot" scheme.) But these teams are not going to have the depth of talent that teams with better recruiting are going to have. They may have their Breeses, Burresses, and Hardies, but they can't get talent like LSU or USC because they can't recruit such deep areas and they have too much regional recruiting competition.

It aint about Xs and Os, its about Jimmies and Joes