The Big Ten is Better than the SEC
Both conferences are strong, but the Big Ten is better. Not stonger, but better. There is a difference. Looking at all these historic stats that are thrown at us, including bowl wins and head-to-head stats (mainly thrown at u by an SEC fan), one would see an SEC advantage.
But lets look at the comparisons a bit deeper. First of all, there's is no argument that the Big Ten has as many top-notch athletes in the NFL as the SEC. This simple fact negates any silly notion that the SEC is fast and the Big Ten is slow.
Second, while peaking at those head-to-head bowl matchups, consider where the games are played. The Big Ten has more than held its own in these games, many of which are played in the deep south in 70 degree weather.
How bout that Wisconsin-Tennessee game at the Big House in Ann-Arbour on Jan 1st instead of in Tampa Bay?
Third, the SEC has a decided advantage in their bowl matchups over the last decade. The media can ridicule the Big Ten and play kiss-kiss with the SEC all they want. But consider the conference tie-ins and what they mean.
As much as the media (Mark May) wants to loath the Big Ten, the proof is in the pudding. Purdue played Central Michigan, the MAC champ, in Michigan.
Penn State played Texas A&M in Texas, Michigan played Florida in Florida, Illinois played USC in California, and Ohio State played LSU in Louisiana.
I don't care how "strong" or "weak" you are, but that is a tough draw...not to mention that Michigan State (a 7-5 football team!) had to face a double-digit winner in Boston College down in Florida.
One last thing..the Big Ten had 8 first-team academic all-americans, the most of any conference. The Big-Ten graduates many more players,and though this doesn't show up in any win-loss records, it does help show who is the "better" conference.