Why not include the Ivy League in these stats?
Since so much thought and history has been brought in, why not point out that no teams have even come close to the Ivy league schools in the way of national titles?
Sure, nobody else was playing back then, but they had to beat somebody. The fact remains that the SEC has won far more bowls, but they also generally get more bowl games than any other conference.
I'll give you that one, but for the record, the SEC was not the best conference from top to bottom this year or last. They were indeed the best at the top and have been for quite some time. That's enough. I don't know why so many SEC fans insist that Vanderbilt can contend with the likes of Penn State or Iowa (for you Big Ten fans).
I'm torn b/c i'm a Gamecocks fan and a Michigan fan. Both of which suck right now. My SEC team MIGHT be on the rise and well old Blue is stinkin' it up. I'd venture to say that with Penn State beating LSU and Northwestern and Auburn going toe to toe that the conferences are pretty square until you get to the top.
I'd even go out on a limb and say the Big Ten was a deeper conference. OSU (won their bowl game), Penn State (won), Iowa (won) and Northwestern, arguably a terrible team won their game. Michigan State lost but then how many players couldn't make it. Okay, okay, that's a wash with the whole Texas Tech game, but still I'd argue that the Big Ten is slightly deeper, proving it's better than the SEC's third best team, but severely weaker at the top. No way do I believe OSU could beat Florida or Bama.
In any case, we can all agree that the ACC is terrible.