scott91575;1867712; said:
Exactly.
Pac 10 was 2-2, Big Ten was 3-5. Big Ten not only had 4 more bowl teams, but always plays a much tougher bowl schedule. Pac 10 was 2-5 last year and the Big Ten was 4-3.
Add in the fact one of their BCS teams just lost their head coach.
Exactly.
Pac 10:
Oregon L to Auburn
Stanford W over Virginia Tech
Washington W over Nebraska
Arizona L to Ok State
Stanford was heavily favored over VT, and Oregon and Auburn was a toss-up. Washington already got crushed early by Nebraska, but they came into the game flat and dejected.
Big Ten:
Wisconsin L to TCU
Ohio State W over Arkansas
Michigan L to Miss State
MSU L to Alabama
Illinois W over Baylor
Iowa W over Missouri
NW L to Texas Tech
The ONLY big ten team favored to win by Las Vegas bookkeepers was Ohio State. Only MSU and Ohio State were ranked higher than their opponents on the Big Ten side. Baylor, Missouri, Texas Tech, Alabama and Miss State were projected to win by double digits.
Iowa was struck by suspensions and without most of their key players and NW played without Dan Persa. It is clear that the Big Ten had significantly less favorable matchups than the Pac 10. How else can you justify unranked Iowa vs #12 Missouri or Unranked Michigan vs #21 Miss State? The Big Ten is much tougher than the Pac-12, which, besides Oregon, USC, and briefly Stanford just isn't that good. Conversely, in the Big Ten you have Ohio State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan State, Illinois, and, before RR, TSUN.