Tatt Mareeco Gets Published

It's no secret that in recent years the Big Ten Conference has taken a few beatings in the Rose Bowl. Most notably, the outstanding 2007 Illini squad led by Juice Williams, Rashard Mendenhall, Arrelious Benn, Vontae Davis and J Leman, had their butts handed to them by Pete Carroll's USC Trojans. The only upside of that game was that I was able to attend and spent 8 hours tailgating before the game.

Granted, that's some pretty high upside.

Last January was no different as USC pounded an overmatched Penn St. team.

These losses - and others like them - led many members of the media to criticize the Big Ten for having less talent than other marquee conferences, including the Pac 10.

Not so fast says my trusted advisor Tatt Mareeco. Using his keen college football analytical skills honed over 30+ years of studying college football, including 4 years at the University of Michigan, Tatt discovered a common trend among the Big Ten's recent Rose Bowl losses.

He then told ESPN's Adam Rittenberg about it and Rittenberg put Tatt's question in a "Big Ten mailblog." The Q&A is below.

Tatt from NYC writes: Adam,You and others have said the Big Ten needs to win the Rose Bowl to regain its reputation. I've also seen talk that our problems stem from the fact tha we constantly get two teams in the BCS so all of our teams have to play up in competition. Really, I think our problems stem from USC getting screwed out of the championship game every year. Let someone else play them and the Big Ten can take on number two in the Pac 10. I think you'd see the Big Ten do just fine then. It's not like I see any SEC schools chomping at the bit to play the Trojans. Lord knows those guys will schedule anyone, where as Florida won't leave the state of Florida.

Adam Rittenberg: Good assessment, Matt. No team in the country wants to play USC in a meaningful game, and the Big Ten has seen the Trojans four times in the Rose Bowl this decade. I can't imagine the Big Ten's Rose Bowl losing streak would be what it is had the opponent been Oregon, Cal or Oregon State. Having only one BCS team would improve the league's overall bowl prospects, but the Big Ten wants its teams on the biggest stages with the biggest payouts. Two BCS victories after the 2005 season certainly helped, and the Big Ten could make a similar breakthrough this year, if the matchups fall right.

Very illuminating. No doubt Tatt is correct that Big Ten teams like '07 Illinois and '08 Penn State would have smoked the Cal, Oregon and Oregon States of the world. It's nice to see Rittenberg jump on board and agree with Tatty's expertise. It's also nice to see that the creampuff non-conference schedule Urban Meyer puts together every year at Florida is getting its proper ridicule.

I for one will look forward to additional insight from Tatt throughout the college football season.