Panda,
I watched both the games discussed. I think sometimes the "better team" can lose a game head to head. If for instance Alabama lost to Auburn in football the "better team" lost. In the same way, TN was better than UCLA and would win that game 9/10 times, it just so happened that Crompton had one of the worst QB performances I have ever witnessed.
The Florida team that I have been watching looks really strong. They did not beat MSU because MSU had its best players foul out, they did not win because MSU had a freakishly bad game from 3 (like NC State against NW) or because Florida had a freakishly good game from 3 (a great equalizer that sometimes sends "worse" teams past their betters in the tournament until the heat cools).
Did you watch the Illinois Clemson game? Clemson and NC State honestly looked horribly coached to me. It is unreal how flat they were in the 2nd half giving away a gigantic lead (20 plus points), turning the ball over without defensive pressure causing it etc. It was just really hard to watch.
If I argued that the SEC was the equal to the Big East, I would be deservedly laughed at. If and when the SEC is widely accepted as better than the Big 10 after some more OOC victories (I posted about all of those opportunities) then people will say I guessed...oh well. If Miss. State gets Sidney and is a top 15 team by March, people will say that the Big Ten was better than the SEC back in December, but that things changed by March.
I do not see any credible arguments that the Big 10 is significantly better than the SEC. Both conferences have teams that are painfully bad (Iowa, Arkansas) both conferences have teams that could get to the Final 4 (UK, UT, UF, MSU, Purdue)...which conference is better depends on teams 5-9 and how they do.