The funniest thing about that is that he uses the SOS argument to artificially prop up the Pac10, but it would hurt the Badgers, so I imagine he's very conflicted there.
Aside from that, SOS is a link in the chain, it is never...evvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvver a statistic that should be used on its face. Buckeye has a huge flaw with how he uses SOS, and I'm not doing this just to rip buckeye, I know I've hinted at this a couple times. But, his logic is really, really bad on strength of schedule.
For starters, it makes no sense to add up the SOSs of all the teams in a conference and then average it and boom...that's the toughest conference. This makes sense on no level.
The main reason is that conferences level out because you're constantly playing each other. For instance, of the 11 Big Ten teams, 6 of them will likely have 6 wins or more. Maybe 7 if Indiana beats Purdue. The SEC will have something like 78. The Pac 10 will have 6. The point of bringing this up is that teams 5 through 7 in the Big Ten, Purdue, Indiana, Iowa wouldn't get 6 wins if they were to replace a team in the SEC. Conference play allows teams to generally slip into an arc of Conference wins.
From there, you have to look at the depth of these Conferences. If a Conference is deep, there is less of a chance that the teams at the top run the table or finish with 1 loss. The Big Ten is going to finish with an undefeated team and 2 teams with 1 loss. The Pac10 will be similar. The SEC won't. This is not because of SOS or anything like that, it has to do with conference depth...BUT...this factors in to SOS and the Pac10 and Big Ten teams have their SOS artificially propped up.
I also think buckeye might be using one of those preseason SOSs, but there's so many out there, I really can't make that claim 100%, but it is my hunch. Those are even sillier because they are predicated on myth.
Strength of Schedule needs a huge tweak if it is to be used as a stand alone statistic. I'm not sure if I would be opposed to turning the current SOS analysis (opponents win% and opponentsopponents win%) into a state called schedule assessment, and use it in the BCS formula as normal, but then creating another statistic, SOS, that would add a team's position in the BCS into the equation somehow, then churn out the BCS once again. I don't know if that is the FIX, I haven't seen it in action, but it would make more sense in theory.
But, then again, SOS doesn't need to be fixed, since most people don't take it for more than what it is anyway. Buckeye clearly does, to his disadvantage.
NonConference SOS is a stat to consider, though. Any SOS including conference games is just silly, though. Just take nonconference SOS and then look at the actual strength of the conference and you'll be better off. The SEC teams will have weaker nonconference schedules, so, you balance that with how the conference is in a given season.
