Is Pac-10 really that much weaker? I think Oregon is lurking somewhere just below the bottom of the BCS rankings, Arizona State is probably about to pass up Tennessee in the BCS, California is a distant but solid fourth place in the country, and of course there are the to-be national champions USC Trojans.
The SEC, in comparison, has only one more team in the top 25 than the Pac-10, even during the Pac-10's supposed "down year". I think Auburn should be in Oklahoma's number 2 spot, Georgia is still somewhere slightly ahead of the Vols (it's crap, I know), the Vols are middle of the pack, and LSU is a little on the lower end of the rankings, coming off last year's National Championship.
I know you are all thinking "What about Arizona/Washington?" Well, don't go off pointing out weak teams in the Pac. You know why? Kentucky, Mississippi, Vanderbilt and Mississippi State (Hell, even throw Florida in there if you'd like) are also very weak.
So, just to back up all this talk, let's look at some interconference statistics:
Assuming USC beats Notre Dame, and Florida beats Middle Tennessee State, the Pac-10 will be .643 in non-conference games, and SEC will be .714. That is a pretty damned small gap, given the Pac-10 has played 10 games against 8 ranked non-conference opponents, compared to the SEC's 4 non-conference games against ranked opponents. The Pac-10 has finished better than SEC recently even under similar conditions.
So if the SEC is the best conference in the land, then you can say that the Pac-10 is right there with them.