Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I think that problem is at least partially solved by having it as point differential among the tied teams only.  Against Rutgers the Buckeyes are likely to have a bigger win just due to style.  However, against a relative equal such as MSU, M, or PSU this is much less of an issue.  

A win counts the same whether it is by 1 point or 35 points.  1 win = 1 win.   1 loss = 1 loss.  Point difference does not matter. 
 I know you have to break the tie somehow but its better not to include point difference.   Michigan the last 2 years is a great example why.  Blowing out teams in mid-season wins then losing close games at the end of the season.  Mich dominated in point differential but not in wins and losses.

I dunno, I'm starting to warm to the idea of point differential, and I get that "playing style" can change things, but if Penn State beat's Michigan 42-10 this weekend vs beating them 13-10, I think most people would agree the 42-10 win was more impressive, more dominant etc.

ultimately if you are using a tiebreaker you lost to somebody, so you got no one to blame but yourself, ala Ohio State 2 of the last 3 years.

When we played Tresselball and beat teams by 3 points I'd still be fine with using a point differential in the formula at some point, maybe not as the first tiebreaker.

I think the part of your statement that I bolded is key.  I am not, and I don't think anybody is advocating the use of point differential in place of winning percentage or even as an early tiebreaker.  What we are discussing here is the fourth or fifth tiebreaker in a multi-team tie.  
The current system to break a multi-team tie is:

• H2H...2H.  
• Divisional Record.  
• Record against the next highest placed team(s) in the division in order of finish.  
• Record among all common conference opponents.  
• Best cumulative winning percentage of B1G-W opponents.  
• Record against the highest placing B1G-W team, then the next highest, etc.  
• Overall winning percentage.  
• Random Draw.  

Personally, I am strongly opposed to the use of #7 simply because it rewards teams for playing an easy schedule and punishes teams for playing a tough schedule.  Ie, at present it appears that Oklahoma is the best team that any B1G team played OOC.  Ohio State lost that game.  IMHO, no team should ever be deprived of a B1GCG spot based on playing a challenging OOC.  

I am mildly opposed to #3 and #6 because they effectively reward bad losses.  I get the idea.  The idea is to reward good wins and that is fine but in a tie situation everyone has losses.  Thus this effectively rewards bad losses because a team with a good win still has to have lost to someone.  

I'm not thrilled with #5 because I think that it would be a great tiebreaker in some situations and a terrible one in other situations.