playDavid HaleNov 10, 2026, 11:11 PM ETCloseCollege football reporter.Joined ESPN in 2012.Graduate of the University of Delaware.Multiple AuthorsOpen Extended ReactionsGreg Sankey says he hasn’t been working the refs, but it’s hard to ignore the constant buzz from SEC coaches and administrators about how important strength of schedule is, how deceptive win-loss records can be, how grueling the path through nine games of conference play is in the SEC.That, of course, is Sankey’s job. It’s up to the committee members to accept or ignore the SEC’s argument based on the merits. To this point, they’ve chosen the former.To be fair, Sankey has a compelling case. The SEC appears to be the strongest conference top to bottom, and metrics such as SP+ bear that out.
But it’s one thing to agree with the general idea that Texas might have it a bit harder than Texas Tech. It’s another to quantify exactly what that means.The committee believes Alabama is the No. 3 team in the country. It believes this mostly due to one metric: The Tide have the No. 1 strength of schedule in the country.And yet the AP voters have watched Alabama all year, too, and they have the Tide at No. 7. The coaches’ poll, presumably made up of voters who know exactly how much a tougher schedule drains a team, has Alabama seventh, too.Then there are the advanced metrics.
SP+, which looks to take luck-based outcomes out of the picture and focus on actual performance, has Alabama eighth. The Tide’s strength of record is fifth. Strength of record accounts for only the outcome, not how a team played in those games, so it’s also worth pointing out that Alabama is 30th in average in-game win expectancy.Yes, but the schedule strength! Won’t someone please think of the schedule strength!The thing is, SP+ and strength of record actually account for strength of schedule.
It’s built into the formula.But the committee doesn’t seem very interested in the recipe for other stats. Eleven of the 14 toughest schedules belong to SEC schools. That’s all the argument the committee needs to stump for the Tide, South Carolina or LSU.The Bayou Bengals are a prime example of the problem. LSU is 6-3 and ranked 21st.
It has the No. 19 strength of schedule. Its best win, though? Clemson, maybe? Or Louisiana Tech?
Ah, but the losses. Getting drubbed by Alabama is like losing a race to Usain Bolt. People are just impressed he took the time to lace up his shoes for you.And yet, it’s not even the quality losses that matter anymore. Georgia lost to Auburn.
Texas lost to Florida. Oregon lost to Illinois. South Carolina lost to Mississippi State. Who cares?
Georgia has wins over teams with really tough schedules! Texas, Oregon, South Carolina — schedule strength galore!The true genius of schedule strength is that it’s a machine fueled by hyperbole and repetition, and it exists in a locker room where teams can neither enter nor exit. It is a room populated with the name brands, the ones we all accepted a decade ago were good because they had the pedigree, and no matter how much Wake Forest, Texas Tech or Boise State bang on the door, they’ll never be let in.The SEC dominates the top 25 because its schools have played the toughest schedules. The schedules are the toughest because the SEC’s schools dominate the top 25.
Chicken, egg.Never mind that the ACC was 8-6 vs. the SEC last year. Never mind that the SEC hasn’t had a team play for a national championship in the past three years. Never mind that Texas A&M and Oklahoma were top-10 teams to open the season but turned out to be pretty bad. (Note: The same can be said for the Big Ten, where Penn State, Michigan and Washington still manage to prop up teams’ schedules long after being exposed as frauds.)But it’s also a concern as we look ahead to an era of 24 teams in the playoff because if doors to the party are open only to the teams with the toughest schedules, the bulk of the invitation can be sent out before the season kicks off.1. The ACCIs the ACC bad?
That’s like asking whether “Road House” was a bad movie. It misses the point. Its beauty is in all the ways it entertains us by upending traditional definitions of “good” or “talented” or “not being Stanford.” The ACC is like all great art in that it challenges us to think differently, to see beauty in the absurd, to consider a team whose mascot wears a top hat and rides a motorcycle as genuine playoff material.The committee, however, is not so enlightened. Where a truly curious mind can look at Duke and see a Heisman Trophy candidate in the backfield, a defense with the highest pressure rate in the Power 4 and a head coach who routinely grows one of the country’s finest beards just in time for the postseason, the folks on the selection committee see only a loss to Georgia Tech and a strength of schedule ranking worse than most Duke grads’ average score through 18 at Pinehurst.But if the committee refuses to look deeper at the ACC, then we’re happy to do its job instead.Explain how Miami, a clear-cut No. 1 in the country last week, can go on the road to South Bend without its best player, lose by a touchdown in a game that would’ve been tied if its tight end had held on to an apparent catch in the end zone for a half second more and tumble all the way to No. 7 in the rankings behind multiple two-loss SEC teams?
Somehow beating Miami was so impressive that Notre Dame was able to jump six spots, but losing to Notre Dame was so egregious that Miami fell seven places?Explain how Wake Forest — No. 10 in strength of record, No. 8 in average in-game win percentage, No. 11 in the AP poll and No. 12 in SP+ — still checks in at No. 13 in the committee’s estimation behind five two-loss teams from other conferences?Oh, perhaps Wake could improve its résumé this week against 7-2 SMU — if only the committee had bothered to rank the Mustangs. Instead, Kevin Jennings & Co. — No. 18 in SP+ with two losses by a total of 13 points — remain unranked, while seven three-loss teams are in the top 25. OK, sure, one of SMU’s losses was to Syracuse, but is that all it takes to write a team off? Because Oregon lost to Illinois.
South Carolina lost to Mississippi State. Oklahoma State lost to Tulsa.And SMU is one of just two power-conference schools with two losses or fewer that remain unranked. The other, of course, is also in the ACC. That’d be Duke.
The Blue Devils, by the way, beat that same Illinois team that defeated Oregon.Oh, while we’re on the subject of three-loss teams cracking the top 25 — how about Louisville? The Cardinals have three losses by a total of nine points — two of which came against ranked foes. Louisville’s SP+ is No. 14 — ahead of BYU, Iowa, Oregon, USC and a number of other supposed top-25 teams.So what? Lose to Syracuse or NC State or Georgia Tech and there’s no one to blame but yourself when the committee looks past the rest of your résumé.
We get it.The problem is on the other side of the ledger, though. If no ACC teams are ever considered good — despite solid records and strong performances — then there’s no way to ever build a résumé the committee will recognize. Wake Forest has one loss in a closely contested game against Miami. It has beaten its past five opponents by an average of 47 points.
And yet, there are only two outcomes possible Saturday: Either Wake Forest will beat SMU, earning a collective yawn from the committee, or it will lose to an unranked SMU and can be ignored completely the rest of the way.The ACC has seven teams at 6-3 or better — one fewer than the Big Ten and SEC, one more than the Big 12.The ACC has two schools ranked. The Big 12 has six. The Big Ten has six. The SEC has nine.As Patrick Swayze said in the cinematic masterpiece “Road House,” “Pain don’t hurt.” But, man, a bad strength of schedule sure does.2.
Texas Tech Red Raiders (8-1, No. 12)If the playoff started today, the first team out would be the Red Raiders. That will certainly change down the road — starting with Texas
Leave a Reply