The issue isn't CFB Playoff Committee, Issue was the SEC scheduling

[deatojl]

Agree but the SEC Scheduling was NOT fair this year.

Compare Georgia or Oklahoma's schedule against Texas's schedule.

Texas got exactly what they wanted, the lightest SEC schedule they could be given in year 1. Now, they can say things like "we don't set the schedule" and "all we can do is play they teams we are scheduled to play". Our schedule was one of the lighter SEC schedules this year, as well, even though I would say at Georgia and Bama at home is quite a bit tougher than Georgia at home and at A&M. The SEC scheduling issue is nothing new, though. There have been disparities for years. Prior to this year, how long has it been since Georgia actually had to play a tough conference schedule? Also, next year will be more of the same since the conference decided to keep the same conference schedule for everyone and simply flip the home/away.

 

[knoxvol52]

We played one of the weaker schedules, yes. That is why I am not whining about our CFP ranking.

One key item is that we did get Georgia on the road versus at home. We also had to play in Norman versus getting OU in Dallas. So if you factor home/away, Tennessee's schedule was harder.

The OU/Texas matchup is always a neutral Field. Oklahoma's home field advantage isn't much this season. Years past maybe.

 

[volbound1700]

The OU/Texas matchup is always a neutral Field. Oklahoma's home field advantage isn't much this season. Years past maybe.

I get that but I would say Tennessee playing at Norman was still tougher than Texas playing OU in Dallas. Florida and Georgia have the same arrangement.

Now I could definitely make the argument that 2025 Texas' schedule is tougher than 2025 Tennessee's schedule due to home/away setup. Texas has to go to Georgia and Florida.

 

[GoodTimeVol]

Until other conferences can match the SEC in terms of SOS this will always be problem, do away with auto bids for conference champions and go by rankings imo

 

[LegionnaireOfTheMiserable]

You do realize Tennessee and Texas have 7 common opponents on this year's SEC schedule? The only difference is Tennessee played Alabama at Home and Won and Texas plays at Texas A&M next week.

So with 7 common opponents are you saying Tennessee's SEC schedule was soft as well?

It was soft this year.

Texas’s schedule looks “bad” because they haven’t played A&M yet, and both Michigan and OU failed to meet expectations. We benefited from the OU failure ourselves, so all this “they ain’t played nobody!” talk just sounds foolish when the only real difference is the only two decent teams we play are done with, and they have one left to go.

 

[LegionnaireOfTheMiserable]

We played one of the weaker schedules, yes. That is why I am not whining about our CFP ranking.

One key item is that we did get Georgia on the road versus at home. We also had to play in Norman versus getting OU in Dallas. So if you factor home/away, Tennessee's schedule was harder.

We got Bama at home, while they have to go to A&M. We got NC State at a neutral field, while they had to go to Michigan. So it really isn’t that different.

 

[volbound1700]

We got Bama at home, while they have to go to A&M. We got NC State at a neutral field, while they had to go to Michigan. So it really isn’t that different.

A&M is not on par with Alabama or Georgia. A&M had the advantage of dodging both (as well as Ole Miss and Tennessee).

Texas A&M's schedule is questionable as well. We will see if they are truly a good team against Texas but IMO, they are a level behind Alabama. This is why they are not in the top 10 as a 2-loss team.

 

[knoxvol52]

This topic is as long as it is broad, can be spun a hundred different ways.

 

[LegionnaireOfTheMiserable]

A&M is not on par with Alabama or Georgia. A&M had the advantage of dodging both (as well as Ole Miss and Tennessee).

Texas A&M's schedule is questionable as well. We will see if they are truly a good team against Texas but IMO, they are a level behind Alabama. This is why they are not in the top 10 as a 2-loss team.

Texas and A&M are playing for the first time in over a decade with a berth in the SEC Championship at stake potentially, and it’s at Kyle Field. That place will be a madhouse.

 

[volfan102455]

Having teams like Texas have an SEC schedule with 0 top 25 wins is a great example.

Why load up Oklahoma with a gauntlet but give SEC a patty cake schedule? Could they have had Kentucky play OU and LSU play Texas instead? What about switch Ole Miss and Miss State (would have also helped Ole Miss SOS)?

The SEC Scheduling was just not balanced. This is on Sankey and the Conference scheduling.

Georgia should be in Atlanta. They played Alabama, Ole Miss, Texas, and Tennessee. Only 2-loss team to play a gauntlet like that.

I also think OOC scheduling should matter. Call me insane, but I am a fan of docking SEC teams for losing bad OOC games or scheduling weak OOC schedules.

Georgia played both Clemson and will play Georgia Tech. 2 G5 teams. Only Florida played a tougher OOC schedule. I was a fan of counting the Southern Cal loss against LSU when it came to SEC tie breakers because that was a garbage loss by LSU. Discovered LSU wasn't really a contender anyways so no argument.

Notre Dame also needs to be left out until they join a Conference and play a REAL schedule. Push them to join the B1G.

It is easy to judge the schedule when the season is almost over. What if some of those teams had been better - then the difficulty changes.

 

[volbound1700]

It is easy to judge the schedule when the season is almost over. What if some of those teams had been better - then the difficulty changes.

Even judging it preseason, it looked weak. UK and Vandy being "better" isn't as good as some of the Tennessee Derek Dooley teams, let's be honest. Billy Napier's Florida teams are competitive or better than UK and Vandy in a good year.

Certain teams in the SEC are just stronger programs than other teams year-in and year out. Texas had an easier schedule even when you looked at it in the preseason. Sure, no one projected Michigan or Oklahoma to totally fall off but the OU vs Texas schedule discussion was there and played out accurately.

 

[VolPack22]

This is why they need to switch to a 9 game conference schedule. Expansion made it very difficult to have balanced schedules with an 8 game schedule. 3 permanent rival games and alternate the 6 other games annually or biannually. You would guarantee playing every team in the conference home and away within a 4 year period. It’s really not that difficult.

The problem is, we are seeing the selection committee show as long as you go undefeated or 1 loss vs a cakewalk schedule they will reward you. There is no incentive for the SEC to increase the amount of conference games whenever that means you will likely be adding more losses and less teams in contention for the CFP. The SEC wants as many teams in as possible and the easiest path for that is the 8 game schedule.

 

[fossilfiction]

Sure, teams like Auburn or Florida are generally good. The SEC has 6 programs that compete for National Titles: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, LSU, and Tennessee. Oklahoma had 4 of those programs on the schedule. SEC also knew that Ole Miss was up and coming.

Do we though? It's been a long time since Tennessee played in a championship or even SEC championship and never have we been able to go to the playoffs.
I know expectations are wildly high, but have not really competing for anything deep into November in a long time.

 

[VolPack22]

It is easy to judge the schedule when the season is almost over. What if some of those teams had been better - then the difficulty changes.

Everyone thought Texas had the easiest SEC schedule whenever it was released. No Alabama, no Tennessee, no Ole Miss. Most people expected Oklahoma to be an average team this year but they have woefully underperformed. A&M has overachieved but their schedule wasn’t as difficult also with LSU underperforming. Give anyone in the country Alabama and Georgia every year and let’s see what their record looks like. Auburn is the only team that feels our pain on an annual basis.

 

[volfan102455]

This is why they need to switch to a 9 game conference schedule. Expansion made it very difficult to have balanced schedules with an 8 game schedule. 3 permanent rival games and alternate the 6 other games annually or biannually. You would guarantee playing every team in the conference home and away within a 4 year period. It’s really not that difficult.

The problem is, we are seeing the selection committee show as long as you go undefeated or 1 loss vs a cakewalk schedule they will reward you. There is no incentive for the SEC to increase the amount of conference games whenever that means you will likely be adding more losses and less teams in contention for the CFP. The SEC wants as many teams in as possible and the easiest path for that is the 8 game schedule.

The problem is why I could see the SEC go to less games to ensure more teams have better records at the end of the year. Or the SEC goes back to the divisions and balances the strength in those divisions.

The translation for now is that you have 2 losses - and it doesn't matter who those are too - you have more losses than the other team so they must be better. If this continues to hold, schedules will change to allow better records.

In comparison if you look at how say baseball and softball panned out - that was full of SEC schools because folks realized the SEC teams were beating each other and teams were rewarded for the strength of their schedule.

 

[ftsandersvol]

I think the NCAA was angling for more controversy, not less, when they went the 12 team route.

The whole process is now just one big joke.

 

[VolPack22]

The problem is why I could see the SEC go to less games to ensure more teams have better records at the end of the year. Or the SEC goes back to the divisions and balances the strength in those divisions.

The translation for now is that you have 2 losses - and it doesn't matter who those are too - you have more losses than the other team so they must be better. If this continues to hold, schedules will change to allow better records.

In comparison if you look at how say baseball and softball panned out - that was full of SEC schools because folks realized the SEC teams were beating each other and teams were rewarded for the strength of their schedule.

SEC Baseball is stronger than even SEC football if you look at the number of teams that legitimately can win a national championship. The sports aren’t the same so you can’t really compare them imo.

Also, I think representation matters on the selection committee. Practically zero SEC representation and we know how the rest of the country feels about the SEC. It was different whenever you couldn’t deny teams like Alabama and Georgia whenever they were clearly the best team in the country but if you add a loss or two they just point to the record and say “you are what your record says you are”. I’ve spoken to a lot of my friends about this and most are in agreement that we need to go back to the initial BCS system with this expanded playoff and take all the human biases out of the equation. It’s harder to get mad at computers for selecting the teams whenever they are utilizing actual data instead of “well we just think X team is better than Z team.”

 

[adam.vol]

You do realize Tennessee and Texas have 7 common opponents on this year's SEC schedule? The only difference is Tennessee played Alabama at Home and Won and Texas plays at Texas A&M next week.

So with 7 common opponents are you saying Tennessee's SEC schedule was soft as well?

I think a lot of the “soft” opponents has more to do with their difficult schedules. Oklahoma got beat up terribly and without early injuries, would have been very comparable to South Carolina with a stout defense and gritty offense.

Something I think needs to be reconsidered is early wins and losses. We played Oklahoma when we were more banged up and they lost some guys because of that game. That was a great win but they were not the same team afterwards. We beat Florida when they had their first string QB for the game. Same for NC State. Arkansas also lost their QB for a few games.

You have to be a non-interested bystander or a TN hater to not consider that our defense crippled the opposition and they were not as good afterwards.

 

[knoxvol52]

I think a lot of the “soft” opponents has more to do with their difficult schedules. Oklahoma got beat up terribly and without early injuries, would have been very comparable to South Carolina with a stout defense and gritty offense.

Something I think needs to be reconsidered is early wins and losses. We played Oklahoma when we were more banged up and they lost some guys because of that game. That was a great win but they were not the same team afterwards. We beat Florida when they had their first string QB for the game. Same for NC State. Arkansas also lost their QB for a few games.

You have to be a non-interested bystander or a TN hater to not consider that our defense crippled the opposition and they were not as good afterwards.

So I'm a hater now Tennessee is the only team I give 2 ***** about in the SEC. I'm far from being the flag waiver some of you are.

 

[volbound1700]

Do we though? It's been a long time since Tennessee played in a championship or even SEC championship and never have we been able to go to the playoffs.
I know expectations are wildly high, but have not really competing for anything deep into November in a long time.

We recruit to compete at that level, we just haven't had the coaching until lately.

 

[adam.vol]

So I'm a hater now Tennessee is the only team I give 2 ***** about in the SEC. I'm far from being the flag waiver some of you are.

In the SEC? So that’s as far as your loyalty goes..

 

[knoxvol52]

In the SEC? So that’s as far as your loyalty goes..

Tennessee is only team I care about in the SEC correct, the rest can kick rocks. I understand that younger individuals were raised in the my conference is better than your conference crap that was started by a Network that most individuals on this site hates. ESPN

 

[Sarms58]

Even then, schedules would be uneven.

LSU scheduled USC as one of their OOC games. It looked like a great match up on paper. But now USC is 5-5 and will be lucky to make a bowl game.

Conversely, MS State scheduled AZ State, who most people thought would be terrible after a 3-9 season a year ago. Now AZ State is ranked 21st and has an outside shot at winning the Big 12 and making it into the CFP (and getting a BYE).

So you're likely going to have variation no matter what. It's not a perfect system and someone is always gonna feel like it's unfair for their team.

Yea, even the NFL has some variation in schedule difficulty but generally less than college. The biggest factor is that there are only 32 teams in the NFL where there are over 130 division 1 teams. As college football evolves I think we might see a super league develop just for football where 40-60 teams compete. Still have some schedule imbalance but less than now…of course people would have to learn to accept 8-4/9-3 as a really good year Since there would be few weak teams.