MIRAMAR BEACH, Fla. -- The Southeastern Conference (SEC) is steadfast in its position regarding the future College Football Playoff (CFP) format, yet it remains unclear about its specific direction. While the other nine conferences across the nation are leaning towards one of two proposed formats, the SEC is currently in a state of indecision following its annual spring meetings. This status effectively positions the SEC as a pivotal authority in shaping the future of college football.
Sources describe the three days of intense debate among coaches and administrators at the Sandestin Hilton as at times contentious. During these sessions, SEC officials disseminated a seven-page document to a select group of reporters on Thursday afternoon. This document, which featured extensive data underlining the SEC's depth and strength, emphasized the necessity of prioritizing strength of schedule in the new CFP selection process.
Titled A REGULAR SEASON GAUNTLET, the document underscored a crucial message: the SEC believes it deserves greater consideration and acknowledgment from the CFP selection committee. The document also suggested that the committee should incorporate additional data points that have historically favored the SEC’s strength of record and schedules over the past decade. SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey articulated this during a 47-minute press conference focused primarily on the future of the CFP, stating, "We need better clarity on the criteria that informs those decisions.”
Decisions regarding the CFP are ultimately made by a 13-person panel composed of athletic directors, former coaches, and a media representative. While this panel utilizes data to inform their decisions, the criteria employed remains vague, particularly for the public. Notably, the CFP has not factored in strength of record in its decision-making since the inception of the playoff 11 years ago.
In the inaugural 12-team playoff, three SEC teams participated, yet none advanced to the national championship game for the second consecutive year. This marked a significant moment, as the last time such an occurrence transpired was two decades ago during the Bowl Championship Series era. The dissatisfaction within the SEC was palpable, especially regarding the absence of three three-loss teams (Alabama, Ole Miss, and South Carolina) in the playoff discussions.
The SEC's handout revealed that the conference ranked No. 1 in five metrics over the last decade. Four of these metrics, managed by media partner ESPN, included strength of schedule, strength of record, the SP+ predictive model, and the Football Power Index (FPI). Sankey questioned how a 9-3 SEC team would be evaluated against other teams with fewer losses, emphasizing the unique rigor of the SEC schedule. "How is that best respected in this national evaluation system?" he asked.
Interestingly, the SEC's position on the CFP format took an unexpected shift on Wednesday. Coaches emerged from meetings expressing a strong preference for a 5+11 model within a 16-team format. This model, which also has backing from the ACC, Big 12, and Group of 6 conferences, would allocate five automatic spots for the highest-ranked conference champions and grant 11 at-large berths based on committee rankings.
In contrast, the Big Ten favors a 4+4+2+2+1 model, providing four automatic qualifiers for itself and the SEC, two for the ACC and Big 12, and one for the highest-ranked Group of 6 champion. As discussions evolved, many SEC athletic directors aligned with the Big Ten's preferences, but the momentum for the 5+11 model grew following the coaches' feedback.
The SEC's proposal to adjust selection criteria in the CFP is contingent upon the influence of the committee in a 5+11 format. As with any major conference, the SEC seeks increased representation and clarity on the data utilized by the committee. "I do think there's a need for change," Sankey asserted, highlighting the need for transparency regarding past decisions.
Last year, the 10 FBS conferences and Notre Dame reached a memorandum of understanding granting voting control of the CFP format to the Big Ten and SEC. If these two entities choose to collaborate on automatic qualifiers, they can push their preferences through the voting process, provided they engage in good-faith negotiations with other leagues. The deadline for CFP executives to finalize decisions is December 1, which complicates the SEC's ongoing discussions about expanding its schedule from eight to nine games.
As athletic directors aim to reach a decision before the upcoming football season, there is pressure to finalize the CFP format. Expanding to nine games alongside a 5+11 CFP format could enhance the SEC's visibility and profitability, particularly with the prospect of additional playoff play-in games during championship weekend in December.
With the ACC and Big 12 expressing dissatisfaction regarding CFP governance, the upcoming meeting on June 18 will be crucial. SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey emphasized the importance of collaboration within and outside the conference while acknowledging the uncertain future of the CFP format. As the college football landscape evolves, all eyes will be on the SEC to see if it can navigate these complex discussions effectively.
