****

SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey's recent comments ahead of the SEC Spring Meetings have stirred debate about the criteria used for College Football Playoff selections, particularly regarding the weight given to the strength of schedule. Sankey, whose primary role is to advocate for the 16 schools in the Southeastern Conference (SEC), emphasized the importance of ensuring strong representation for the SEC in the playoff system.

A major point of discussion for the league is the evolution of the College Football Playoff, set to expand beyond the current 12-team format by 2025, though the exact size and selection criteria remain undecided. Ensuring that SEC teams are well-represented in this expanded field is a priority for Sankey.

Despite this strategic focus, Sankey's recent assertion that avoiding losses has overshadowed the actual strength of schedule in playoff selection has been met with skepticism. He highlighted that three SEC teams with three losses each—Alabama, Ole Miss, and South Carolina—were excluded from the playoff field in favor of teams like Indiana and SMU, which he suggested were less deserving.

Sankey's comments particularly referenced Alabama and Ole Miss, both of which defeated the University of Georgia but were still excluded. However, critics point out that he overlooked Alabama's losses to Vanderbilt and Oklahoma, teams with poor SEC records, and Ole Miss' subsequent defeat to Florida and an embarrassing home loss to Kentucky. South Carolina, despite a tough nonconference victory over Clemson, also failed to make the cut due to losses to Alabama and Ole Miss.

The debate intensifies around the fact that even with a strong emphasis on the strength of schedule, Alabama ranked higher than a two-loss Big 12 champion and a two-loss Miami team. This contradicts Sankey's claim, as strength of schedule has visibly influenced rankings and seeding decisions.

Moreover, the strength of schedule argument is evident in how teams like Tennessee and several two-loss teams were seeded, while an 11-1 Indiana team faced tougher matchups due to a weaker schedule. Such considerations were also behind the restructuring of automatic byes for conference champions.

Ultimately, Sankey and the SEC continue to argue that strength of schedule was disregarded, but evidence suggests otherwise. Alabama and Ole Miss were sidelined due to their losses to inferior SEC opponents, and South Carolina fell short when head-to-head results were considered. Sankey’s role is to champion the SEC, but accuracy in addressing such critical issues remains crucial.