Explaining the College Football Playoff’s new strength of schedule metric — and the SEC’s campaign behind it

The College Football Playoff announced that it will use an “enhanced” tool to further emphasize strength of schedule in its selection process, starting in 2025.

The new metric — titled record strength — will give further credit to how a team performs against its schedule. It will give extra credit for beating quality teams, while lessening the penalty for losses against tougher opponents. To the contrary, it will give less credit for beating lesser teams. Additionally, the existing strength of schedule metric has been adjusted to further err towards playing higher-level foes. 

“All of these modifications will help the selection committee as they rank the top 25 teams,” CFP executive director Rich Clark said in a statement. “We feel these changes will help construct a postseason bracket that recognizes the best performances and teams on the field during the regular season, and I want to thank our veteran selection committee members and data analytics groups for helping implement these changes.” 

The CFP created a data analytics panel to evaluate ranking metrics at the behest of the CFP Management Committee, which runs the playoff. Ultimately, they came back with this revamped analytic system.

Additionally, the CFP has adjusted its recusal rules to allow more discussion on teams. Members historically have been fully recused from any discussions involving teams from which any family member receives compensation. Now, there will be two levels of recusal — full recusal or partial recusal. When a committee member is partially recused, they will be able to be in the room for discussion of said teams, but will not be able to vote. 

Pressure from above

The SEC has been loud about its desire to adjust the criteria of the CFP after 9-3 Alabama was left out of the field for 11-2 SMU last season. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has spoken on multiple occasions about the desire to further emphasize strength of schedule, a move that he believes would help his conference. 

However, the link between enhanced strength of schedule metrics and changing results is somewhat specious. Alabama was already a three-loss team with losses to Vanderbilt and Oklahoma that finished ranked ahead of two-loss Big 12 champ Arizona State. Georgia and Texas both finished 11-2, but still ranked ahead of one-loss Notre Dame, Indiana and Boise State. Two of the three SEC teams in the CFP failed to win a game last season. 

Strength of schedule is very much already baked into the rankings. SEC teams with strong schedules are essentially given a mulligan that even Big Ten teams don’t get. 

However, for the second year in a row, the SEC was locked out of the national championship game. Instead, it featured the Big Ten’s Ohio State against FBS Independent Notre Dame. Before 2023, the SEC had won 13 of the past 17 championships. When the league fails to deliver the ultimate prize, their focus will shift back to the system, especially as Sankey tries to keep a league with lots of powerful stakeholders happy. 

Changing criteria

Back in 2022, I was given the opportunity to take part in the CFP mock selection committee with other media members. The experience helped show the different ways that the visualization and data tools can influence how teams are seen in the room. 

Historically, there are 12 factors (that historically correlate to winning) put up on the board that committee members use compare multiple teams. There’s also a gradient that shows the relative power of schedules based on a simple opponent rating given by SportsSource Analytics. Frankly, I felt the visualizations gave plenty of credit to strength and schedule and opponent strength in the past. 

There’s history of tweaking or adjusting the metrics involved to fit a specific preference. For example, a special teams metric was added to the mix at the behest of legendary Nebraska coach Tom Osborne. 

The record strength is just the latest.