There is a “major” discussion amongst college football sports media “experts” in the likes of ESPN, Fox Sports, and any other sports sites trying to offer their thoughts and explain the issue such as strength of schedule for college football at the FBS level. This highly contested, subjective topic all derives from the recent selection and seeding of the CFP 12-team playoff. Many of the college football fans, more specifically ESPN sports media personalities who cover college football at the FBS level, believed that the CFP selection committee did not select the best (7) at large teams for the inaugural 12-team CFP playoff. Their thoughts are the belief that the strength of schedule (SOS) should have a significant impact on the selection process for the remaining (7) at-large FBS team seeds. Moreover, the ESPN media corporation has financially back the SEC with a 12-year, $2.25 billion dollar investment that ended in 2023. There is a new agreement between ESPN and the SEC that started this year of 2024, at the rate of $3 Billion dollars over the course of 10 years. No wonder ESPN and their on air personalities both in radio and television, are promoting more SEC teams into the CFP playoffs. Vested interest, either financial or subjective has an evil way of rooting itself into areas that affect the hard-working innocent FBS programs who are trying to earn their way into the playoff field.
With billions of dollars at stake, in addition to what other bowl monies are available with the title of national championship; are there questions that need to be asked to assist in determining the right selection and seeding process. The first question that needs to be addressed consists of, are there data and variables being collected to evaluate for SOS significance? What’s the process in how to select the remaining (7) at-large FBS programs for the playoffs? How are we determining SOS? Does vested interests either by financial revenue, subjective assessment or other variables that are quantifiable, qualitative, empirical and possessing numerical value for assessment that all can comprehend. Every FBS program should have the fair and equal opportunity to compete for the right to be called national champion in college football at the FBS level.
To allow the college football audience and sports media members to understand how SOS can be determined, I will implement my data point collection that is historical, empirical, qualitative and quantitative research from 1996 to the present. The research data points, and variable are collected for ALL FBS programs, every season past and future, on a season-to-season basis. During my continuous and on-going data collection research for college football, I will use the example from the 2024 college football season to draw a better assimilation and correlation to the SOS topic and the CFP playoff. More specifically, using Southeastern Conference (SEC) program, the 2024 Tennessee Volunteers as the primary example. Since the SEC fan base and ESPN sports media personalities have this belief that ANY SEC team is more deserving than ANY OTHER FBS team.
FACT: The 2024 Tennessee Volunteers were (10-2), was seeded (9th) ninth by the CFP playoff committee. Tennessee’s two (2) losses on the road are to (6-6) Arkansas 19-14. Followed by Georgia 31-17. Furthermore, Tennessee also earned a win versus an FCS opponent Tennessee Chatanooga 69-3. FCS games are not quality wins or losses. FCS teams do not compete for the FBS title which indicates that any FCS data is not credible, valid or should be used for ranking assessment or SOS assessment. Furthermore, during the 2024 college football season, FBS teams were (115-6 at (.950)) versus FCS teams. With all FBS teams winning games versus FCS teams by an average of 35.8 points per game during the 2024 FBS season. In addition to FBS versus FCS data, the SEC data revealed that the SEC was (15-0) versus all FCS opponents winning by an average of 50.6 points per game. This variable alone can be determined that scheduling FCS programs possesses no validity in the SOS variable. This means all FBS games scheduled versus FCS teams should possess negative value against the FBS teams.
Below are statistical data points and charts to assist in how I as a college football researcher, promoter of an expanded college football playoff of 16-teams. Using my own research, data points and acumen to assist in selection and seeding for future college football playoffs, my own 16-team playoffs and ranking week to week based upon the professional model theory. All data and numerical variables can be used to assist in a better selection and seeding process.
Strength of Schedule (SOS) Assessment 1: The non-conference SOSA1 is determined by those scheduled games against FBS opponents from other conferences or independent programs. What needs to be clarified is that all non-conference opponents were and or are previously arranged with a minimum of (2) years in advance. With that being said, there is no significant proof that validates the credibility of any FBS team’s future success year to year. The review of data for the 2024 Tennessee Volunteers indicates that their non-conference schedule significantly lacked a strong SOS1 assessment. This indicates that the statistical data results for Tennessee lacks credibility within the SOS1. Determining a very weak non-conference SOS schedule. With the removing of all FCS data from the chart below, the 2024 Tennessee Volunteers SOSA1 would be shown as (8-24) with a Win-Loss Percentage rate as (.242). The (9-27) non-conference SOSA1 record for Tennessee ranks tied for 132 through 134 out of 134 FBS teams within this categorical variable. To draw a correlation within this variable, Tennessee is tied with (10-2) Louisiana Lafayette and (10-2) Memphis with a (.250) percentage rate. Furthermore, 91 out of 134 FBS programs earned a SOSA1 percentage rate credibility and validity of (.500) or greater. That indicates that 67.9% of the FBS teams during the 2024 FBS season, scheduled better non-conference opponents.
| 2024 Tennessee Non-Conference Schedule |
| North Carolina State ACC (6-6) |
| Kent State MAC (0-12) |
| Texas El Paso CUSA (3-9) |
| (9-27) = .250 Win Loss Percentage Rate |
Strength of Schedule (SOS) Assessment 2: The non-conference SOSA2 is determined by the FBS programs in which were scheduled, within their non-conference schedule results of win or loss. By tracking those FBS programs win-loss percentage rate within their non-conference schedule, provides another variable to determine credibility. This SOSA2 indicates the success or non-success of the non-conference results. The review of data for the 2024 Tennessee Volunteers indicates that the SOSA2 results is equivalent to their SOSA1 results. This indicates that the Tennessee non-conference schedule lacks credibility in any SOS validity. With removing all the FCS data from the chart below, the Tennessee Volunteers SOSA2 would be (2-7) with a win-loss percentage rate of (.222). The (3-9) non-conference SOSA2 record for Tennessee ranks tied for 131 through 133 within this categorical variable. To draw a correlation within this variable, Tennessee is tied with (11-1) Indiana and (10-2) Memphis. Furthermore, 103 out of 134 FBS programs earned a SOSA2 percentage rate credibility and validity of (.500) or greater. That indicates that 76.8% of the FBS programs scheduled better non-conference opponents.
| 2024 Tennessee Non-Conference Schedule |
| North Carolina State ACC (3-1) |
| Kent State MAC (0-4) |
| Texas El Paso CUSA (0-4) |
| (3-9) = .250 Win Loss Percentage Rate |
Strength of Schedule (SOS) Assessment 3: This strength of schedule assessment is determined by the overall schedule of the FBS program. The SOSA3 will also determine the true validity and credibility of the overall SOS of each FBS program and can be compared to the rest of the FBS program as a whole. The review of data for the 2024 Tennessee Volunteers indicates that the SOSA3 results are below (.500) win loss percentage rate. This data results also indicates that the overall SOS for Tennessee is significantly less than successful. If we remove all the FCS data from the Tennessee cumulative overall schedule, then the results would significantly indicate a very weak SOS with a (47-73) overall record. With Tennessee’s win loss percentage rate of (.392). The (59-73) SOSA3 overall record with FCS data for Tennessee, ranks 121 out of 134 FBS programs. Furthermore, 92 out of 134 FBS programs earned a SOSA3 percentage rate for credibility and validity of (.500) or greater. That indicates that 68.6% of the FBS programs possessed an overall record of credibility and validity.
| 2024 Tennessee Cumulative Schedule |
| North Carolina State ACC (6-6) | Kentucky SEC (4-8) |
| Kent State MAC (0-12) | Mississippi State SEC (2-10) |
| Oklahoma SEC (6-6) | Georgia SEC (10-2) |
| Arkansas SEC (6-6) | Texas El Paso CUSA (3-9) |
| Florida SEC (7-5) | Vanderbilt SEC (6-6) |
| Alabama SEC (9-3) | (59-73) = .447 Win Loss Percentage Rate |
Strength of Schedule (SOS) Assessment 4: This strength of schedule assessment pertains to the conference scheduled FBS games only. The SOSA4 will clearly validate the SOS within conference play. The one variable that we need to comprehend is that conference schedules are determine during spring meetings for the conference athletic directors. If I recall, the SEC possesses a formula for scheduling conference games with rotational basis on who to schedule. However, since the SEC went to one division for now, I am not clearly definitive how the scheduling format has been determined for future use. The SOSA4 will validate conference credibility and validity for assessment. The review of data from the 2024 Tennessee Volunteers determined that Tennessee possessed a weak conference strength of schedule. With a conference overall record of (24-40) with a win-loss percentage rate of (.375). This indicates that Tennesse’s conference schedule possessed very little credibility and validity. The (24-40) conference SOSA4 record for Tennessee ranks tied for 15th and 16th amongst all SEC programs. Tennessee was tied with (11-1, 7-1) Texas within this SOSA4 variable.
| 2024 Tennessee Conference Schedule |
| Oklahoma (2-6) | Kentucky (1-7) |
| Arkansas (3-5) | Mississippi State (0-8) |
| Florida (4-4) | Georgia (6-2) |
| Alabama (5-3) | Vanderbilt (3-5) |
| (24-40)= .375 win loss percentage rate |
With these types of data point evaluations, which are qualitative, quantitative, empirical and possessing numeric values; there is no reason why a selection committee are not using data points such as this. However, what the ESPN corporation and sports media personalities will espouse that the use of subjective assessment and rankings for the polls possess more credibility than these type of data points. What the ESPN sports personalities do not understand, is that there is no credibility within the subjective polls since they are opinion based with a vested interest outcome. Just as ESPN’s Rece Davis who subjectively ranks FBS programs in the AP poll.
To draw a final conclusion on this subject matter and topic, there are other ways to determine strength of schedule (SOS) outside of using subjective rankings or the “eye” test. As a 20-year researcher and publisher of college football data at the FBS level, there are other ways to select and seed for the CFP playoff. The ultimate objective is to know what data you are using to determine credibility versus the subjective “eye” tests and rankings.
If you possess any questions about my research, please leave a comment or reach out to me on Twitter/X @cfbpoexpert or BlueSky @cfbpoexpert.bsky.social
Remember to abide by APA/MLA format and citations when you wish to recite other’s ideas in which you claim as you own. Thinking its your idea is not simply your idea if you do not do the leg work in researching if the idea was already published.
Artificial Intelligence WAS NOT USED to establish this posting. Artificial Intelligence DOES NOT KNOW how to publish the right facts, evidence and truths. Data collection, review of numerical values from published websites and apps, in addition to my own research data was used to establish this posting.
© Copyright Protected and Intellectual Property Rights Reserved.