MIRAMAR, Fla. – The SEC isn’t wavering on its views regarding the College Football Playoff format’s future; it’s just uncertain about its direction. As nine other leagues across the nation lean towards certain proposed formats, the SEC finds itself in a state of indecision following its recent spring meetings, establishing it as a pivotal influence in the sport’s future.

Sources describe several days of heated debates among coaches and administrators at Sandestin Hilton. During the meetings, SEC officials shared a comprehensive seven-page document with reporters. This document emphasized the SEC’s strength and depth, aiming to centre attention on strength of schedule during the new CFP selection process. The report, titled A REGULAR SEASON GAUNTLET, stressed that the SEC deserves increased recognition and the consideration of additional metrics that reflect its strength over the last decade.

According to SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey, “We need better clarity on the criteria that informs selection decisions.”

Ultimately, these decisions are made by a 13-member panel composed of athletic directors and former coaches, relying on various data inputs that guide their decisions, yet such factors remain quite unclear, especially publicly. Interestingly, strength of schedule hasn’t been taken into account in their decision-making since the CFP’s inception over a decade ago.

In the early days of the playoff, three SEC teams participated, yet none of them made it to the championship game, marking the second consecutive time this has happened. The absence of three three-loss teams (Alabama, Ole Miss, and South Carolina) frustrated some in the SEC. The SEC’s report highlighted that the conference ranked first in five metrics over the last ten years—including strength of schedule and strength of record—along with ESPN’s SP+ model and Football Power Index.

Sankey also raised concerns regarding how a 9-3 SEC team would be compared to those with fewer losses, insisting on the unique rigor of the SEC schedule. He emphasized the need for it to be properly acknowledged within the national evaluation context.

In a surprising twist, during the meetings, it became apparent that coaches largely favour a 5+11 model as part of a 16-team format—a proposal supported by the ACC, Big 12, and Group of 6 conferences, which allocates five automatic spots for the top-ranked conference champions and awards eleven at-large berths computed by committee rankings.

Moreover, the discussions indicate that the Big Ten supports a 4+4+2+2+1 approach that would ensure its own conference and the SEC each receive four automatic qualifiers, while the ACC and Big 12 would secure two, with one guaranteed spot for the top Group of 6 champion alongside three at-large teams.

With SEC officials seeking more representation and clarity on committee data usages, Sankey stated, “I do think there’s a need for change. How do you explain certain decisions that have been made?”

As deadlines loom, including a key meeting on June 18 with FBS commissioners, the SEC’s future plays a crucial role in deciding how the College Football Playoff will evolve.