What’s that unusual scent in the air? It feels peculiar, almost as if I detect a hint of anti-SEC bias.

The College Football Playoff (CFP) selection committee doesn’t seem too impressed with the conference that claims, “it just means more.”

Recently, the committee delivered a shocking blow to the SEC as it released its latest rankings.

This marks the end of the CFP’s long-standing favoritism towards the SEC.

Throughout the playoff’s existence, the SEC has generally been favored more than any other conference, which was often justifiable given the high level of football played in the SEC.

This season saw increased competition within the SEC, with Georgia’s performance declining and every SEC team suffering at least one loss in conference play.

Some might claim this diversity signals a tough league where any team can emerge victorious, but the committee seems doubtful about the number of truly elite teams in the SEC.

The CFP committee is not stagnant; its members change over time, altering perspectives and opinions as seasons progress. Conference performances also can vary significantly from year to year.

Still, it is surprising to see only one SEC team within the CFP’s top six, while the Big Ten secured four spots within the top five.

CFP Committee Tightens Its Grip on Tennessee and Georgia

Despite a convincing win over Mississippi State, Tennessee was passed over by Indiana and Brigham Young University (BYU) in the rankings.

Indiana jumped from No. 8 to No. 5 after narrowly defeating a .500 Michigan team, while BYU, which the committee overlooked last week, moved from No. 9 to No. 6 despite a last-minute field goal victory over struggling Utah.

What led to Tennessee’s ranking stagnation?

“It really came down to the recent performances of Indiana and BYU,” said Warde Manuel, chairman of the CFP selection committee, and Michigan’s athletic director.

This reasoning seems odd, especially considering BYU’s previous struggles before their recent surge.

As Tennessee faced scrutiny, Georgia’s situation was even more dire, falling sharply from No. 3 to No. 12.

The Bulldogs suffered a 28-10 defeat against Ole Miss, a team that rose from No. 16 to No. 11 following the game.

“Their offense has not been stable. The committee assessed that. They had issues with turnovers,” Manuel explained about Georgia’s dramatic drop in the rankings.

This significant change suggests that Georgia’s upcoming match against Tennessee is a do-or-die situation concerning their CFP hopes. Despite having the top-ranked strength of schedule from several analysts, the committee appears to prioritize win-loss records over schedule strength.

In comparison, Miami lost to unranked Georgia Tech by a score of 28-23 but fell only five spots from No. 4 to No. 9.

Why was Miami treated more favorably than Georgia?

It boils down to their records.

“It was Miami’s first defeat, compared to Georgia’s second loss,” Manuel noted. “That certainly played a part.”

This reasoning may hold water, except for previous rankings where one-loss Georgia was ahead of undefeated Miami.

It seems one loss is acceptable, but two may not be, and three is certainly out of the question, regardless of schedule difficulty. Georgia’s matchup against Tennessee will be their fourth contest against teams currently rated in the top 11.

Manuel also highlighted the significant margin of Georgia’s defeat compared to Miami’s close loss.

This choice of favoring record over strength of schedule explains why undefeated Indiana, with no top-25 opponents on its schedule, is ahead of numerous one- and two-loss SEC teams that feature tougher schedules.

On the other hand, Texas can’t complain too much. The SEC newcomer suffered a loss against Georgia and lacks a signature victory yet still ranks at No. 3.

Perhaps the committee has overlooked that the Longhorns are now part of the SEC.

If Texas beats Arkansas this weekend but is surpassed by Indiana and BYU in the rankings, it will suggest that the committee has finally recognized the Longhorns’ new conference status.

Big Ten in a Stronger Position for Playoff Seeding than SEC Teams

Before anyone feels sympathy for the proud SEC, it’s important to note that the conference is still well-positioned to send four teams to the 12-team playoff.

Texas, No. 10 Alabama, and No. 11 Ole Miss are in the best shape for a postseason spot, while the victor of the upcoming Tennessee and Georgia game stands to benefit significantly.

However, this recent shift in rankings undermines the expectation of the SEC qualifying five teams for the playoff.

It appears that four teams from the SEC will make the cut.

In this year’s college football rankings, the Big Ten leads with a total of 11 teams, followed by four from the SEC, and four from various other conferences. It appears that Big Ten teams are in prime position for the most sought-after seeds.

So, could it be that the committee has a bias against the SEC? I’m not sure that’s the case. Rivalries between conferences often matter more to fans than to those making the selections.

Rather than showing any deliberate bias against the SEC, this committee seems to be influenced by two factors: their assessment of a team’s past performance and how teams look during games.

The committee’s preference for teams like Texas, No. 4 Penn State, and Indiana largely stems from their impressive records. They tend to ignore Indiana’s relatively easy schedule due to their appealing style of play and solid performances on both offense and defense.

However, this eye-test approach didn’t prove beneficial for No. 10 Alabama or Ole Miss, which are both talented teams with two losses, but they dominated their last games. Despite a decisive victory against LSU away from home, Alabama only moved up one ranking.

The committee sends a strong message: having a tough schedule will not compensate for a team’s record, regardless of the conference they belong to.