SEC coaches skeptical of enhanced schedule metric, wary of 9 league games

The SEC’s bold decision to move to a nine-game league schedule in 2026 has been met with skepticism in the coaching ranks.
SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey announced the move from eight to nine league games Aug. 21 on the heels of the College Football Playoff committee revealing it will have access to an enhanced schedule-strength metric when ranking the teams this season.
The league is financially incentivized to make the move, with each school expected to get at least another $5 million as the league’s TV package with ESPN gains value with the expanded conference slate.
Ole Miss coach Lane Kiffin, whose Rebels were among three 9-3 SEC teams left out of last season’s College Football Playoff field of 12 — Alabama and South Carolina, the others — said the enhanced metric comes one season too late.
“I think that sounds good, the metrics, and finally using it more, it should have been that way already,” Kiffin said on the SEC coaches teleconference Wednesday. “It’s kind of unfortunate that we’re that far behind other sports, when they’ve already figured that out (importance of schedule strength), that we’re now discussing this.

“I wish they would have had that more figured out and finalized versus saying, ‘Oh, it’s going to be used.’“
Indiana and SMU were two of the at-large teams selected ahead of the three-loss SEC teams, despite neither team having an overly impressive win during the season.
Alabama and Ole Miss both defeated SEC champion Georgia, while South Carolina went on the road and defeated ACC champion Clemson.
“Last year, strength of schedule was not a factor. Literally, it was all about how many wins you get. It doesn’t matter who you beat, just win,” South Carolina coach Shane Beamer said. “And if that’s going to be the case moving forward, then everybody in this conference needs to take a hard look at what they’re doing and who they’re scheduling.
“If strength of schedule is going to be a factor, which it sounds like it will be, that’s great, and then we just need to make sure that we’re all playing the same, even schedules.”
The SEC’s new nine-game scheduling model, set to begin in 2026, features each team playing three permanent opponents and rotating six other league members.
The SEC has yet to announce who each team’s three permanent opponents will be.
Auburn coach Hugh Freeze realizes his Tigers could draw Alabama and Georgia among their three permanent rivals to play each season.
“It’s certainly two difficult games, but two that I know our fan base relishes and wants to continue,” Freeze said Wednesday. “I love coaching in those games and our kids love playing in those games, and there’s no easy games in this deal.”
Freeze shared the concern the SEC coaches have had when talks of a nine-game schedule have come up.
“We wish we knew the final product of the end game of what the playoffs really looked like before we decided whether it was eight or nine,” Freeze said. “If you know you have a certain number of teams that are going to get in, then obviously the nine-game schedule can make more sense.”
The SEC’s move to a nine-game schedule increases the likelihood of the CFP expanding from a 12-game field to 16-game field — or more — as early as the 2026 season.
One of the models for an expanded, 16-team CFP field calls for the Big Ten and SEC to receive four automatic bids each, with the ACC and Big 12 getting two — the highest-ranked Group of Six team getting one — and then the next three highest-ranked teams from the CFP standings being selected as at-large teams.

The other popular model — the “5-11,” is preferred by the SEC, ACC and Big 12.
It consists of the four power conference champions along with the highest-ranked Group of 6 conference champion, and then the next 11 highest-ranked teams in the CFP standings making the field as at-large selections.
Freeze, like his SEC coaching peers, still questions the CFP Selection Committee getting it right.
“And how are they going to decide the teams (rankings)?” Freeze said. “Is it going to be some metric that gives credit for playing a difficult schedule, or is it really just won-loss record?”
The coaches told Sankey at the SEC Spring Meetings they were not in favor of a nine-game schedule.
But on the heels of the addition of the enhanced schedule metric, and then the majority support of the league’s schools’ athletic directors and presidents, the SEC made the move.
Sankey acknowledged the league coaches’ reservations when appearing on SEC Network last week.
“Not everyone agrees (with the expanded schedule). I’m certain that our coaches are concerned about the competitive aspect,” Sankey said. “We have to continue to improve the selection process for the postseason.“
Missouri coach Eli Drinkwitz, a rising young star in the coaching ranks who is fast becoming one of the more outspoken, made no attempt to veil his skepticism of the enhanced schedule-strength metric.
“I think it was a clever way to enhance the opportunity for the SEC to go to the nine-game schedule,” Drinkwitz said, saying out loud what many have intimated.
“I didn’t see any real significance. I think it’s progress, but I don’t think there’s going to be a team left in or left out based off an enhanced strength-of-schedule metric.”
Drinkwitz said the enhanced schedule-strength metric is “just a piece of paper that’s going to get passed out to the committee, and they can either use it or not.”
The first set of CFP rankings this season will be released Nov. 4.
“It’s still based on human bias, and what the human believes is the best teams,” Drinkwitz said of the 13-member selection committee. “In my opinion, that’s the opposite of what meritocracy in football is all about.”
Georgia coach Kirby Smart, like Kiffin and Drinkwitz, pointed out that whatever metrics are used — or not used — the rankings still amount to a beauty contest.
“I know there has been language and lingo to say that they are going to do a better job, not necessarily a different job, but a better job of measuring that (schedule) strength,” Smart said, “but that’s in the eyes of the beholder.”