MARLER: SEC’s schedule debate isn’t about fairness
05/29/2025
By Chris Marler
Every college football offseason seems to crown one debate as king, a single talking point that dominates headlines, podcasts, and social media until it’s been dissected for 230 long days before kickoff.
NIL. The Portal. Realignment. Playoff expansion.
Each one of those has become a broken record of hot takes and clickbait that get stuck in our ears while monopolizing our screens. It’s like a bad No. 1 hit that just won’t go away like “Who let the dogs out” or that national nightmare over the airwaves in 2014 that Pharrell made, “Happy.”
This year’s summer anthem? SEC Schedules. More specifically, whether or not the league will finally make the move to nine games instead of eight.
Spring Meetings in Destin
This week, SEC coaches, media, and Commissioner Greg Sankey gathered in Destin, Florida, for the league’s annual Spring Meetings. In a time when college football’s to-do list is longer than ever, one item has somehow taken top priority: scheduling. Like a Saturday honey-do list, everyone agrees it needs fixing, except the person actually holding the hammer.
The league has plenty of ideas, and pros and cons for each. They’ve even floated the idea of going to nine conference games, plus each team playing an annual game versus a Big Ten opponent. That would create a total of ten Power Four opponents in every 12 game SEC schedule. Others have floated the idea of a play-in series of games on championship weekend.
They seem to have plenty of ideas. What they do not have is a lot of time.
The Clock is Ticking
SEC administrators want a decision on the 2026 conference schedule by week one of this season. Keep in mind a two year bandaid was put over the schedule scab when Texas and Oklahoma joined the conference. That was primarily due to Greg Sankey taking a wait-and-see approach to what other major changes would be happening to the sport before making a decision that would impact all 16 teams.
Changes like the $20.5 million house settlement for NIL and potential television contracts are both factors. Then, there’s the desire to preserve longstanding secondary rivalries like Auburn-Georgia or Tennessee-Alabama for future schedules.
But, let’s not kid ourselves, the only thing Sankey and company are waiting on is a decision on what the College Football Playoff Format will be.
The Playoff Piece
Both the SEC and Big Ten have been very vocal about switching to a 16 team playoff and using a 4-4-2-2-1 model, where both the SEC and B1G would get four automatic bids, the ACC and Big 12 receiving two, Group of Five would get one, and then three more at-large bids to round out the field.
The ADs of both conferences have pushed for that while the majority of head coaches from the the SEC, ACC, and Big 12 have all stated their preference for a 5+11 model.
In that scenario each Power Four conference and the one Group of Five team would get an automatic bid followed by 11 at-large bids. The 11 at-large bids would be based on the final rankings from the CFP committee, and in the rarest of rarities, that plan seems to be something everyone agrees with. However, that’s dependent on one thing and one thing only: the SEC going to nine conference games.
Still, Sankey is trying to keep the wolves at bay for as long as he can. The deadline for the future CFP format changes is December 1. However, Sankey and others are hoping that timeline can be expedited before any monumental and significant decisions are made affecting all 16 teams in the league.
This Isn’t About Nine Games
The real story here isn’t about the SEC going to a ninth conference game. Not at all.
The SEC has been the boogeyman for misguided projections and irrational outbursts of blame from fans outside the conference for years. An extra conference game isn’t going to change that. It will only shift the goalposts somewhere else for the anti-SEC crowd and those that think this conference is ruining the sport.
This has essentially been the playbook for the anti-SEC narrative and crowd for years
- They only win because they cheat and pay players.
- They only win because they play eight games.
- They only win because they play FCS teams and do it in November.
- They only win because they refuse to schedule road games in lieu of neutral sites.
- They only win because ESPN is biased and runs the CFP.
- They only win because of Alabama and Georgia and the rest of the conference is average.
- They only have the highest strength of schedule rankings because the metric is bias and flawed.
This group has more excuses and less accountability than Urban Meyer’s 2008 Florida team, or cable news during an election year.
The SEC Isn’t Alone in Expansion
Let’s not forget that the Big Ten expanded to 18 teams, nearly double the amount in their actual name, and all that did was give them four teams worth a damn instead of three.
Both the B1G and Big 12 have been playing nine conference games for less than a decade, but that hasn’t stopped either conference or its fans from recanting the move as one of the most morally superior and heroic martyrdoms of our generation.
What’s Really at Stake
Which is why, again, the story here isn’t about a potential nine game SEC schedule.
The story is that for the first time ever the SEC is having their hand forced into making changes and conforming to the demands that outside conferences, coaches, and the national media have been screaming for for years.
But why? That’s my question.
Who would’ve thought that five different teams winning 13 national titles in 17 years would be forgotten like a turn signal in rush hour or a Microsoft Teams password you’ve had to reset 28 times.
Who knew that, making it to the CFP semifinals and losing in the last moments to the eventual national champion, and/or best team money can buy, would result in the perception of the league being turned upside down.
A Trade, Not Progress
I could argue all the reasons why the narrative is dumb, and why Sankey shouldn’t fix what ain’t broke, as my grandpa would say. But, the choice is simple. He is bartering a nine game schedule to make sure what happened last year to the SEC never happens again.
Let’s call it what it is. A trade. A preventative play to maintain power, just in case a bunch of nutjobs on a committee in a Dallas hotel room get enamored with a few 11-1 teams with no Top-25 wins, but no “bad losses” and stuff them in the playoff like unfolded clothes in a suitcase the last day of vacation.
This isn’t progress. Not in the slightest. It’s the biggest prisoner of the moment situation in college football history being Trojan Horse-ed to the masses behind the veil of “fairness” and “parity.”
Most importantly, it’s a demand. Not for more seats at the table, just new faces.