Rece Davis Tries To Defend SEC Conference Schedule, Gets It Completely Wrong

There's been an increasingly contentious debate in college football as to the importance of conference schedules. 

The Big Ten, for example, plays nine conference games and three non-conference games. The SEC plays just eight conference games, and four non-conference games. That creates an immediate disparity, necessarily impacts intra-conference records, and makes it harder to compare records and strength of schedule.

For most objective observers, this is a benefit to the SEC. Yes, the SEC is the deepest conference and has consistently created very difficult matchups between big name programs. But the extra non-conference game provides significant advantages. It provides an opportunity for extra rest late in the season for some schools who choose to play FCS-level teams in November. It often allows for an extra home game, cutting down on travel. 

And perhaps most importantly, it allows some schools to boost their resumes by adding an extra win. Ole Miss in 2024, for example, obliterated four weak teams in non-conference play, then went 5-3 in the SEC. Had they replaced say, Middle Tennessee State with another SEC team, that 9-3 record could easily have dropped to 8-4. Suddenly, Ole Miss is no longer a top-15 team with a (completely absurd) argument for inclusion in the playoff.

READ: Here’s How The SEC Benefits From Its Football Conference Scheduling

But ESPN, as one of the SEC's partners, is not objective. And one of its top college football commentators, Rece Davis, demonstrated exactly how they get it so wrong in order to defend their relationship.

NEW YORK, NY - SEPTEMBER 23:  ESPN College GameDay analyst Rece Davis discusses game day at Times Square on September 23, 2017 in New York City.  (Photo by Abbie Parr/Getty Images)

Rece Davis Doesn't Understand It's About Quantity

Davis started his discussion by trying to avoid controversy by demonstrating a complete lack of awareness of the argument at hand.

"As we dive into these teams, I'm going to say this," Davis said, "I'm going to keep saying it on the pod until the aggregators pick it up and create some type of controversy because of it, in my judgment, the dumbest argument of all of the arguments between the conferences is number of games played."

It is not dumb, because it directly impacts the win-loss records that ESPN uses to promote SEC teams. It's not dumb because while strength of schedule matters, so do wins and losses. And nine conference games is going to create more losses for a conference than playing eight. He kept going.

"But nine versus eight, which nine in the Big 10, which eight in the SEC," he said. "Because, as we're talking about the SEC, Oklahoma's eight-game schedule last year was completely different from Texas' eight-game schedule. Florida's was way more difficult than Texas. I would argue that Florida's and Oklahoma's eight-game schedule greatly surpassed Indiana's nine-game conference schedule. So arguing this sheerly on the number of games because of the sizes of these two conferences is a fool's errand."

It's almost impossible to get this more backwards.

What he fails to understand or address is the difference in win probability between an SEC school playing Middle Tennessee State and a Big Ten school playing Nebraska or Maryland. When a top SEC team schedules Middle Tennessee State, their win probability is 95% or higher. When a top Big Ten school plays Maryland, their win probability, especially say, on the road, is more like 60-75%, depending on the year. It's the difference between "guarantee" and "likely." That's meaningful.

As previously explained, adding another guaranteed win greatly impacts the individual records for conference schools. A 9-3 team is ranked in the top 15, whereas an 8-4 team might not be ranked at all. The rankings then inform strength of schedule arguments, especially for people like Rece. "Well, see, LSU had to play #17 Ole Miss, that's another ranked matchup and makes their schedule harder," the argument goes. 

Take away #17 from Ole Miss because they lost the ninth conference game, that argument changes. 

This doesn't mean that SEC schedules have been or are easy, but when conference teams play each other, it guarantees an additional collective loss when the comparable conference is giving themselves a guaranteed win by playing Furman. That's the issue. 

Put differently, there are just three teams in the SEC that play 10 games against Power 4 teams, while 12 Big Ten teams will play 10 games against Power 4 teams. Because of the ninth conference game. That doesn't mean the SEC won't have difficult schedules mixed in, but again, allows them to avoid the added probability of another loss.

Oh, and Indiana, the team he criticizes? They had the 8th best strength of record in college football last year, according to his own employer's analytics.