SEC, at a glance.
Top 10 by power rating — last season final records.
Home Conferences FBS 2026 season
Can anyone in the SEC produce the kind of defense-first, run-it-in-January championship run that Indiana used to beat them — or does the bracket stay crowded while the trophy moves to another conference again?
SEC carries real selection-room weight with 9 teams inside the top 25 and Georgia driving a legitimate national ceiling.
Top 10 by power rating — last season final records.
The SEC has placed five or more teams in the CFP field every year since the bracket expanded to 12 — but in 2025, Indiana (Big Ten) ended the conference's title run. The SEC still dominates the bracket depth chart. It just doesn't own the trophy anymore.




The depth argument for this conference rests on how many credible opponents are clustered behind the leader. The gap between the top and bottom is narrow — a sign of genuine parity.
Can anyone in the SEC produce the kind of defense-first, run-it-in-January championship run that Indiana used to beat them — or does the bracket stay crowded while the trophy moves to another conference again?
The ReclaimerGeorgia won back-to-back CFP titles in 2022-23 and still holds the SEC's highest power rating entering 2026. They didn't lose the conference because of talent — they lost the bracket because the schedule caught up with them. Georgia's 2026 schedule includes the games that could define whether this program is a dynasty or a window that's closing.
Why it matters →
The Coaching StoryVanderbilt went 10-3 in 2025 with a recruiting class ranked #76 nationally — the biggest coaching premium in the conference. Clark Lea's program has gone from conference doormat to legitimate nine-win contender in three seasons. What they do against Georgia and Alabama in 2026 will tell us whether it's a trend or a year.
Why it matters →
The QuestionAlabama finished 2025 with an 11-4 record and an SP+ rank (#31) that doesn't match a recruiting class ranked #3 nationally. The gap between raw talent and on-field production is the defining question for the program in the post-Saban era. If the coaching catches up to the talent in 2026, the SEC reclaims the conversation.
Why it matters →How will Ohio State recover from losing a top running back prospect to Tennessee?
Can Alabama sustain its recruiting success into future classes?
How will Georgia and Florida State prepare for their 2028 matchup?
How will Ole Miss address its biggest challenges entering fall camp?
Will Ole Miss succeed in collecting the $1 million in alleged unpaid buyouts from the two players?
Where each SEC program stands nationally in fan sentiment (100th = most positive in FBS, 0 = least). Conference median: 17th percentile.
Positive gap means the coaching staff won more than the recruiting class predicted. Data: SEC teams, 16 programs.
2026 final — sorted by power rating. Stature tag = interim Zeitgeist calibration (medium confidence).
| # | Team | Record | RR50 | Resume |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
GeorgiaBlue Blood#3
|
0-0 | +19.9 | +98.6 |
| 2 |
TexasPower Program I#9
|
0-0 | +18.3 | +97.6 |
| 3 |
Ole MissPower Program I#14
|
0-0 | +17.3 | +97.2 |
| 4 |
Texas A&MPower Program II#17
|
0-0 | +17.3 | +96.9 |
| 5 |
AlabamaBlue Blood#1
|
0-0 | +16.2 | +96.5 |
| 6 |
LSUBlue Blood#10
|
0-0 | +14.6 | +94.8 |
| 7 |
TennesseePower Program II#19
|
0-0 | +13.1 | +94.5 |
| 8 |
OklahomaPower Program I#8
|
0-0 | +12.8 | +93.4 |
| 9 |
MissouriPower Program III#28
|
0-0 | +12.5 | +92.7 |
| 10 |
South CarolinaPower Program III#31
|
0-0 | +12.1 | +91.0 |
| 11 |
AuburnPower Program II#22
|
0-0 | +10.8 | +88.6 |
| 12 |
FloridaPower Program II#16
|
0-0 | +10.2 | +87.2 |
| 13 |
VanderbiltRegional Program I#76
|
0-0 | +9.9 | +86.5 |
| 14 |
KentuckyNational Program II#53
|
0-0 | +5.9 | +74.0 |
| 15 |
ArkansasNational Program II#52
|
0-0 | +5.9 | +73.7 |
| 16 |
Mississippi StateNational Program II#56
|
0-0 | +2.7 | +65.4 |
Projected Standings · SEC · 2026
Odds of winning at least N conference games from current power ratings — full slate played out, not locked to results. AVG = expected wins; W–L = most-likely record.
| # | Team | W–L | PWR | AVG | ≥9 | ≥8 | ≥7 | ≥6 | ≥5 | ≥4 | ≥3 | ≥2 | ≥1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Favorites | |||||||||||||
| 1 | Georgia | 6–3 | +7.4 | 6.1 | 3 | 16 | 41 | 68 | 88 | 97 | 99 | ✓ | ✓ |
| 2 | Texas | 6–3 | +5.8 | 5.7 | 1 | 9 | 29 | 56 | 80 | 94 | 99 | ✓ | ✓ |
| 3 | Ole Miss | 6–3 | +4.9 | 5.5 | 1 | 8 | 25 | 51 | 77 | 92 | 98 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Challengers | |||||||||||||
| 4 | Texas A&M | 6–3 | +4.8 | 5.4 | 1 | 7 | 23 | 49 | 74 | 91 | 98 | ✓ | ✓ |
| 5 | Alabama | 5–4 | +3.7 | 5.3 | 1 | 6 | 21 | 46 | 72 | 90 | 97 | ✓ | ✓ |
| 6 | LSU | 5–4 | +2.2 | 5.0 | 4 | 15 | 36 | 63 | 85 | 96 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 7 | Tennessee | 5–4 | +0.6 | 4.7 | 2 | 11 | 29 | 55 | 79 | 93 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 8 | Oklahoma | 5–4 | +0.3 | 4.5 | 2 | 8 | 25 | 51 | 76 | 92 | 98 | ✓ | |
| The Field | |||||||||||||
| 9 | South Carolina | 5–4 | -0.4 | 4.6 | 2 | 10 | 28 | 54 | 79 | 93 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 10 | Missouri | 5–4 | +0.1 | 4.6 | 2 | 9 | 27 | 53 | 78 | 93 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 11 | Auburn | 4–5 | -1.7 | 4.2 | 1 | 5 | 17 | 41 | 68 | 88 | 97 | ✓ | |
| 12 | Vanderbilt | 4–5 | -2.5 | 4.2 | 1 | 5 | 18 | 41 | 67 | 88 | 97 | ✓ | |
| 13 | Florida | 4–5 | -2.2 | 3.8 | 3 | 13 | 32 | 59 | 82 | 95 | 99 | ||
| Rebuilding | |||||||||||||
| 14 | Kentucky | 3–6 | -6.6 | 3.0 | 1 | 4 | 14 | 34 | 62 | 86 | 98 | ||
| 15 | Arkansas | 3–6 | -6.6 | 2.9 | 1 | 3 | 12 | 32 | 60 | 84 | 97 | ||
| 16 | Mississippi State | 2–7 | -9.8 | 2.4 | 1 | 6 | 20 | 45 | 75 | 94 | |||
Six advanced-stat dimensions per team, ranked against all 134 FBS programs, 2025 season. Every column reads higher-is-better. Click a column to sort.
| Team | Scoring | Converts | Defense | Identity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Georgia | +0.24 | 46.6% | -0.08 | No explosive plays |
Texas | +0.19 | 40.6% | -0.09 | Big-play offense |
Ole Miss | +0.31 | 48.5% | -0.09 | Efficient offense |
Texas A&M | +0.24 | 45.5% | -0.11 | Balanced |
Alabama | +0.20 | 42.8% | -0.06 | Balanced |
LSU | +0.09 | 39.5% | -0.07 | Balanced |
Tennessee | +0.32 | 50.1% | -0.15 | Efficient offense |
Oklahoma | +0.10 | 40.0% | +0.04 | Lockdown defense |
Missouri | +0.20 | 44.8% | -0.03 | Lockdown defense |
South Carolina | +0.10 | 37.9% | -0.08 | Can't sustain drives |
Auburn | +0.18 | 43.5% | -0.05 | No explosive plays |
Florida | +0.14 | 42.2% | -0.15 | No explosive plays |
Vanderbilt | +0.41 | 49.8% | -0.18 | Big-play offense |
Kentucky | +0.08 | 42.7% | -0.17 | No explosive plays |
Arkansas | +0.29 | 48.6% | -0.25 | Efficient offense |
Mississippi State | +0.17 | 42.6% | -0.19 | Balanced |
Identity is the single dimension where a team is most above or below the FBS average (pace, defense, big plays, or converting drives) — "Balanced" means nothing stands out either way. CFBD 2025 advanced stats, excludes garbage time.
SEC's highest CFB Index Scores, 2025 season.
| # | Player | Team | National |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | William EcholesIDL | Ole Miss | #2 of 330 |
| 2 | Colin SimmonsLB | Texas | #3 of 583 |
| 3 | Diego PaviaQB | Vanderbilt | #1 of 146 |
| 4 | Xavier AtkinsLB | Auburn | #5 of 583 |
| 5 | Zxavian HarrisIDL | Ole Miss | #4 of 330 |
| 6 | Ahmad HardyRB | Missouri | #3 of 326 |
| 7 | Princewill UmanmielenEDGE | Ole Miss | #8 of 420 |
| 8 | Trinidad ChamblissQB | Ole Miss | #2 of 146 |
| 9 | Damon Wilson Jr.EDGE | Missouri | #11 of 420 |
| 10 | Taylor WeinEDGE | Oklahoma | #13 of 420 |
Conference strength by RR50 (round-robin adjusted power).
Best available American odds · sportsbook consensus.
| # | Team | Odds |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Georgia
|
+260 |
| 2 |
Texas
|
+300 |
| 3 |
Texas A&M
|
+800 |
| 4 |
Alabama
|
+800 |
| 5 |
LSU
|
+600 |
| 6 |
Ole Miss
|
+900 |
| 7 |
Oklahoma
|
+900 |
| 8 |
Tennessee
|
+1800 |
| 9 |
Florida
|
+2000 |
| 10 |
Missouri
|
+3000 |