SEC, at a glance.
Top 10 by power rating — 2026 season, through the latest games.
Home Conferences FBS 2026 season
VERDICT BEGINS · 2026
SEC
The Standard
The 2026 SEC season is underway — Georgia holds the early power lead, but the picture is still open.
SEC carries real selection-room weight with 9 teams inside the top 25 and Georgia driving a legitimate national ceiling.
#1overall
#1in FBS
+22.8RR50
+27.4upper strength
16teams
9top-25 teams
Power snapshot
Projected 2026 standing
The Standard
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.
9 top-25 teams.
The depth argument for this conference rests on how many credible opponents are clustered behind the leader. A wide talent spread separates the haves from the have-nots.
Where things stand right now.
The 2026 SEC season is underway — Georgia holds the early power lead, but the picture is still open.
The ReclaimerGeorgia Is Built to Win It Back
Georgia 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's Rise Has Changed What's Possible
Vanderbilt 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 QuestionCan Alabama Find Its Ceiling Again?
Alabama 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 →Active arcs our read
Hot2mo ago
Virginia and Vanderbilt set future football matchups
How will these new series impact both programs' schedules?
Vanderbilt
Hot1wk ago
Louisville holds top 25 spot after close Ole Miss loss
Can Louisville sustain its ranking despite the narrow defeat?
Ole Miss
Hot3mo ago
Tennessee lands first $2 million running back David Gabriel-Georges over Ohio St
How will David Gabriel-Georges impact Tennessee's future?
Tennessee
Active7wk ago
Kalen DeBoer navigates Alabama's early season challenges
How will Alabama's new coaching adjustments and injuries impact their performance?
Alabama
Active6wk ago
Vanderbilt Football Coach Clark Lea Avoids Naming Starting Quarterback
When will Vanderbilt name its starting quarterback for the upcoming season?
Vanderbilt
Fan pulse
17% positive
46% neutral
37% negative
LSU
4,793
↓ negative
Texas
4,642
↓ negative
Georgia
4,349
↓ negative
Florida
3,873
↓ negative
Alabama
2,714
↓ negative
Tennessee
2,367
↓ negative
Fan confidence — FBS percentile
Where each SEC program stands nationally in fan sentiment (100th = most positive in FBS, 0 = least). Conference median: 37th percentile.
Most volatile: Florida
Fan confidence has swung 51 percentile points in the last 8 weeks — currently at the 66th percentile nationally.
Rivalry face-offs
The coaching premium
Recruiting class rank vs. SP+ performance — where coaches add or subtract value
Above line = coaching premium
Below line = underperforming
Gap = recruiting rank minus SP+ rank
Positive gap means the coaching staff won more than the recruiting class predicted. Data: SEC teams, 16 programs.
Standings
2026 season, in progress — sorted by power rating. Stature tag = interim Zeitgeist calibration (medium confidence).
| # | Team | Record | RR50 | Resume |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
GeorgiaBlue Blood#3
|
2-0 | +32.9 | +94.5 |
| 2 |
TexasPower Program I#9
|
2-0 | +31.7 | +100.0 |
| 3 |
Texas A&MPower Program II#17
|
2-0 | +30.2 | +97.2 |
| 4 |
Ole MissPower Program I#14
|
2-0 | +26.1 | +95.5 |
| 5 |
South CarolinaPower Program III#31
|
2-0 | +25.9 | +71.6 |
| 6 |
OklahomaPower Program I#8
|
1-1 | +25.9 | +50.9 |
| 7 |
AlabamaBlue Blood#1
|
2-0 | +25.3 | +96.4 |
| 8 |
FloridaPower Program II#16
|
2-0 | +25.0 | +74.4 |
| 9 |
LSUBlue Blood#10
|
2-0 | +24.5 | +99.6 |
| 10 |
TennesseePower Program II#19
|
2-0 | +23.9 | +95.4 |
| 11 |
MissouriPower Program III#28
|
2-0 | +22.3 | +95.7 |
| 12 |
VanderbiltRegional Program I#76
|
2-0 | +21.7 | +97.5 |
| 13 |
AuburnPower Program II#22
|
2-0 | +19.1 | +99.7 |
| 14 |
KentuckyNational Program II#53
|
1-1 | +15.9 | +66.2 |
| 15 |
Mississippi StateNational Program II#56
|
2-0 | +15.3 | +99.3 |
| 16 |
ArkansasNational Program II#52
|
1-1 | +13.0 | +66.0 |
Projected Standings · SEC · 2026
Win Projection
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 | 7–2 | +9.3 | 6.5 | 5 | 24 | 53 | 79 | 93 | 99 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| 2 | Texas | 6–3 | +8.0 | 6.1 | 3 | 15 | 40 | 68 | 88 | 97 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| 3 | Texas A&M | 6–3 | +6.6 | 5.8 | 2 | 10 | 31 | 59 | 82 | 95 | 99 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Challengers | |||||||||||||
| 4 | South Carolina | 5–4 | +2.2 | 5.1 | 4 | 16 | 39 | 66 | 87 | 97 | ✓ | ✓ | |
| 5 | Ole Miss | 5–4 | +2.5 | 4.9 | 3 | 13 | 34 | 62 | 84 | 96 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 6 | Alabama | 5–4 | +1.6 | 4.9 | 3 | 13 | 33 | 60 | 82 | 95 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 7 | Oklahoma | 5–4 | +2.2 | 4.7 | 2 | 11 | 29 | 56 | 80 | 94 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 8 | Florida | 5–4 | +1.4 | 4.5 | 2 | 9 | 26 | 51 | 77 | 92 | 98 | ✓ | |
| The Field | |||||||||||||
| 9 | LSU | 5–4 | +0.9 | 4.9 | 3 | 13 | 34 | 61 | 83 | 95 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 10 | Tennessee | 5–4 | +0.2 | 4.7 | 2 | 11 | 29 | 56 | 80 | 94 | 99 | ✓ | |
| 11 | Vanderbilt | 4–5 | -1.9 | 4.4 | 1 | 7 | 23 | 48 | 74 | 91 | 98 | ✓ | |
| 12 | Missouri | 4–5 | -1.4 | 4.2 | 1 | 5 | 18 | 42 | 69 | 89 | 98 | ✓ | |
| 13 | Auburn | 4–5 | -4.5 | 3.7 | 2 | 10 | 28 | 54 | 80 | 95 | 99 | ||
| Rebuilding | |||||||||||||
| 14 | Mississippi State | 3–6 | -8.3 | 2.7 | 2 | 10 | 28 | 55 | 82 | 97 | |||
| 15 | Kentucky | 2–7 | -7.8 | 2.7 | 2 | 9 | 26 | 53 | 80 | 96 | |||
| 16 | Arkansas | 2–7 | -10.7 | 2.2 | 1 | 4 | 14 | 37 | 68 | 92 | |||
How they play
Six advanced-stat dimensions per team, ranked against all 134 FBS programs, 2026 season. Every column reads higher-is-better. Click a column to sort.
ScoringConvertsBig playsDefensePacePass rate
| Team | Scoring | Converts | Defense | Identity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Georgia | +0.69 | 60.2% | +0.11 | Efficient offense |
| Texas | +0.31 | 49.4% | -0.15 | Balanced |
| Texas A&M | +0.23 | 47.8% | +0.19 | Lockdown defense |
| Ole Miss | +0.34 | 55.4% | -0.19 | Efficient offense |
| South Carolina | +0.44 | 58.7% | +0.07 | Efficient offense |
| Oklahoma | +0.20 | 45.5% | +0.11 | Lockdown defense |
| Alabama | +0.23 | 50.1% | +0.19 | Lockdown defense |
| Florida | +0.55 | 54.2% | +0.16 | Lockdown defense |
| LSU | +0.24 | 49.8% | +0.27 | High-tempo |
| Tennessee | +0.40 | 50.8% | +0.06 | Balanced |
| Missouri | +0.28 | 46.7% | -0.08 | Balanced |
| Vanderbilt | +0.13 | 42.6% | +0.03 | Balanced |
| Auburn | +0.16 | 45.2% | +0.05 | High-tempo |
| Kentucky | +0.19 | 46.8% | -0.13 | No explosive plays |
| Mississippi State | +0.54 | 58.1% | +0.07 | Efficient offense |
| Arkansas | +0.13 | 42.0% | -0.13 | High-tempo |
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 2026 advanced stats, excludes garbage time.
Top players
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 | #2 of 326 |
| 7 | Princewill UmanmielenEDGE | Ole Miss | #8 of 420 |
| 8 | Damon Wilson Jr.EDGE | Missouri | #11 of 420 |
| 9 | Trinidad ChamblissQB | Ole Miss | #2 of 146 |
| 10 | Taylor WeinEDGE | Oklahoma | #13 of 420 |
Where SEC stands nationally
Conference strength by RR50 (round-robin adjusted power).
1
SEC
SEC
+22.8
2
B10
Big Ten
+21.7
3
IND
FBS Independents
+20.4
4
P12
Pac-12
+20.2
5
B12
Big 12
+19.5
6
ACC
ACC
+19.2
7
AAC
American Athletic
+17.3
8
SB
Sun Belt
+17.0
9
CUSA
Conference USA
+16.6
10
MAC
Mid-American
+16.2
SEC title odds
Best available American odds · sportsbook consensus.