How Texas, Oklahoma, Oregon and others should fare in new conferences, by the numbers

The moves we’ve talked about for so long as part of a power struggle, of some abstract future, are now concrete. This week, almost three years after it was officially announced, Oklahoma and Texas officially became members of the Southeastern Conference. In another month, the rest of the seismic recent conference realignment moves — Oregon, UCLA, USC and Washington to the Big Ten; Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah to the Big 12; Cal, Stanford and SMU to the ACC — will also become official. The future is now, whether or not it makes any sense.

We’ll still have plenty of jarring moments of realization this fall — when UCLA visits Rutgers in mid-October, for instance, or when Cal visits Wake Forest in early November (or when we get to the end of the season and Oklahoma didn’t play Oklahoma State — but for all of the unique matchups to come, how are these teams going to actually fare? How would they have fared last season? And how do things normally work when a team changes conferences? Let’s look into it.

Where teams would have ranked in their new conferences last season

Using 2023’s SP+ rankings, let’s set the table by first looking at how the hierarchy would have taken shape for each conference with its new members. (New members for 2024 in bold.)

SEC

2. Georgia (13-1)
6. Texas (12-2)
7. Alabama (12-2)
10. Missouri (11-2)
11. LSU (10-3)
12. Ole Miss (11-2)
14. Tennessee (9-4)
16. Texas A&M (7-6)
17. Oklahoma (10-3)
22. Kentucky (7-6)
36. Auburn (6-7)
41. Florida (5-7)
51. South Carolina (5-7)
54. Arkansas (4-8)
62. Mississippi State (5-7)
110. Vanderbilt (2-10)

After winning at Alabama in Week 2 and reaching the College Football Playoff, Texas finished in a predictable range in SP+, while Oklahoma, benefiting from a relatively light schedule, went 2-2 against SP+ top-25 teams and 8-1 against everyone else and finished 17th overall. Both teams are projected to stay about the same in terms of overall quality — Texas is projected fourth, Oklahoma 15th — which makes the Longhorns a likely CFP contender, and leaves the Sooners, who would have been sandwiched between two 7-6 teams last season, projected to win seven to eight games.

Big Ten

1. Michigan (15-0)
3. Oregon (12-2)
4. Ohio State (11-2)
5. Penn State (10-3)
13. Washington (14-1)
21. Maryland (8-5)
27. UCLA (8-5)
29. Wisconsin (7-6)
31. USC (8-5)
47. Iowa (10-4)
56. Rutgers (7-6)
63. Minnesota (6-7)
66. Nebraska (5-7)
69. Northwestern (8-5)
75. Illinois (5-7)
88. Michigan State (4-8)
90. Purdue (4-8)
92. Indiana (3-9)

The Big Ten is always a top-heavy conference, with heavyweights like Michigan and Ohio State at one end and quite a few mediocre-at-best teams at the other. It would have been amazingly top heavy last year with such good Oregon and Washington teams. (And yes, here’s your reminder that SP+ didn’t love Washington last season despite the run to the national title game. The Huskies went 8-0 in one-score finishes; SP+ attempts to measure sustainability, and there’s nothing sustainable about that. It was incredibly fun to watch, though.)

Big 12

15. Kansas State (9-4)
18. Arizona (10-3)
25. Kansas (9-4)
32. Utah (8-5)
35. TCU (5-7)
37. Iowa State (7-6)
38. West Virginia (9-4)
42. Oklahoma State (10-4)
43. Texas Tech (7-6)
57. UCF (6-7)
76. BYU (5-7)
81. Colorado (4-8)
87. Cincinnati (3-9)
95. Houston (4-8)
97. Baylor (3-9)
107. Arizona State (3-9)

Like Washington, Oklahoma State rode a run of close wins (5-1 in one-score finishes) to a surprise Big 12 championship game bid, but the Cowboys might not have actually been one of the best teams in the conference. Arizona and Utah, however, might have been. In a Texas- and Oklahoma-free Big 12 universe, the battle for the title game might have included as many as eight or nine teams. This year’s race might too. I can’t wait.

(Another reminder: Colorado was still very bad last season. But we’ll come back to that.)

ACC

9. Florida State (13-1)
23. Clemson (9-4)
24. SMU (11-3)
28. Miami (7-6)
30. Duke (8-5)
34. Louisville (10-4)
39. NC State (9-4)
40. North Carolina (8-5)
46. Virginia Tech (7-6)
65. Georgia Tech (7-6)
67. California (6-7)
80. Syracuse (6-7)
83. Boston College (7-6)
91. Pitt (3-9)
96. Wake Forest (4-8)
105. Virginia (3-9)
108. Stanford (3-9)

Of the ACC’s three new additions, it was the Group of 5 team, SMU, that would have had the most success. The Mustangs were excellent in 2023, at least until quarterback Preston Stone got injured. They still held on to beat Tulane for the AAC championship without him, but they performed poorly in a bowl loss to Boston College. They’ll get a revenge attempt this fall.

AAC and Conference USA

Two teams are joining Group of 5 conferences this year, too: Army (AAC) and FBS newcomer Kennesaw State (Conference USA). Army would have ranked fifth in the extremely top-heavy AAC, behind the league’s heavyweights — SMU, Tulane, Memphis and UTSA, who went a combined 41-13 in 2023 — and ahead of everyone else.

Kennesaw State, meanwhile, deployed an extremely redshirt-heavy roster in anticipation of its 2024 transition — by my count, 18 Owls played exactly four games — and, predictably, wasn’t very good. The Owls went just 3-6 against an easy schedule and finished 52nd in FCS SP+. They would have ranked last nationally in FBS SP+, slightly behind Kent State.

How newcomers are projected to fare this season

Using my SP+ projections, let’s look at how everyone’s likely to fare. What teams are taking on harder and more ambitious schedules? Whose are lightening up quite a bit?

Harder schedules

Seven teams are facing slates that are at least a bit more difficult than last year’s.

Kennesaw State (FCS to Conference USA)

SP+ projection: 130th

Projected wins: 3.3 overall, 2.3 in conference

Strength of schedule ranking: 121st

KSU’s transitional schedule featured multiple Division II opponents, so even with an SOS ranking of just 121st, this is obviously an upgrade. That said, Brian Bohannon’s Owls will still face quite a few teams in their general quality vicinity — seven opponents are projected 110th or worse in SP+ (or are in FCS). They’ll have a shot at some wins, even if they aren’t quite ready to handle any of their four projected top-60 opponents.

Oklahoma (Big 12 to SEC)

SP+ projection: 15th (last year: 17th)

Projected wins: 7.5 overall, 3.6 in conference (last year: 10-3)

Strength of schedule ranking: third (last year: 52nd at end of regular season)

For years, Oklahoma fans complained about a lack of thrilling, big-name regular-season opponents. For better or worse, the Sooners are getting what they evidently craved this fall.

Not every SEC team plays elite teams week in and week out, no matter what SEC fans want to tell you, but after a light nonconference slate, Oklahoma damn near does exactly that. Of its eight SEC opponents, six are projected 16th or better in SP+, and the worst of the bunch is No. 43 South Carolina. SP+ projects the Sooners as one of the 15 best teams in America … and gives them only a 7% chance of going 10-2 or better. The average top-five team could expect a win percentage of only .796 (about 9.5 wins) against this slate. Rough stuff.

Oregon (Pac-12 to Big Ten)

SP+ projection: third (last year: third)

Projected wins: 10.4 overall, 7.5 in conference (last year: 12-2)

Strength of schedule ranking: 26th (last year: 42nd)

While the Pac-12 was as good as it had ever been last fall, Oregon’s regular-season strength of schedule was a little weaker than others’, at least in part because, well, the Ducks didn’t have to play the Ducks.

Their 2024 schedule isn’t the toughest Big Ten slate imaginable, but Oregon does host projected No. 2 Ohio State while visiting No. 6 Michigan. Including a visit from Boise State in nonconference play, the Ducks play six projected top-40 teams in all. It’s manageable, but it’s still potentially harder than last year’s schedule.

SMU (AAC to ACC)

SP+ projection: 23rd (last year: 24th)

Projected wins: 9.1 overall, 5.6 in conference (last year: 11-3)

Strength of schedule ranking: 84th (last year: 95th)

The upgrade isn’t as much as you would think for a team jumping from the Group of 5 to the Power 4 (or whatever we’re calling the group of power conferences now). The ACC has six projected top-30 teams (including SMU), but Rhett Lashlee’s Mustangs are scheduled to play only two of them: Florida State in Week 6, then at Louisville in Week 7. Otherwise, if they’re really a top-30 team like SP+ thinks, they could be favored in as many as 10 games.

Texas (Big 12 to SEC)

SP+ projection: fourth (last year: sixth)

Projected wins: 9.9 overall, 6.4 in conference (last year: 12-2)

Strength of schedule ranking: 14th (last year: 33rd)

Compared to Oklahoma, Texas got off easy in its 2024 SEC draw; the only reason the Longhorns are ranked even 14th in SOS is because of a nonconference trip to Michigan in Week 2. They face an utterly titanic Week 8 visit from top-ranked Georgia one week after their Red River Rivalry game against OU, but the only other top-20 SEC opponent on the schedule is Texas A&M over Thanksgiving weekend.

Texas and Texas A&M playing each other. In football. What a concept.

UCLA (Pac-12 to Big Ten)

SP+ projection: 26th (last year: 27th)

Projected wins: 6.2 overall, 4.4 in conference (last year: 8-5)

Strength of schedule ranking: 13th (last year: 62nd)

Aside from Oklahoma, no one is taking on a bigger leap in schedule strength than Deshaun Foster’s first UCLA team. The Bruins start with navigable games against Hawaii and Indiana, but in Weeks 4-6, they will play at LSU (No. 9, per SP+), home against No. 3 Oregon and at No. 7 Penn State. They’ve got two more top-25 opponents in November, too, one far away (at Iowa) and one nearby (home vs. USC).

Even with a top-30 projection — ambitious considering the rookie head coach and a lack of star power at QB — SP+ gives the Bruins only a 69% chance of bowling. If they’re merely a top-40 or top-50 team, they’re probably staying home during bowl season.

USC (Pac-12 to Big Ten)

SP+ projection: 21st (last year: 31st)

Projected wins: 6.4 overall, 4.8 in conference (last year: 8-5)

Strength of schedule ranking: 11th (last year: 23rd)

It’s a similar story for Lincoln Riley’s Trojans. Their first actual Big Ten schedule includes only a couple of heavyweights — at Michigan in Week 4, Penn State in Week 7 — but they’ve got four other top-40 opponents on the conference slate, and their nonconference schedule is absolutely brutal: LSU in Las Vegas in Week 1 (that’s right, LSU is playing both L.A. schools) and Notre Dame over Thanksgiving. Despite projected improvement, USC is looking at only a 71% chance of bowling and a 2% chance of going 10-2 or better.

Easier schedules

A lot of the biggest names in this realignment batch are staring at more ambitious schedules, but in part because the Pac-12 was so good last year, seven of last year’s Pac-12 teams are facing lighter schedules this fall. Strangely, so is Army despite the move to the AAC.

Arizona State (Pac-12 to Big 12)

SP+ projection: 88th (last year: 107th)

Projected wins: 3.4 overall, 2.0 in conference (last year: 3-9)

Strength of schedule ranking: 46th (last year: 16th)

ASU went 3-9 the hard way in Kenny Dillingham’s first season in charge, going just 1-3 against teams ranked 60th or worse in SP+ but upsetting two of eight top-50 opponents. I guess it’s not a guarantee, then, that the Sun Devils will improve their win total despite now playing five teams projected 67th or worse. But with three relative toss-ups right out of the gate in nonconference play (Wyoming, Mississippi State, at Texas State), this season could go in about a thousand different directions.

Army (Independent to AAC)

SP+ projection: 95th (last year: 79th)

Projected wins: 6.4 overall, 4.3 in conference (last year: 6-6)

Strength of schedule ranking: 102nd (last year: 81st)

Army played two FCS opponents last year, but this schedule is still weaker? Yep. That’s what happens when you go from playing four top-50 opponents to one. Even with just one FCS foe, 10 of Army’s 12 games come against teams projected 89th or worse. Lots of win opportunities for the Black Knights as they try to rebound from recent slippage.

Cal (Pac-12 to ACC)

SP+ projection: 52nd (last year: 67th)

Projected wins: 6.1 overall, 3.5 in conference (last year: 6-7)

Strength of schedule ranking: 49th (last year: ninth)

With spectacular running back Jaydn Ott and a turnover-hungry defense, Cal took full advantage of the weak spots on last year’s schedule, going 5-0 against teams ranked 50th or worse in SP+. Of course, that means the Golden Bears went 1-7 against everyone else. This year the ratio shifts slightly, with seven sub-50 teams on the docket, so if they pull the same “beat bad teams, lose to good ones” routine, they’ll be bowling again in their first season in a conference with “Atlantic” in the title.

I suggest they try actually beating good teams, though. It’s fun.

Colorado (Pac-12 to Big 12)

SP+ projection: 69th (last year: 81st)

Projected wins: 3.8 overall, 2.5 in conference (last year: 4-8)

Strength of schedule ranking: 45th (last year: 21st)

A lot of people are stepping on the Colorado rake again. Despite last season’s post-September collapse, each week brings a new social media clip of a TV analyst predicting Deion Sanders’ Buffaloes to win the Big 12, and EA Sports seems to thinks very highly of the Buffs — they evidently have the 16th-best team in the country in the forthcoming NCAA video game.

The Buffs do still have Shedeur Sanders and Travis Hunter, and I actually like the offensive and defensive line additions Sanders made far more than last year’s. They should be a better team, and their schedule shouldn’t feature any outright heavyweights. But it still includes seven opponents projected 42nd or better (four in the top 25), and they’ll have to improve pretty significantly to even bowl.

Oregon State (Pac-12 to independent)

SP+ projection: 55th (last year: 19th)

Projected wins: 7.5 overall (last year: 8-5)

Strength of schedule ranking: 77th (last year: 31st)

You could say that, by some margin, Oregon State was exactly the 19th-best team in the country last season, going 0-4 against teams ranked 18th or better (two close losses, two blowouts) and 8-1 against everyone else. With only two top-50 opponents on 2024’s slate, the 19th-best team in the country would be looking at a pretty spectacular season, but the Beavers got hit terribly hard by attrition and are projected to fall out of the top 50 themselves.

Still, they’ll have to fall even further than that to miss out on a solid 8-4-ish season. For all of the horrible luck they suffered in the last round of realignment, at least they’ve still got plenty of wins on the schedule.

Stanford (Pac-12 to ACC)

SP+ projection: 84th (last year: 108th)

Projected wins: 3.8 overall, 2.0 in conference (last year: 3-9)

Strength of schedule ranking: 33rd (last year: first)

Stanford played five of last year’s top 19 teams, plus two more ranked 31st or better. That was a bit much for a team undergoing a total on-field reset; its record against these seven teams was 0-7 with one narrow loss and six others by an average score of 50-16. Troy Taylor’s Cardinal return most of last year’s two-deep and should absolutely improve, but while the schedule eases up a hair, they’re still looking at seven games against top-40 foes, three of which are at least two time zones away. This isn’t the hardest schedule in the country this time, but it still isn’t easy.

Utah (Pac-12 to Big 12)

SP+ projection: 18th (last year: 32nd)

Projected wins: 9.4 overall, 7.5 in conference (last year: 8-5)

Strength of schedule ranking: 81st (last year: 13th)

Despite full-season quarterback uncertainty (and the customary absence of big plays and easy points), Utah, like Oregon State, played exactly to its level in 2023, going 0-4 against SP+ top-20 teams and 8-0 against everyone else (at least until a meek bowl loss to Northwestern). This year, the Utes get quarterback Cam Rising back, and the schedule eases up dramatically. They do still face three top-30 teams (at Oklahoma State, Arizona, Iowa State), but with seven opponents projected outside the top 60, the floor for their win total is awfully high.

Washington State (Pac-12 to independent)

SP+ projection: 59th (last year: 50th)

Projected wins: 7.6 overall (last year: 5-7)

Strength of schedule ranking: 99th (last year: 29th)

Wazzu in no way played to its level in 2023, beating two top-30 opponents early, then losing to back-to-back sub-100 teams late to finish 5-7. The Cougs were evidently a big-games-only team, which could be awkward this season when there aren’t nearly as many big games. They play three teams projected between 35th and 42nd early on, but posting a big win total will hinge on a run of four straight later games against teams ranked 100th or worse.

Schedule strength about the same

Arizona (Pac-12 to Big 12)

SP+ projection: 24th (last year: 18th)

Projected wins: 8.6 overall, 6.2 in conference (last year: 10-3)

Strength of schedule ranking: 55th (last year: 53rd)

Arizona began the season 3-3 and ranked 49th in SP+ heading into October, but the Wildcats surged late, winning their last seven games and finishing 18th. They have a new head coach and plenty of new faces, but quarterback Noah Fifita & Co. will have a shot at a lovely start in their new league. After facing two top-20 opponents (Kansas State and Utah) on the road in September, they don’t see a single top-30 foe in the last two months. If the Wildcats are up for it, they’ll have a shot at another great finish.

Washington (Pac-12 to Big Ten)

SP+ projection: 35th (last year: 13th)

Projected wins: 6.5 overall, 3.8 in conference (last year: 14-1)

Strength of schedule ranking: 16th (last year: 12th)

Losing head coach Kalen DeBoer and stars Michael Penix Jr. and Rome Odunze (among many others) could create quite a setback this season, even before we consider the wrath of the close games god. The schedule won’t provide much relief: The Huskies have a relatively light September, but in their last seven games, they’ll play seven teams projected 26th or better, including three in the top 10. This isn’t harder than last year’s path, but it’s not much easier either.

How this normally works

It’s easy to get lost in the weeds analyzing how a program is going to fare against a new set of league opponents. How much is its recruiting base going to change? What changes might it need to make stylistically? Things like that.

But recent big realignment moves have basically taught us three things: (1) If your program is well run, you’re going to be fine; (2) if it’s not, you’re not; and (3) if you’re joining a better league, your average win total is probably going to drop a bit. Here’s a quick look at eight programs that made noteworthy moves in the first half of the 2010s.

Texas A&M and Missouri to the SEC

When A&M and Mizzou fled the increasingly dramatic Big 12 for the SEC in 2012, fans of both the Aggies and Tigers, after being told for a solid year about how the “SEC grind” would wear their teams down, got to take early satisfaction in how they performed. A&M surged to 11-2 in its very first season, beating Alabama with Heisman winner Johnny Manziel. Meanwhile, after quarterback injury issues derailed its first season in the league, Missouri won the SEC East in its second and third seasons.

All in all, the move has worked out pretty well for both programs, albeit in different ways.

A&M has recruited like a big dog from its first day in the league; the Aggies battled inconsistency in the 2000s, but they’ve been consistently good since joining the SEC. The problem: They’ve been good in the hardest division in college football. “Grind” or no grind, the Aggies play lots of very good teams and lose to some of them. This is a top-15 to top-20 program, but as Oklahoma might learn in 2024, with the wrong schedule that can still result in going 7-5.

Mizzou found some early success in the SEC East, something that will be forfeited now that divisional play is no longer a thing. But the Tigers’ tenure has been remarkable in that they were basically the exact same program before and after the move: one capable of top-15 performances, but one with a floor lower than that of A&M and others.

Other Big 12 departures

Colorado and Nebraska also left the Big 12 in the early 2010s. Their respective fates haven’t been as solid as those of A&M and Missouri, but it’s hard to say that was because of the moves. Both programs battled regression and identity crises in the 2000s, and changing conferences most certainly didn’t arrest those slides.

Colorado suffered five consecutive losing seasons before leaving the Big 12, and the bottoming-out that occurred in the Pac-12 would have happened in any conference. The Buffaloes’ entire Pac-12 life was, aside from one lovely run in 2016, a fruitless search for traction.

Nebraska was still good in its final Big 12 years, winning either nine or 10 games in four of its last five seasons. But after the elite success of the previous decades, Huskers fans and administrators were not satisfied with good. NU fired Bo Pelini after seven consecutive nine- or 10-win seasons and proceeded to get lost in the wilderness. With just one winning season in nine years, the Huskers are in their worst run since the 1950s.

Was the Big Ten move in some way responsible for this slide? I really don’t think so. The recruiting base certainly changed a bit, but when you’re not living up to recruiting rankings, then recruiting itself isn’t the problem. This school has checked just about every box on the “how not to run a program” list — Rule No. 1: Don’t just hire the opposite of your ex and expect the opposite result — and that easily could have happened in the Big 12 too.

Maryland and Rutgers to the Big Ten

The Big Ten’s other major move in the 2010s added two programs that were, well, quite a bit less storied than Nebraska. They haven’t really made much noise either.

Maryland has remained Maryland — a program with occasional potential but consistency issues. But when you hit the 80th percentile, as the Terrapins have the past two years, there are plenty of wins to be found in the Big Ten.

As the chart shows, after the amazing surge of 2006, Rutgers had already begun to suffer diminishing returns. When Greg Schiano left for the pros in 2012, Kyle Flood held the fort for a moment, but collapse followed. With Schiano returning in 2020, an ascent has begun. We’ll see what the Scarlet Knights’ ceiling is.

Utah and TCU called up to the majors

The two teams that most obviously benefited from early-2010s realignment were the two elite mid-majors that found power-conference homes. They’ve provided two different types of examples for both SMU in 2024 and the four mid-majors (BYU, Cincinnati, Houston and UCF) that moved to the Big 12 last season.

It has bounced all over the place, but TCU’s 12-year percentile average has remained almost exactly the same before and after the move to the Big 12. The major difference: With harder schedules, the win total has dropped a decent amount. (As 2022’s run to the CFP national title game proved, however, the highs have been quite high.)

Utah is the model when it comes to meeting greater opportunity with slow and steady growth. The Utes enjoyed two brilliant seasons in the 2000s — unbeaten campaigns with BCS bowl wins in 2004 and 2008 — but they were less consistent than TCU in that period. With Kyle Whittingham running a steady ship, however, they have grown brilliantly consistent over the past decade. Of course, that improvement has basically produced the same win totals as before, but it’s impressive all the same.