Well, I think part of the discussion is perspective. I'm not trying to make excuses for a loss, I've said before I think the team needs no excuses. What they did was amazing last season, it was an amazing season. You simply are not supposed to play a schedule that brutal and still be in the title hunt.
The SoS component, I have been bringing that up, and warning against making schedules even tougher for years now. It's not some new argument I just invented. I'm against another conference game, and I've been the first to point out when other "contenders" played weak schedules. It does matter, it matters a lot.
It's not common to see a team in title contention that played a really brutal schedule, the schedule usually wins. Usually, when you look at a team that really ran the gauntlet, you see something like Auburn at 8-5. They weren't a bad team, they might have been a contender in the ACC for instance, but they got dismantled by the rigors of their schedule. If you question that, consider that they lost 4 out of their last 5 (see? not just talking about Ole Miss). Ole Miss by the way lost 4 out of their last 6. Heck, Miss. State lost 3 out of their last 4. All three of those teams looked like contenders earlier in the season. Am I to believe that the high SoS wasn't a major factor in their collective collapses?
What is happening here though? It's not just injuries, as in what's reported. It's the things that make you walk with a limp, that make it hard to take a deep breath, it's what makes it hard to get out of the bed in the morning and move around. All these collective things take a toll to the point that these guys who had a really brutal season are pained just going through the motions. Then, there's the psychological impact which might be the most severe. If you've been playing through that, and something weakens your will, can you keep it up? It even impacts coaching, the coaches have to show their hands earlier and often, they get less chances to hold back, to plan ahead. It all accumulates.
So, why did the SEC win all those championships? They won them because a perfect storm of sorts had formed. The SoS was high, but generally the SEC championships weren't playing top ten SoS, the coaches, the players, the facilities, the SEC was simply putting out a better overall product and things were working. Perhaps most importantly, the SEC almost always had multiple contenders, when one team fell, another was there to take their place. But, that was delicate, as we've seen. The streak is broken. However, no playoff last year, Alabama vs. FSU, who do you think wins? How things were still set things up well, now though, the extra game, it favors a slightly different pedigree, it does involve a little less rest, a little less preparation, and more importantly it can involve a team that has evolved vs. simply being elite the entire year. Even the signing limit matters, it went into place in 2012, is it coincidence that the SEC started looking mortal shortly thereafter? It impacts depth, we all know that much, as does high SoS.
The SEC did sneak some high SoS teams in there, but if you look at other contenders you routinely see "worse" SoS. It's just easier that way, heck look at the last two champions.
2014: Ohio State 29
2013: Florida State 62
Is SoS everything? No, of course not, I don't think it explains everything that for instance playing in the SEC entails (I simply don't buy that high SoS in say the Pac-12 is quite the same). But, I will argue that when a team wins a championship that played a very high SoS, it is because they were a very good team, and despite the high SoS rather than because of it.