As a PSU fan who suffered a difficult scheduling gauntlet this season (UM, at OSU, at MSU in consecutive weeks), I wanted to analyze the role of scheduling on top 10 programs (using the final AP polls, post bowls) the past five years (the last BCS year, first 4 CFP years). Here's what I found.

Top 10 teams lost 41 of 242 true road games (16.94%), 5 of 18 regular season neutral site games (27.8%), and 23 of 339 home games (6.78%).

By conference...
ACC—10% loss rate on road, 9.3% loss rate at home
Pac-12—17.2 loss rate on road, 15% loss rate at home
Big 12—17.1% loss rate on road, 4.1% loss rate at home
Big Ten—19.1% loss rate on road, 5.5% loss rate at home
SEC—22.6% loss rate on road, 4.8% loss rate at home

Conclusions on losing percentages…
--Top 10 teams lose approximately one road game per year (17.69%)…and one home game every other year (6.78%).
--Teams from the Big Ten, SEC, and Big 12—conferences with traditionally larger and more rabid fan bases—tend to lose more on the road and less at home than those from the Pac-12 and ACC.
--Therefore, favorable scheduling is a key factor in being a top 10 team from SEC, Big Ten, and Big 12 conferences. Scheduling plays a negligible role in the Pac-12 and ACC.
--Losing percentage in neutral site regular season games (27.8%) is higher than true road games (16.9%), largely because of the closer equality of opponents in these games.

Obviously, I've only addressed one aspect of elite teams, but I feel like I found strong confirmation of my theory that scheduling does matter (although I didn't expect there to be a discrepancy between the five conferences). The CFP committee should consider this factor more highly as they look at "strength of schedule" going forward.