Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

"Vegas" isn't predicting outcomes, they're setting lines to get even betting on each side so the house makes money both ways.  This has always been among the silliest arguments sports fans choose to engage in.  I'll leave you to it.

I don't think it's silly at all.
Vegas sets lines to get equal action on both sides.  Another way to describe that is getting a consensus.
A consensus with skin in the game, which means they're taking it seriously.
.
Now, let's move on from Texas/IU, as they have equal records.  Let's do Bama/IU, just to prove a point.
Bama could very well be favored in a hypothetical matchup with IU.  I'd say it probably would be, despite that game vs OU, lol.

That by itself isn't enough to leapfrog a 3-loss team over a 1-loss team.  I get a lot of flack here for not valuing the game results for some reason, which I've never understood.  I simply advocate for taking it all into account.  Maybe there can be enough context that a 3-loss team be ranked ahead of a 1-loss team (it happens all the time with helmets vs G5 programs). 
If Vegas favors the 3-loss team, that just tells me it's worthwhile to have the conversation of which team is better.  A team can be better/more talented/more stars/more high draft picks and yet have a trash resume compared to a team with a better record.  And that betting line/talent advantage may not be enough to rank that team ahead of the 1-loss IU-type team. 
Alabama is really good sometimes.  Ole Miss is great sometimes.  IU blew out a lot of teams, but didn't face many genuine threats this year.  There's no crime in saying that.  We saw the 153 total yardage effort vs OSU.  Not a good look vs a strong team. 
But there was a reason IU was a 10.5 dog vs OSU.  As there is a reason Bama probably wouldn't be as big an underdog.  Talent matters.  Results matter.  Ignoring losses isn't prudent, nor is ignoring one's own eyes. 

Personally, I'd include a 10-1 (or 11-1) IU in the playoff over and 3-loss P4 team.  That's a 2-loss difference.  But when there is a 1-loss difference, to not even have the conversation is embarrassing and stupid imo.  A 1-game difference between teams with very different schedule strengths is not enough of a difference.  That you win IS important, but WHO you beat is also important.  It's not an either/or thing and never has been.  I haven't advocated for one without the other, just that pollsters tend to rank teams on even conference planes by number of losses, as a child might.  That's not taking into consideration enough information and I will always always criticize it.

Alabama would be favored against all but 5 schools, so they should probably still be safely in

well just how many does bama have to lose to be out of playoff consideration

To be fair, Texas hasn't exactly played "an SEC schedule" this year, either. 
Texas is 1st in the conference right now, and they played UGA, which is 2nd.
The Horns haven't (yet) played 3,4,5,6,7,8, or 9.
They played 10 on their 3rd-string QB and minus many other starters.
They played 11, 12, 13, 15, and 16.

We knew this before the season began - the 2 newbies' schedules were VERY different (Texas was given a pass compared to OU's slate).
Texas will play A&M, so that helps some....but Texas will not have faced a traditional, middle-of-the-road SEC schedule in 2024.

So if you get to nitpick my phrase, I get to further specify it.

In this new mega conference era, this will be common. Just saying "SEC Schedule" or "B1G Schedule" is meaningless when you are only playing half the teams. 

Ohio State and Indiana both played B1G Schedules but IU missed Oregon and Penn State. They are VERY different B1G Schedules. 

"Vegas" isn't predicting outcomes, they're setting lines to get even betting on each side so the house makes money both ways.  This has always been among the silliest arguments sports fans choose to engage in.  I'll leave you to it.

Never underestimate Vegas oddsmakers.  They could cure any condition - if there was a spread involved.

Speaking of odds, likely that right now OSU would be a favorite over every team on every field

I'd love to see a ranking based on purported Vegas odds.  I realize at times A>B  B>C  C>A by a smidgen.

[th]Team[/th] [th]Rating[/th] [th]Offense[/th] [th]Defense[/th] [th]Spec Tms[/th]
1. Ohio St. (10-1)	31.4	39.3 (5)	9.7 (1)	1.8 (17)
2. Ole Miss (8-3)	27.4	38.2 (8)	12.9 (6)	2.1 (2)
3. Oregon (11-0)	27.1	40.0 (3)	14.4 (8)	1.6 (22)
4. Texas (10-1)	26.8	39.4 (4)	11.0 (2)	-1.7 (115)
5. Georgia (9-2)	25.6	39.1 (6)	15.6 (9)	2.1 (5)
6. Alabama (8-3)	25.5	40.5 (2)	16.4 (10)	1.4 (27)
7. Notre Dame (10-1)	24.9	37.6 (9)	11.7 (3)	-1.0 (99)
8. Miami (10-1)	24.1	43.8 (1)	21.6 (31)	1.9 (12)
9. Tennessee (9-2)	23.9	34.2 (23)	11.9 (4)	1.5 (23)
10. Penn St. (10-1)	23.3	35.9 (15)	12.3 (5)	-0.3 (82)
11. Indiana (10-1)	20.9	35.5 (16)	16.7 (11)	2.0 (7)
12. Texas A&M (8-3)	18.6	35.3 (18)	18.7 (18)	2.0 (8)
13. SMU (10-1)	18.3	38.4 (7)	20.2 (25)	0.1 (65)
14. S. Carolina (8-3)	17.3	33.9 (25)	17.4 (14)	0.8 (42)
15. Clemson (9-2)	15.7	36.1 (12)	18.9 (20)	-1.5 (109)
16. Kansas St. (8-3)	15.4	33.2 (29)	19.7 (22)	1.9 (13)
17. Iowa (7-4)	15.4	27.7 (62)	14.3 (7)	2.0 (6)
18. BYU (9-2)	12.8	31.6 (36)	20.8 (27)	2.0 (9)
19. Louisville (7-4)	12.6	36.8 (11)	22.8 (37)	-1.5 (110)
20. Iowa St. (9-2)	12.3	30.9 (40)	19.3 (21)	0.7 (45)
21. Missouri (8-3)	12.3	33.0 (31)	19.7 (23)	-1.0 (98)
22. LSU (7-4)	12.3	35.5 (17)	23.8 (43)	0.6 (50)
23. USC (6-5)	11.9	33.9 (24)	22.7 (36)	0.7 (48)
24. Auburn (5-6)	11.8	29.7 (47)	17.4 (13)	-0.5 (88)
25. Boise St. (10-1)	11.8	37.5 (10)	25.4 (55)	-0.3 (83)

SP+ is pretty good short hand for it. Vegas uses an algorithm like it, which of course they don't share. They also likely adjust it more due to injuries, which SP+ doesn't. But the line and the prediction tend to be pretty close. Of course, betting heavily influences where the line goes once it is set, and doesn't affect SP+ at all. But for a quick and dirty guess, it is pretty good.