Skip to main content

Steve Sarkisian takes direct aim in college football arms race

Steve Sarkisian explains why the biggest problem with the CFB Playoff is not the number of teams in the format.
Brett Davis-Imagn Images
Brett Davis-Imagn Images | Brett Davis-Imagn Images

Behind a veil so thin to be almost transparent, Steve Sarkisian made a major complaint about the Texas Tech Red Raiders. Sark has no high ground from which to challenge other programs for using huge warchests to chase championships. Texas athletics is loaded with donor cash, as are more than a few other athletic departments. One of the others spending big money is Texas Tech, whose power booster, Cody Campbell, shades the spending issue a bit by claiming the Red Raiders are the "most effective spender." On3's Pete Nakos claims that Texas and Texas Tech were the top two spending programs last season.

If Nakos is correct, it is no wonder that Steve Sarkisian has a burr under his saddle. The Red Raiders made the playoffs with an automatic bid. The 9-3 Longhorns did not, and Sark clearly believes Texas was the better team.

Instead of talking about money and player payrolls, Sarkisian challenged Texas Tech and the playoff team selection process, not adequately considering Strength of Schedule (SOS) disparities. Without naming the Red Raiders, Sarkisian said, " There’s a team in our state that plays in another conference that has a schedule that I would argue if I played with our twos and our threes, we could go undefeated, and they’ll probably make the CFP this year."

Sarkisian has a valid point. Big 12 proponents vehemently disagree. The Big 12 counterargument is not a strong one. Based on ESPN's FPI, Texas Tech had an SOS of No. 46 among all FBS teams. Playing Oregon in a Playoff game boosted the Red Raiders' SOS. No. 46 was the second-highest SOS in the Big 12. The worst SEC SOS was Tennessee at No. 36.

Sarkisian Points Out Biggest Playoff Problem

The Playoff Selection Committee knows it has a problem in factoring in SOS. They talked a lot about a new metric of 'Record Strength', but the talk led to little adjustment.

If only the playoffs could be about allowing the 12-best or 14 or 16 or 24-best teams to compete for a National Championship. It started that way with four teams, but lost its purpose long before the field was increased to 12 teams.

Sark's comments are self-serving, but that does not make them wrong. How to select Playoff teams is more important than the number of teams in the format.

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Loading recommendations... Please wait while we load personalized content recommendations