Steve Sarkisian isn’t just coaching games right now-he’s campaigning. With the College Football Playoff picture coming into focus and Texas sitting at 9-3, the Longhorns’ head coach is doing what many coaches do this time of year: making his case to the committee. But in doing so, Sarkisian took a not-so-subtle jab at Miami, and it’s raising eyebrows across the college football landscape.
During a recent TV appearance, Sarkisian questioned whether the CFP committee is truly watching the games or just scanning box scores. And to drive home his point, he used Miami’s 38-7 win over Pitt as an example of what he believes shouldn’t be rewarded.
“Or, is it don’t play good teams, put up a bunch of yards, put up a bunch of points, and make it look good?” Sarkisian said.
“You know, throw fade route touchdowns with 38 seconds to go when you're ahead 31-7 so that score looks better. So is the committee really watching the games?
Or are they just looking at a stat sheet at the end of the game and say, ‘Oh well they won by this many points, they must have played very good.’”
That’s not exactly subtle. Sarkisian didn’t name Miami directly, but the reference was clear.
Late in that Pitt game, with Miami already up big, Panthers head coach Pat Narduzzi called a timeout with under two minutes left. On the next play, Mario Cristobal dialed up a deep shot.
Quarterback Carson Beck dropped a fade into the end zone, and CJ Daniels hauled it in with a spectacular one-handed grab to put the exclamation point on a blowout win.
Was it a little extra? Sure.
Was it unusual in the world of college football? Not at all.
Late-game touchdowns in lopsided contests happen all the time-sometimes in response to a timeout, sometimes just because a team wants to stay aggressive. But Sarkisian’s real gripe isn’t about sportsmanship.
It’s about narrative.
He’s trying to shift the conversation away from final scores and toward strength of schedule-something Texas can hang its hat on. The Longhorns have played five top-10 opponents this season, coming away with wins over ranked teams like Oklahoma, Vanderbilt, and Texas A&M. That’s a resume built on quality competition, not just gaudy numbers.
Miami, on the other hand, has been making its own case, but from a different angle. The Hurricanes are leaning on a signature win over Notre Dame as their calling card.
That head-to-head victory over a respected opponent is the kind of thing the committee is supposed to weigh heavily. And they’ve been challenging the committee to reward that kind of performance over raw records or point differentials.
So yes, Sarkisian has a point-he just made it in a way that puts Miami in his crosshairs. And that’s what makes this interesting.
Of all the teams he could’ve used to illustrate his argument, he chose Miami. Not a team currently slotted in the top four.
Not another program on the playoff bubble. He went straight at the Hurricanes, possibly because their case is built on a similar foundation: “We beat a good team, and that should matter.”
But if we’re being honest, Texas’ loss to Florida is a tough blemish in any side-by-side comparison. That’s the kind of result that lingers in the committee’s mind, especially when margins are razor-thin. Still, Sarkisian is doing what any coach in his position would do-he’s advocating for his team, trying to control the narrative in the final hours before selections are made.
This is the season for lobbying. The games are mostly behind us, and now it’s about positioning.
Coaches know the committee is made up of people, not machines. And even if the system is designed to be objective, human nature always plays a role.
Sarkisian’s message is clear: don’t just look at the scoreboard-look at who we played and how we played them. Whether the committee agrees is another story. But one thing’s for sure: the playoff race just got a little more personal.