Steve Sarkisian’s Scheduling Comments Reflect a Bigger Tension in College Football’s Playoff Era
In the wake of Texas’ win over Texas A&M, Steve Sarkisian didn’t waste any time making his case for the Longhorns in the College Football Playoff. And in doing so, he raised a point that’s been bubbling under the surface for years: Should teams be penalized for playing tough nonconference schedules?
Sarkisian says no-and he’s using Texas’ future matchups with heavyweights like Ohio State, Michigan, and Notre Dame to drive the point home. His message? If Texas isn’t rewarded for scheduling those games, what’s the incentive to keep doing it?
It’s a fair question. But the idea that Texas would walk away from marquee matchups in the future? That’s a lot harder to believe.
Sarkisian’s Frustration: Real, But Misplaced?
Let’s start with the context. Texas is the only team that’s come close to beating Ohio State this season, falling 14-7 in a defensive slugfest.
That’s notable, considering the Buckeyes have steamrolled everyone else on their schedule. Sarkisian’s argument is that his team should be rewarded, not punished, for taking on that challenge.
“If we’re just staring at a record, we’ve got to put ourselves in a better position to get a better record,” Sark said this week, pointing out that Texas has played five top-10 opponents this season-four of them in SEC play. That’s a brutal stretch by any standard.
But here’s where things get murky. Sarkisian has floated the idea that if Texas doesn’t make the playoff, future games against top-tier nonconference opponents could be reconsidered. It’s a bold stance-but one that doesn’t really hold up when you look at the bigger picture.
Why Those Big-Time Matchups Aren’t Going Anywhere
Texas already has home-and-home series scheduled with Ohio State, Michigan, and Notre Dame through 2033. And while Sarkisian might be frustrated now, those games aren’t getting canceled.
Why? Because they’re too valuable-not just for Texas, but for college football as a whole.
These kinds of matchups are the lifeblood of the sport’s current ecosystem. In an era where TV contracts are king and stadiums are built to hold 80,000-plus fans, you need heavyweight games to fill seats and drive ratings.
Texas vs. Ohio State?
That’s a primetime event. Texas vs.
San Jose State? That’s a tough sell, even in Austin.
This is the reality of modern college football: the sport is fueled by media rights deals, and networks aren’t shelling out eight-figure checks to air Texas vs. Kentucky.
They want the big ones-Texas vs. Michigan, Florida State vs.
Alabama, Oklahoma vs. Georgia.
These are the games that command national attention and justify the massive payouts.
And no one understands that better than Texas athletic director Chris Del Conte, who has long been a champion of scheduling high-profile nonconference games. Even before Texas joined the SEC, Del Conte was lining up matchups with Georgia and Florida. That appetite for marquee games hasn’t gone away-it’s only grown.
The Playoff Picture vs. The Business of College Football
Sarkisian’s frustration stems from a legitimate place. If the College Football Playoff committee is primarily looking at win-loss records, then why should a team risk a loss by playing a powerhouse in Week 1? It’s a valid concern, especially in a system that still leaves room for subjectivity.
But the reality is, the playoff is just one piece of the puzzle. The broader business of college football demands big games. They’re what keep fans engaged, what sell out stadiums, and what drive the TV deals that fund entire athletic departments.
So while Sark may be venting now, the idea that Texas would actually pull out of those future games is more bark than bite. The stakes are too high, and the benefits too big, for that to be a serious option.
What This All Really Says About the State of the Sport
At its core, Sarkisian’s comments reflect a growing tension in college football: the balance between competitive fairness and commercial reality.
On one hand, coaches want to put their teams in the best position to make the playoff. On the other, athletic departments and TV networks need the kinds of games that generate buzz, sell tickets, and justify billion-dollar contracts.
That push and pull isn’t going away anytime soon.
So while Sarkisian’s comments may sound like a warning shot, they’re really more of a pressure release-a coach doing his job, fighting for his team, and trying to spark a conversation about how we evaluate success in this new era of college football.
But when it comes to those blockbuster nonconference games? They’re not going anywhere.
Not in 2026. Not in 2033.
Not as long as the sport keeps chasing bigger audiences and bigger paydays.