If the College Football Playoff (CFP) were to begin today, one of the biggest stories would be the absence of two of college football’s most storied programs: Texas and Oklahoma. Historically, these programs have been synonymous with elite-level success and national relevance, boasting national championships, Heisman winners, and a pipeline to the NFL that few programs can rival. Yet, as of now, both schools would find themselves on the outside looking in, a reality that underscores just how much college football has shifted in recent years. It is a development that would have stunned even the most seasoned observers just a decade ago, but in today’s landscape, it reflects both the unpredictability of the sport and the profound challenges these programs face in maintaining elite status amid the evolving dynamics of the game.
For Texas, the situation is both puzzling and alarming. The Longhorns are a program with massive resources, an iconic brand, and access to some of the best recruiting territory in the country. Yet, despite these advantages, their performance on the field in recent years has been inconsistent at best. High-profile coaching changes, recruiting missteps, and the pressure of living up to historical expectations have created a scenario in which Texas cannot simply rely on its name or legacy to secure a spot in the playoff. The Longhorns’ struggles are emblematic of a broader issue in college football: prestige alone no longer guarantees elite performance. Fans and analysts alike expected Texas to be a fixture in the playoff conversation, yet the reality is that other programs have closed the gap, if not surpassed them entirely, with innovative coaching, player development, and strategic recruiting.
Oklahoma’s exclusion would be equally significant, though the context differs slightly. The Sooners have been one of the most consistent programs over the past decade, regularly competing for Big 12 titles and appearing in major bowl games. However, their recent challenges highlight the difficulty of sustaining success in a league that has seen substantial upheaval. Conference realignment, the rise of emerging programs, and the increasing influence of the transfer portal have all contributed to a landscape where dominance is harder to maintain. Oklahoma’s absence from the playoff conversation serves as a reminder that even historically elite programs cannot rest on past accomplishments. Excellence in college football is increasingly measured by the ability to adapt, innovate, and win in a rapidly evolving environment, rather than by tradition alone.
Several factors contribute to the current predicament for both Texas and Oklahoma. First and foremost, the competitive balance in college football has shifted dramatically. Programs that were once considered underdogs have found ways to compete with, and even surpass, traditional powerhouses. This leveling of the playing field is fueled by a combination of factors, including better coaching hires across the country, the increasing strategic use of the transfer portal, and the growing influence of analytics and modern training techniques. As a result, even teams with unparalleled history and fan support, like Texas and Oklahoma, must contend with an array of formidable challengers, making a playoff berth far from guaranteed.
Recruiting, long the lifeblood of both programs, also plays a critical role in explaining their absence from the current playoff picture. While Texas and Oklahoma still attract top-tier talent, the recruiting landscape has become much more competitive, with elite players considering a wider array of options and programs outside of the traditional powerhouses. The advent of the transfer portal has only amplified this effect, allowing talented players to move more freely and forcing programs to think strategically about roster management and player retention. For Texas, the challenge has been converting high-profile recruits into on-field success consistently. For Oklahoma, maintaining a pipeline of talent amid conference uncertainty and national competition has proven to be a significant hurdle. In both cases, talent acquisition alone is no longer enough; it must be paired with effective coaching, culture-building, and in-game execution.
Coaching stability—or the lack thereof—is another critical factor. Texas has cycled through multiple head coaches in recent years, each bringing a new philosophy, system, and approach to the program. This constant change has made it difficult for the Longhorns to establish continuity, a key ingredient in building a team capable of competing for national championships. Oklahoma has been relatively more stable, but even subtle shifts in staff, strategy, or scheme can have ripple effects in a conference as competitive as the Big 12. Coaching decisions, game-day execution, and the ability to develop players over time are all central to achieving playoff-caliber success, and both programs have faced challenges in these areas.
The larger conference dynamics also have a direct impact on playoff prospects. The Big 12 has undergone substantial realignment and transformation, creating both opportunities and challenges. Traditional dominance by Texas and Oklahoma is no longer guaranteed, as other programs have strengthened significantly, making conference games more unpredictable and competitive. The absence of a conference championship game for a period further complicated playoff access, limiting the ability of teams to bolster their resumes against high-profile opponents. These structural factors exacerbate the challenges already faced by both programs and highlight the importance of consistent performance across the schedule, not just marquee wins.
Another element that cannot be ignored is the rise of other programs that have disrupted the traditional hierarchy of college football. Schools like Georgia, Michigan, and Ohio State have combined elite talent with coaching stability to dominate the playoff conversation in recent years. Similarly, emerging programs like Washington, Florida State, and Utah have demonstrated that meticulous planning, strategic innovation, and strong player development can create competitive parity. In this environment, the historical prestige of Texas and Oklahoma, while still valuable, is no longer sufficient to secure automatic consideration for the playoff. The playoff committee now evaluates teams based on performance metrics, strength of schedule, and consistency, emphasizing results over reputation.
Fan expectations also play a role in shaping the narrative. Both Texas and Oklahoma have massive fan bases accustomed to competing at the highest level. Their absence from playoff contention is therefore not just a sporting issue but also a cultural and emotional one. Longhorns and Sooners fans are acutely aware of the stakes and feel the sting of exclusion more sharply than most. Social media, 24-hour sports coverage, and the heightened visibility of college football have amplified this effect, creating intense scrutiny and debate over coaching decisions, recruiting classes, and game outcomes. In essence, the playoff absence of these programs is as much a narrative about perception and expectation as it is about on-field performance.
Looking forward, the path back to playoff contention for Texas and Oklahoma requires a multi-faceted approach. First, both programs must establish stability at the coaching level, ensuring that players can develop within a consistent system and culture. Second, recruiting and player development must be executed with precision, taking full advantage of their natural geographic and brand advantages while adapting to the realities of the modern transfer portal. Third, game-day execution and in-season adjustments must be sharp, with strategic innovation and adaptability becoming core components of the program’s identity. Finally, both schools must cultivate a sense of resilience and identity that extends beyond individual seasons, reinforcing a culture of sustained excellence rather than relying on historical glory alone.
The absence of Texas and Oklahoma from the playoff also raises broader questions about the state of college football. It reflects a leveling of the playing field, where innovation, preparation, and execution can outweigh tradition. It underscores the increasingly analytical and data-driven approach to the sport, where every decision, from recruiting to game strategy, is scrutinized for its impact on a team’s national relevance. Moreover, it highlights the importance of adaptability in a sport that is undergoing rapid transformation, from conference realignment to name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals, and the evolving expectations of players and fans alike. In short, the current situation is a microcosm of a sport in transition, with historical powerhouses no longer guaranteed dominance but instead required to earn their place in the spotlight every single season.
