The College Football Playoff debate is heating up, and ESPN's Stephen A. Smith has a bold take that might spark some controversy. Should a player's brand power influence their team's chances of making the CFP?
With the Texas Longhorns potentially finishing the season with a 9-3 record, including wins over powerhouse programs like Georgia or Texas A&M, the CFP conversation is intensifying. But here's where it gets intriguing: Smith suggests that Arch Manning's star power could be a significant factor in Texas' favor.
Smith argues that while Manning's on-field performance has been up and down, his name alone draws attention and boosts ratings. This idea might raise some eyebrows, as it implies that off-field factors could outweigh on-field achievements. But Smith isn't shy about addressing the elephant in the room: the impact of television ratings on major sporting events.
Manning, a highly-touted recruit, has indeed been a media darling this season. His name consistently makes headlines, regardless of his game-day performance. However, is this enough to justify a CFP spot? Most fans would argue that on-field excellence should be the sole criterion.
Statistically, Manning has had a solid season, throwing for over 2,000 yards and 18 touchdowns in nine games. His standout performance against Vanderbilt and impressive showing against Mississippi State, before an unfortunate concussion, have contributed to Texas' success.
A 10-2 record would almost certainly secure Texas' place in the CFP. But Smith's argument becomes more compelling if Texas finishes 9-3. He believes Manning's brand value could tip the scales in their favor, ensuring a spot in the national championship conversation.
And this is the part most people miss: the influence of media and popularity on major sporting decisions. Is it fair to consider these factors when determining playoff spots? Share your thoughts in the comments below. Should the CFP committee take ratings and brand power into account, or strictly adhere to on-field results?
