The Big 12 has turned unpredictability into part of its identity, but that same chaos has created a tougher question around the conference. If almost anyone can beat anyone, does that prove depth, or does it show the league lacks a truly dominant team? Kalani Sitake believes the former, and his latest message to the CFP committee makes it clear he thinks the Big 12 is being judged too harshly for the very thing it considers a strength.

During an appearance on the Jim Rome Show, Sitake defended the Big 12’s competitive balance and sent a message to the playoff committee.

“Don’t punish us because we have great parity because there’s great depth in the conference,” Sitake said. “And don’t punish this conference because anybody can win it.”

For Sitake, the issue is that the Big 12 does not have one team dominating the conference every year, but that does not mean the league lacks quality teams. In fact, he believes the opposite.

The difficulty of winning the Big 12 comes from the fact that every conference game feels like a challenge.

“Look at the parity that exists in the conference. Nobody can basically predict what’s going to happen and who’s going to win the championship,” Sitake said. “It’s been a different champion for a number of years now.”

Over the last six seasons, the Big 12 has produced a different conference champion every year.

Sitake pointed to teams like Texas Tech under Joey McGuire, Oklahoma State, and Kansas State as examples of programs that make the conference difficult to navigate. His argument is that the Big 12’s unpredictability should not hurt its playoff chances.

That argument is not coming from theory alone. BYU experienced exactly how quickly one loss inside the conference could reshape its playoff position last season.

BYU already learned how costly one Big 12 loss can be

Sitake does not have to look far for an example. BYU started the 2025 season 8-0 and climbed to No. 7 in the CFP rankings before losing 29-7 on the road to Texas Tech. The defeat sent the Cougars tumbling five spots to No. 12, even as Texas Tech moved from No. 8 to No. 6. BYU eventually recovered, finished the regular season 11-1 and entered the Big 12 Championship Game ranked No. 11.

The rematch with Texas Tech ended even worse. BYU lost 34-7, finished 11-2 and slipped to No. 12 in the final CFP rankings, leaving the Cougars just outside the playoff. Both losses came against the same Texas Tech team, which finished 12-1 and remained No. 4 in the final rankings.

What made the outcome harder to ignore was what happened around BYU. Alabama stayed at No. 9 despite finishing 10-3 and losing the SEC Championship Game, while Miami moved from No. 12 to No. 10 without playing that weekend. For Sitake, that sequence adds real context to his argument. The issue is not simply that the Big 12 is unpredictable, but whether losses to the conference’s best teams are being weighed the same way as similar losses elsewhere.

That is also where the SEC comparison enters the conversation. The league has long been praised for its depth because several teams are usually ranked and capable of competing nationally. Sitake believes the Big 12 deserves similar consideration when its own contenders survive a difficult conference schedule.

His point is not that the Big 12 should receive an easier path. It is that the quality of those conference opponents should matter when the CFP committee evaluates a 10-2 or 11-2 résumé.

And BYU’s case is only part of the bigger picture. The conference itself has spent the last several seasons proving how difficult it is for any one program to stay on top.

Nobody has been able to own the Big 1

The Big 12’s recent history adds to his case. Since conference realignment changed the league, several programs have had chances to compete near the top instead of one team controlling the championship race every season.

That creates a different kind of challenge for coaches.

“You can’t just assume that the games are going to work out the way that you think they are,” Sitake said. “It’s unpredictable, which makes it more fun, but makes it more difficult as a head coach.”

The CFP committee evaluates teams based on several factors, including strength of schedule, conference championships, quality wins, and losses. For Big 12 programs, the challenge has been proving that their conference schedule deserves the same respect as other major leagues.

Sitake believes the conference’s biggest selling point should not become its biggest disadvantage. The Big 12 does not need every season to have a clear favorite to prove it has strong teams. In his view, the fact that anyone can win the conference is exactly what makes it difficult.

“Anybody can win it,” Sitake said.

That has become the Big 12’s message in the expanded playoff era. The conference believes surviving a league full of dangerous opponents should carry value, even without a single dominant program leading the way.

For Sitake, the committee should not see the Big 12’s chaos as a weakness. It is the reason winning the conference means so much.