Will the Golden Knights win the Stanley Cup again? The cases for, against a repeat
More Videos
Published
2 years agoon
By
admin
-

Kristen Shilton, ESPN NHL reporterJul 18, 2023, 07:00 AM ET
Close- Kristen Shilton is a national NHL reporter for ESPN.
The Vegas Golden Knights were once known as the “Misfits.”
We’d consider them now more like the “Overachievers.”
It took just six seasons for the NHL’s latest desert-dwelling expansion team to earn the franchise’s first Stanley Cup championship, through a five-game triumph over the Florida Panthers in June.
The Golden Knights weren’t even Cup Final rookies, either. Vegas advanced to that stage in the organization’s inaugural 2017-18 campaign too (it lost to the Washington Capitals), further proof that while Vegas may have joined the NHL about 100 years into its existence, these Golden Knights wasted no time making their mark.
Despite Vegas’ short history, the club has undergone a number of roster and coaching changes in a short half-decade that culminated in it hoisting Lord Stanley’s chalice. Only six of the Golden Knights’ original “Misfits” — aka the first round of players selected in the 2017 expansion draft — remained when Vegas clinched its victory: Jonathan Marchessault, William Karlsson, Reilly Smith, Brayden McNabb, Shea Theodore and William Carrier. The club hasn’t stopped evolving since its inception.
How did the Golden Knights do it? What had to go wrong before so Vegas could finally get it right? And with one title under its belt, will Vegas go on to repeat with another Cup victory next summer?
We’re looking back at Vegas’ run to this most recent Cup Final (and its eventual victory) to break down why the Golden Knights will — and why they won’t — be able to do it all again in 2023-24.
It’ll be a fascinating journey to watch. One thing’s for sure, though. With Vegas, we know there won’t be a dull moment ahead.
1:00
Vegas hoists the Stanley Cup for the first time
The Vegas Golden Knights celebrate at the Stanley Cup presentation ceremony.
The Golden Knights didn’t wander into last season as obvious Cup contenders.
Vegas missed the playoffs entirely in 2021-22 through repeated, self-inflicted wounds. Their big in-season trade acquisition, Jack Eichel, struggled coming off neck surgery, and by April the tenor of the team was obvious disappointment and frustration over unfulfilled expectations.
That led to then-head coach Peter DeBoer being fired. Bruce Cassidy — just let go by the Boston Bruins — stepped in behind the bench. Then word came out in August that the club’s starting netminder, Robin Lehner, was likely done for the season following hip surgery.
It felt as though Vegas was at a turning point — but in which direction? The Golden Knights didn’t need long to answer.
Vegas opened October 2022 with an 8-2-0 record to cement itself as one of the Western Conference’s top contenders. And the Golden Knights never let up from there. They finished atop the Western standings with 111 points (51-22-9) and walked right into the postseason off a near-perfect 5-0-2 roll through April.
Eichel — fully healthy and back in form — led the Golden Knights with 27 goals and 66 points through 67 regular-season contents. But Vegas did damage by committee: Seven skaters had 15 or more goals, six surpassed the 60-point plateau and the Golden Knights paced the NHL in blocked shots per 60 minute (17.94), illustrating a ready appetite for bodily sacrifice.
Vegas was deservedly confident heading into the playoffs, and it immediately showed the resiliency required of a Cup champion. The Golden Knights lost Game 1 of their first-round playoff series against the Winnipeg Jets by a 5-1 margin, then bounced back with four straight victories to ground the Jets and advance to the second round.
The Edmonton Oilers awaited there, and Vegas split the first two contests. In Game 3, the Golden Knights lost starting goaltender Laurent Brossoit to a playoff-ending groin injury. Vegas turned then to backup Adin Hill, relying on the 27-year-old to backstop the team from there. Hill delivered, and Vegas sent the Oilers packing with a 4-2 series win.
In the Western Conference finals, Vegas faced off against DeBoer and the Dallas Stars. The first two games were overtime wins for the Golden Knights, but the Stars didn’t go quietly, pushing the series to an eventual sixth game that Vegas won 6-0 to reach the Cup Final against Florida.
The Panthers’ path to that point was more fraught than that of the Golden Knights: Florida had played 16 games by then (including nine rounds of overtime) compared to just 12 games (and five overtimes) for Vegas. The Golden Knights took an early 2-0 lead in the series, and while the Panthers responded with a Game 3 win, it was Vegas punching back with consecutive victories to win the Cup on home ice by a 9-3 result.
Vegas’ season came together through a confluence of factors rooted in a hundred decisions made over the previous six seasons. Cassidy proved to be a perfect fit in the Golden Knights’ organization by quickly and effectively establishing an identity for the club. The team as a whole managed to stay relatively healthy in the postseason, and its depth was off the charts (four players hit double-digit goal totals in the postseason; six had 15 or more points).
So what are the chances the Golden Knights can run it back with another title this season? Caesars Sportsbook has given Vegas the second-best odds (behind the Colorado Avalanche) to be the 2023-24 Stanley Cup champion. With the NHL draft and the bulk of free agency behind us, now’s the time to take a snapshot of those repeat title chances.

Point: The Golden Knights’ core remains intact
General manager Kelly McCrimmon and president of hockey operations George McPhee took great pains piecing Vegas together into the team we see now. It’ll look quite similar come fall, with those key players from the regular season and postseason returning to the fold.
Eichel (six goals, 26 points in the playoffs), Mark Stone (11 goals, 24 points), Chandler Stephenson (10 goals, 20 points), Marchessault (13 goals, 25 points) and Karlsson (11 goals, 17 points) remain. So do Theodore, McNabb, Alex Pietrangelo and Alec Martinez on defense. Each has become a cornerstone of Vegas’ success to date. Those players set a tone.
Hill will return too, after his star turn as Vegas’ No. 1 goaltender in the playoffs. He was sensational, posting an 11-4-0 record with a .932 save percentage and 2.17 goals-against average. In the Cup Final itself, Hill was 4-1 with a .923 SV%. Vegas smartly resigned Hill via a two-year, $9.8 million contract in June; he’ll enter the Golden Knights’ training camp on an inside track to be their starter once again.
Vegas’ chemistry was palpable all season long. It was clear how much the Golden Knights enjoyed playing together, and that intangible can’t be underestimated when a grinding 82-game campaign bleeds into an increasingly stressful postseason push. No new friends needed.
Counterpoint: Health could be an issue
Colorado learned the hard way.
After the Avalanche went on their own Cup-winning run in 2021-22, they too hoped to be poised for a repeat. The injury gods had other plans.
In the offseason following the Cup victory, captain Gabriel Landeskog underwent knee surgery and wound up missing the entire 2022-23 season. Cale Makar, Artturi Lehkonen and Nathan MacKinnon — all integral players on that Cup team — were sidelined by various ailments. The Avalanche didn’t have enough depth to keep up — they’d lost Nazem Kadri and Andre Burakovsky, among others, to free agency the previous summer — and Colorado fell short of its consecutive Cup goal.
The Golden Knights will aim to avoid a similar fate. But there’s a red flag or two worth watching out for, particularly with impact skaters who’ve been through the injury roller coaster already.
Stone himself has had two back surgeries in the past nine months. Eichel has never played a full 82-game season in his eight-year career. Goaltender Logan Thompson missed most of the second half of last season with a lower-body problem. And who knows what other procedures or issues players have been dealing with that we don’t know about.
It takes a good deal out of everyone on the path to a Cup victory. How Vegas survives the wear and tear of a long spring — and short summer — will have a direct effect on its prospects this year, too.
Point: Vegas’ ownership and management group want to win — at any cost
Golden Knights owner Bill Foley strives to be a man of his word.
He’s off to a good start.
Foley recounted for reporters last month how, when Karlsson agreed to an eight-year extension with Vegas in June 2019, he expected “three Stanley Cups” during the length of the contract.
“When we were on the ice [after the Cup victory] and getting our pictures taken,” Foley said, “I looked over at [Karlsson] and told him, ‘OK, you got one.'”
Vegas has four years — on Foley’s timeline anyway — to grab two more. And there’s no doubt Foley will give his executives every green light available to try and get there. McPhee and McCrimmon have a history of showing they’ll take advantage of opportunity.
McCrimmon has said repeatedly that while Vegas’ run to the Cup Final in its inaugural season wasn’t a fluke, the organization had to improve season over season to be where it’s at now, positioned as a perennial contender.
To make that a reality, the Golden Knights aren’t afraid to make hard — or unpopular — decisions. Last month Vegas traded Smith, an original Golden Knight, to Pittsburgh to free up enough cap space to sign Ivan Barbashev to a five-year, $25 million extension. Vegas previously acquired Barbashev from St. Louis at the trade deadline, and he was a force in the postseason, putting up seven goals and 18 points (Smith, by comparison, tallied four goals and 14 points).
McCrimmon & Co. don’t get bogged down by emotion. Smith was the first player to whom Stone handed the Cup after his initial captain’s lap, but moving him freed up cap space and got Vegas a third-round draft pick in return.
Counterpoint: Cap space could be an issue
At the moment, Vegas has $1,423,317 in cap space, according to Cap Friendly.
Now, that could change if and when the team shifts players to long-term injured reserve down the road (for example, Lehner spent all of this past year on LTIR with a hip issue, and his $5 million hit might end up there again depending on his current health status).
Like some other teams, the Golden Knights have gotten creative in the recent past in hurdling over any cap-related restraints. If there’s a loophole they can use to sign or keep a player, they will explore it in earnest.
However, the cap is what it is — and it’s increasing by a paltry $1 million this season (to hit $83.5 million). Should the Golden Knights not be able to capitalize on LTIR space like they have in the past, it could tie their hands when it comes to making in-season improvements. Having the team’s core dialed in is the ideal scenario, but as the Avalanche discovered, there must be room to adjust on the fly as well — or else.
Reality: It’s hard — but not impossible — to repeat
Just 16 NHL teams have won consecutive championships. Only Tampa Bay (in 2020 and 2021) and Pittsburgh (2016 and 2017) have managed to do it in the past 25 years.
There’s a long list of reasons for why that feat is so difficult. Fatigue plays a major role for many Cup-winning teams the following season. The league’s other 31 teams have had the chance to improve themselves over the past months and weeks, too. There’s a target on the back of champions. That can creep into any player’s head space and take hold — positively or negatively.
The mere pressure of attempting to repeat can derail that very attempt. It’s a collection of issues every former victor has had to navigate, and the vast majority fall short.
That’s not to say Vegas can’t be the exception. All things being equal, the Golden Knights should have a strong, motivated team going into the season. And Vegas has enjoyed defying the odds, whether in that first-season push to the Cup Final or by their willingness to take risks that ultimately paid off.
What’s the final verdict, then, on Vegas’ potential going 2-for-2? It’s easy to be high on its chances in July. On paper, the Golden Knights are obvious contenders you’d be hard-pressed to bet against.
But as every card player knows too well — tables can go from hot to cold in a blink. The Golden Knights best be well prepared for a fight starting this fall.
You may like
Sports
Back in NHL, Hart debuts for Vegas after acquittal
Published
8 hours agoon
December 3, 2025By
admin
-
Associated Press
Dec 2, 2025, 10:41 PM ET
LAS VEGAS — Goalie Carter Hart, one of five 2018 Canada world junior hockey players acquitted of sexual assault in July, made his first NHL appearance in nearly two years Tuesday night and received an enthusiastic reaction from Golden Knights fans during pregame introductions.
Hart certainly received the loudest response before Vegas’ home game against Chicago, and if there were any boos, they were difficult to hear.
Some fans also held signs supportive of Hart.
Hart was the first of those five players to agree to an NHL contract. The league ruled those players were eligible to sign deals beginning Oct. 15 and to play starting Dec. 1. Hart signed a two-year, $4 million contract and has been working with the club’s American Hockey League affiliate in Henderson, Nevada.
After he agreed to sign, Hart read a statement to reporters that, in part, said he wanted “to show the community my true character and who I am and what I’m about.”
Hart was asked Monday what steps he has taken to fulfill that pledge.
“There’s been a few things we’ve talked about,” Hart said. “We did a thing there in Henderson helping out the homeless. There’s some things we’ve talked about throughout the season. Whatever I can do to help, I’m happy to help.”
Giving Hart his first start at home could help ease him into what could be a rocky reception around the league. After facing the Blackhawks, Vegas goes on a five-game trip against Eastern Conference teams, including a Dec. 11 stop at Hart’s former Philadelphia team.
He worked in Henderson on getting back into NHL game shape. Hart appeared in three games and went 1-2.
“I’ve worked my [butt] off to get back to this point,” Hart said. “For me, the key is preparation and I’ve done everything I can to be prepared.”
It was a tough start against the Blackhawks. Less than a minute after the Golden Knights scored, Chicago’s Oliver Moore found the back of the net against Hart on the Blackhawks’ second shot on goal.
He gave up a second-period goal when he left the crease to clear the puck. His pass instead went directly to Tyler Bertuzzi, who scored over Hart and defenseman Noah Hanifin.
But Hart made 15 saves through the first two periods and the score was 2-2 entering intermission.
The 27-year-old last played in an NHL game Jan. 20, 2024, for Philadelphia. Hart played six seasons for the Flyers, going 96-93-29 with a .906 save percentage and 2.94 goals-against average.
“The purpose of Henderson was to get him back into live reps,” Golden Knights coach Bruce Cassidy said. “He can practice with us with NHL shooters, but traffic around the net, screens, all that stuff is sometimes hard to replicate, especially when you haven’t played that often. We’re less worried about the results, more getting reps, getting used to that stuff.”
The Golden Knights could use the help in net, especially with starting goalie Adin Hill on injured reserve because of a lower-body injury and his return possibly weeks away. Akira Schmid has received the majority of the work with Hill out and is 9-2-4 with a .896 save percentage and 2.51 GAA.
Vegas had lost four straight games before defeating San Jose 4-3 on Saturday night.
Cassidy said the upcoming schedule works in the Golden Knights’ favor in terms of not overloading the goalies.
“Akira’s played well, too, so we have to keep mindful he has to stay sharp,” Cassidy said. “So I’m sure you’ll see a lot of both goalies, but Carter’s waited a long time to play, so he’s definitely going to get his share of starts.”
Sports
Week 15 Anger Index: The case for Texas and monthlong gripes for Miami, BYU
Published
10 hours agoon
December 3, 2025By
admin

-

David HaleDec 2, 2025, 08:16 PM ET
Close- College football reporter.
- Joined ESPN in 2012.
- Graduate of the University of Delaware.
The first College Football Playoff rankings came out five weeks ago. They looked a lot like tonight’s rankings.
We’ve had precious little movement at the top, with a few teams jockeying up or down a slot, but effectively no seismic shifts in the landscape. BYU and Texas are the only two teams that were projected in the field in the committee’s first ranking that aren’t now — and they’re just barely on the outside with reasonable arguments for inclusion.
Teams ranked in the top 18 by the committee this year are a combined 55-9, with six of those losses coming to other teams ranked in the top 18. All three outliers are courtesy of — you guessed it — the ACC (Louisville to Cal, Virginia to Wake and Georgia Tech to Pitt).
That’s a massive anomaly. Last year, top-18 teams at this point had lost 19 games, including 14 to teams outside their own grouping. Top-10 teams are 33-4 this year. In the first 11 years of the playoff, top-10 teams had lost an average of nine games by this point in the season.
The two words that best describe this year’s playoff push are “status quo.”
That, of course, has been bad news for all the teams on the outside looking in — from those with valid cases such as Miami, BYU and Vanderbilt, to underdogs such as USC, Utah or Arizona that might’ve had a shot in a more chaotic year.
But the real loser in this copy and paste rankings season is all the fans who just want to see things get weird. It’s a sad state of affairs when we’re left to rely on MACtion and the ACC to do all the heavy lifting when it comes to college football drama. The power players need to step up — or, perhaps, ratchet down — their game to add a bit more drama.
The good news is, the committee’s ad hoc reasoning, mushmouthed explanations and mind-boggling about-faces still leave plenty to argue about, even if the big picture hasn’t changed all that much.
Here’s this week’s biggest slights, snubs and shenanigans.

![]()
It’s not entirely clear how this committee values wins. For the past month, the priority has certainly appeared to be about which team has the better losses (unless, of course, you’re Alabama).
That seems a foolish way to prioritize playoff teams, since the goal of the playoff isn’t to lose to good teams but to win games.
Does Texas have a bad loss? Yes. A 29-21 defeat to woeful Florida — even if the Gators also played Georgia and Ole Miss close and just walloped a team that beat Alabama head-to-head — is problematic.
But look who Texas has beaten: No. 7 Texas A&M by 10, No. 8 Oklahoma by 17 and No. 14 Vandy by three (in a game they led by 24 in the fourth quarter). That’s the résumé of a team capable of winning a national championship — even if the Horns were also capable of losing to a second-rate SEC team.
Are we trying to find teams with the most upside or give participation trophies to the ones which have not lost an ugly one? (Except, again, Alabama.)
And it’s not as if the committee believes an extra loss is disqualifying. Oklahoma, Alabama, Notre Dame and Miami all have two losses and are ranked ahead of one-loss BYU (more on that in a moment), so what’s the harm of moving a three-loss Texas ahead of a two-loss team that has accomplished less?
This all comes back to the most frequent and justified criticism of the committee: The same rules aren’t applied evenly. In some cases, record matters. In some cases, best wins matter. In some cases, better losses matter. The standard varies based on the team being considered. But if the committee is going to err in favor of any team, it should probably do so for one that’s proved — not once, not twice, but three times — that it can beat an elite opponent.
Oh, and moving Texas up ahead of, say, Notre Dame would also have the added bonus of allowing the committee to sidestep another tricky situation. Which leads us to…
![]()
![]()
We’re putting these two teams together because we’ve already lamented the committee’s utterly disingenuous evaluation of them repeatedly, so it feels redundant to keep going down the same rabbit hole. But, for the sake of two programs being astonishingly misevaluated, let’s do one more round.
For Miami, the logic is obvious: The Canes beat Notre Dame head-to-head.
But let’s keep going. Miami’s two losses — SMU and Louisville — would rank as the fourth- and fifth-toughest games on Notre Dame’s schedule, had the Irish played them. Instead, Notre Dame has cruised through an essentially listless slate. Six of Notre Dame’s 10 wins came against teams that beat zero or one other Power 4 opponent. Stanford — seriously, Stanford! — is Notre Dame’s fourth-best win (by record). Yes, Notre Dame played well enough in losses to two very good teams, but one of those teams has the same record and is somehow ranked lower! Even if this is strictly about the “eye test,” there’s little argument for ignoring the head-to-head outcome. Notre Dame’s strength of record is 13th. Miami’s is 14th. Notre Dame’s game control is fifth. Miami’s is sixth. If all else is the same, how is head-to-head not the deciding factor?
Yet, here’s a little more salt in the wound for the Canes: Had Florida State finished 6-2 instead of 2-6 in ACC play, Miami would’ve won the (fifth) tiebreaker for a spot in the ACC title game and could’ve locked up its place in the playoff by simply beating Virginia. Instead, the Canes will sit at home and watch and hope and, at this point, probably get left out. Chess, not checkers, by rival FSU.
As for BYU, the committee’s desire to overlook the Cougars makes no sense. Let’s take a look at a blind résumé, shall we? (Note: Best wins and composite top 40 based on an average of SP+, FPI and Sagarin ratings.)
Team A: No. 6 strength of record, No. 14 game control, best win vs. No. 11, next vs. No. 28, loss to No. 5, four wins vs. composite top 40, five wins vs. teams that finished 7-5 or better
Team B: No. 7 strength of record, No. 10 game control, best win vs. No. 13, next vs. No. 27, loss to No. 7, three wins vs. composite top-40, two wins vs. teams that finished 7-5 or better
Now, just based on that information, Team A would seem the obvious choice. Now what if I told you Team B just lost its head coach, too?
That’s right, Team A is BYU and Team B is Ole Miss. Every bit of data here suggests the Cougars are, at worst, on even footing with the Rebels or ahead, and yet the committee has Ole Miss ranked five spots higher.
This is, arguably, the second year in a row in which BYU was clearly the most overlooked team in the country.
![]()
A week ago, Notre Dame was ranked one spot ahead of Alabama.
Then on Saturday, the Irish beat 4-8 Stanford by 29 (in a game they at one point led 42-3), while Alabama beat 5-7 Auburn by seven (in a game the Tigers had a chance to tie before fumbling in Tide territory late).
The committee looked at those two results and said, “You know what, we like what we saw from the Tide! Move ’em up!”
What could possibly be the logic for shifting opinions on these two teams? The only other team that jumped another winning team was Texas, and the Longhorns beat the No. 3 team in the country emphatically, not a second-tier team that fired its head coach a month ago.
Oh, and hasn’t the committee made it pretty clear losses are supposed to matter? Well, Notre Dame has two losses to teams ranked in the top 12. Alabama got beat by a Florida State team that finished 5-7.
Even by the eye test, this makes little sense. Notre Dame has proved to be one of the most complete, dominant teams in the country, with a secondary that’s near impossible to throw on, a rookie quarterback who has been nearly flawless and a running back who might well be the best player in the country. Alabama, on the other hand, has a one-note offense that can’t run the football.
We’re not believers in using advanced metrics as a ranking of accomplishment, but if this is simply a “who’s better” debate…
-
SP+ ranks Notre Dame fifth and Alabama 12th.
-
FPI ranks Notre Dame third and Alabama sixth.
-
Sagarin ranks Notre Dame second and Alabama seventh.
-
FEI ranks Notre Dame fourth and Alabama ninth.
So, again, we ask: Why would the committee possibly make this change?
We’d wager you know the answer. That sticky Canes vs. Irish head-to-head debate is a real headache for the committee. But if Notre Dame’s currently the last team in and something unexpected happens this weekend (hello, BYU over Texas Tech), then the committee can do as it did in 2014 and wash its hands of a tough choice and keep both Notre Dame and Miami out.
(It’s also interesting that a seven-point win over a team with a losing record is enough to jump Notre Dame, but a 31-point win over a ranked Pitt did nothing for Miami’s relative placement with the Irish despite — and we’re not sure anyone has mentioned this yet — a head-to-head win!)
But, speaking of Alabama…
![]()
![]()
4. Championship game participants
Step into the time machine with us for a moment, all the way back to championship week 2024. Here’s the state of play: Alabama, at 9-3, is ranked No. 11, the first team out of the playoff and also out of the SEC title game. Still, the Tide and the SEC hope there’s a pathway to salvation because SMU — 11-1 and ranked eighth — still has a game to play against Clemson in the ACC championship. If the Mustangs were to lose, couldn’t the committee then justify slotting SMU behind Alabama based on another data point, even though the Tide were simply sitting at home watching the action?
This was the case being made throughout the run up to the ACC championship last season. SMU, which should’ve been celebrating a miraculously successful first season in the Power 4, spent hours upon hours defending itself against criticism that it didn’t belong in the same conversation with big, bad Bama. Rhett Lashlee hinted he thought the committee’s vote was rigged, SMU players lamented their status on the chopping block despite a ranking that should’ve put them safely in the playoff field, and SEC commissioner Greg Sankey made the rounds arguing that Alabama’s (and Ole Miss’ and South Carolina’s) strength of schedule ought to put them ahead of SMU (and others).
OK, back to the present day. Here we are with Alabama sitting perilously on the dividing line between in the field and out — a week ago, it would have been the last team in, but of course the committee had other ideas this time around — with a game to play against Georgia in the SEC championship. An ACC team (Miami) sits just a tick behind the Tide in the rankings, but it will be off this week.
So, what happens if Alabama loses?
The comparison to last year’s SMU isn’t even a particularly fair one. The Mustangs were at No. 8 before the ACC title game. Alabama is at No. 9 (and probably should be a spot or two lower). SMU’s game against Clemson was new territory. A loss to Georgia will actually undermine Alabama’s best argument for inclusion — the three-point win in Athens in September. And while SMU did make the playoff field last year, a last-second loss on a 56-yard field goal still dropped the Mustangs from No. 8 to No. 10 in the rankings.
Play this scenario out now: Alabama, ranked at No. 9, plays a team that currently counts as the Tide’s best win. Imagine if Georgia wins the rematch and does so convincingly. The committee docked SMU two spots for a last-second loss, so surely it will do at least that much to Alabama for a more convincing defeat, right? And here’s the other thing: Even with the ACC title game loss last year, SMU was 11-2 — one less loss than Alabama had. A Tide loss in the SEC title game will be defeat No. 3 — one more than Notre Dame or Miami or (presumably) BYU.
It’s hard not to see a conspiracy here given the committee’s inexplicable flip-flop between Alabama and Notre Dame. It’s hard not to see brand bias in how the Tide’s championship week narrative diverges from SMU’s a year ago. It’s not at all hard to envision a scenario where Alabama loses to Georgia, gets in as the last team anyway, and it’s all explained away as a completely reasonable decision.
![]()
Well, the committee finally weighed in on more than one team outside the Power 4 — mostly because it was just impossible to find enough Power 4 teams worth ranking — and the news isn’t good for JMU. With the committee deciding already that North Texas is the higher ranked team, the Dukes’ only hope for the playoff would seem to be a Duke win in the ACC title game.
But what exactly has the committee seen to warrant that decision? Check out the numbers.
Best win (by average FPI, SP+ and Sagarin ranking)
JMU: No. 54 Old Dominion
UNT: No. 62 Washington State
Next best
JMU: No. 62 Washington State
UNT: No. 68 Navy
Loss
JMU: No. 29 Louisville
UNT: No. 24 USF
Wins vs. bowl-eligible
JMU: six
UNT: five
Strength of record
JMU: 18th
UNT: 22nd
FPI
JMU: 28th
UNT: 37th
There are certainly some check marks in North Texas’ favor, including a more impressive win over common opponent Washington State and a slightly better SP+ ranking, but on the whole, James Madison has had the tougher path here. That can change should UNT beat Tulane, but the committee should’ve waited for that to happen. Instead, it has made it clear JMU isn’t sniffing the playoff unless it comes at the expense of the ACC.
Also angry this week: Vanderbilt Commodores (10-2, No. 14); The ACC leadership who voted on its tiebreaker policies; Manny Diaz, who has to try to make a coherent argument for his five-loss Duke Blue Devils getting in ahead of a one-loss JMU; Every 8-4 team with a markedly better résumé than 9-3 Houston, which isn’t ranked this week; and Lane Kiffin’s yoga instructor and Juice Kiffin’s dog walker.
Sports
CFP Bubble Watch: Could the ACC get left out?
Published
10 hours agoon
December 3, 2025By
admin

Welcome to the party, James Madison.
With the inclusion of JMU at No. 25 in the selection committee’s penultimate ranking — its first appearance all season — the possibility of the ACC being excluded from the playoff entirely just got real. Five-loss Duke is nowhere to be found in the ranking.
If Duke beats Virginia in the ACC championship game, it’s not guaranteed a spot in the 12-team field. It could open the door for two Group of 5 conference champions to compete for a national title, and if the playoff were today, it would be Tulane out of the American and JMU from the Sun Belt. The ACC’s best team, Miami, is still on the outside.
At No. 12, the Hurricanes still need some help, but Alabama increased its chances of earning a spot as the SEC runner-up with a small promotion to No. 9. The conference championship games can still alter the picture, but hope on the bubble is dwindling.
Bubble Watch accounts for what we have learned from the committee so far — and historical knowledge of what it means for teams clinging to hope. Teams with Would be in status below are looking good after the committee’s fifth ranking. For each Power 4 conference, we’ve also listed Still in the mix. Teams that are Out will have to wait until next year.
The conferences below are listed in order of the number of bids they would receive, ranked from the most to least, based on the selection committee’s latest ranking.
Jump to a conference:
ACC | Big 12 | Big Ten
SEC | Independent | Group of 5
Bracket

SEC
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Would be in: Alabama, Georgia, Oklahoma, Ole Miss, Texas A&M. Right now, the Crimson Tide are the last SEC at-large team in the field. Alabama will face Georgia in the SEC championship game, but the committee could have a difficult decision if Alabama loses and finishes as a three-loss runner-up. The Tide would have defeated Georgia during the regular season but lost to the Bulldogs in the championship game. Even in moving up a spot to No. 9 this week — ahead of Notre Dame — it still seems as if they have a little more margin for error, but how the SEC title game unfolds could matter. And how far Alabama drops could determine if the SEC gets four or five teams in the field. Alabama could finish as the committee’s highest-ranked three-loss team and still be excluded from the playoff to make room for a conference champion — as they were last year.
A Georgia win should lock up a first-round bye and a top-four finish for the Bulldogs, while a loss should still put them in position to host a first-round game. Georgia beat Ole Miss, so it would be surprising to see the Bulldogs drop below the Rebels with a loss, even though the Bulldogs would have one more defeat. With a 35-10 drubbing of Texas also on its résumé, Georgia would still have a strong enough case to finish as the committee’s top two-loss team.
At No. 6, the selection committee moved the Rebels up one spot, so clearly the departure of coach Lane Kiffin to LSU didn’t hurt Ole Miss or its chances of hosting a first-round home game. The bigger reasoning was a promotion after winning the Egg Bowl combined with Texas A&M losing to Texas.
![]()
Still in the mix: Texas. The Longhorns moved up to No. 13, but the win against Texas A&M wasn’t enough to put them into the field after the fifth ranking. Texas is stuck behind Miami in part because of its loss to Florida, which Miami beat. Even if BYU and Alabama were knocked out with title game losses, that still probably won’t be enough for Texas to get into the field because the bracket has to make room for conference champions.
Out: Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, Kentucky, LSU, Mississippi State, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Big Ten
![]()
![]()
![]()
Would be in: Indiana, Ohio State, Oregon. Both Indiana and Ohio State are CFP locks — even if they lose in the conference title game — and the runner-up will still have a strong case for a top-four finish and a first-round bye. The loser’s only loss will be to a top-two team, but it could fall behind Georgia in the top four if the Bulldogs win the SEC, and/or Texas Tech if it wins the Big 12.
The Ducks punctuated their résumé with a respectable win at Washington and should be secure in their playoff position, probably hosting a first-round game. Oregon received a small boost to No. 5 after Texas A&M lost to Texas.
Still in the mix: None.
Out: Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, UCLA, USC, Washington, Wisconsin
Big 12
![]()
Would be in: Texas Tech. The Red Raiders will play BYU in the Big 12 title game and have a great case to be in the playoff regardless of the outcome. It’s highly unlikely the selection committee would drop the Red Raiders out of the field as a two-loss Big 12 runner-up — especially considering they would have a regular-season win against the eventual conference champion. It’s also possible Texas Tech earns a first-round bye as a top-four seed if the Red Raiders win the Big 12. The committee moved them into the top four Tuesday night following Texas A&M’s loss during Rivalry Week.
![]()
Still in the mix: BYU. If BYU doesn’t win the Big 12, it’s unlikely to earn an at-large bid as the conference runner-up because the Cougars are already on the bubble and would be eliminated during the seeding process if the playoff were today. It’s not impossible, though. If Alabama finishes as a three-loss SEC runner-up, it could at least open the door for debate. BYU would have lost to Texas Tech twice, and Alabama would have defeated Georgia, the eventual SEC champ once — and it was on the road. If BYU wins the Big 12, it’s the ideal scenario for the conference because it would have two teams in the playoff.
Out: Arizona, Arizona State, Baylor, Cincinnati, Colorado, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, TCU, UCF, Utah, West Virginia
ACC
![]()
![]()
Would be in: TBD. The ACC championship game will feature Virginia and Duke, and if five-loss Duke wins, it’s possible the ACC is excluded from the playoff since Duke is not part of the CFP rankings. If Virginia wins, it will represent the league in the playoff, as the two-loss Cavaliers are ranked in the top 20. And no, Miami did not play Duke or Virginia during the regular season. Duke lost to Tulane, which is the top Group of 5 playoff contender and will reach the playoff if it wins the American. Duke also lost to UConn. And it has already lost to Virginia 34-17 on Nov. 15.
![]()
Still in the mix: Miami. The Canes are still the committee’s highest-ranked ACC team, but they would be excluded if the playoff were today to make room for a conference champion. That means the ACC winner could knock the league’s best team out of the playoff. The committee isn’t ignoring Miami’s head-to-head win against Notre Dame, but it also isn’t comparing the Canes only to the Irish. Miami also needs to earn an edge against BYU — which the committee has deemed better than Miami to this point. Miami inched closer to Notre Dame because Bama moved up Tuesday, but with neither team playing in a conference championship game, would the committee flip them on Selection Day with a BYU loss?
Out: Boston College, Cal, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, North Carolina, NC State, Pitt, SMU, Stanford, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Independent
![]()
Would be in: Notre Dame. The Irish have done everything right since their 0-2 start, running the table and doing it with consistent dominance regardless of opponent. At No.10, Notre Dame is in a precarious position. If BYU wins the Big 12 and enters the field, that could bump out the Irish. If BYU wins the Big 12, both BYU and Texas Tech are highly likely to make the playoff, which means someone currently in the top 10 would have to be excluded.
Group of 5
![]()
Would be in: Tulane. If the Green Wave win the American, they will represent the Group of 5 in the playoff. Tulane is currently the highest ranked Group of 5 team, but if North Texas beats Tulane on Friday, the Mean Green would be the most likely team to reach the CFP, given the overall strength of the American Conference this season.
![]()
![]()
Still in the mix: James Madison, North Texas. JMU (11-1) has clinched the East Division and a spot in the Sun Belt Conference championship game, where it will face Troy (8-4) on Friday. North Texas will face Tulane in the American, and if it wins, it’s more likely to represent the Group of 5 in the playoff than JMU because of its schedule strength. JMU could still be considered, though, if Duke wins the ACC, giving the Group of 5 two playoff teams in the 12-team field. With JMU earning a spot in the top 25 this week, the situation became more probable.

Bracket
Based on the committee’s fifth ranking, the seeding would be:
First-round byes
No. 1 Ohio State (Big Ten champ)
No. 2 Indiana
No. 3 Georgia (SEC champ)
No. 4 Texas Tech (Big 12 champ)
First-round games
On campus, Dec. 19 and 20
No. 12 Tulane (American champ) at No. 5 Oregon
No. 11 Virginia (ACC champ) at No. 6 Ole Miss
No. 10 Notre Dame at No. 7 Texas A&M
No. 9 Alabama at No. 8 Oklahoma
Quarterfinal games
At the Goodyear Cotton Bowl, Capital One Orange Bowl, Rose Bowl Presented by Prudential and Allstate Sugar Bowl on Dec. 31 and Jan. 1.
No. 12 Tulane/No. 5 Oregon winner vs. No. 4 Texas Tech
No. 11 Virginia/No. 6 Ole Miss winner vs. No. 3 Georgia
No. 10 Notre Dame/No. 7 Texas A&M winner vs. No. 2 Indiana
No. 9 Alabama/No. 8 Oklahoma winner vs. No. 1 Ohio State
Trending
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024
