Connect with us

Published

on

Reviewed by Danielle Ellis, B.Sc. Jul 31 2023

Does anyone still remember the initial phase of the Corona pandemic in 2020? When shops, restaurants, cinemas, and theatres remained closed. When meetings with friends and relatives were prohibited. When school lessons had to take place at home in the children's rooms. When there was no question of traveling.

Presently, most people seem to have long forgotten these times. Yet, the various corona measures taken by politicians are likely to have caused enormous stress for many. The fear for the job, the worry about sick relatives, the nervous strain when parents and children sit together in a small apartment and have to reconcile home office and homeschooling: All this has not remained without effects, as numerous studies show. The crucial factor is anxiety

How and to what extent have these experiences affected the mental health and quality of life of women and men in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic? This has been investigated by a research team of the University and the University Hospital Würzburg.

In detail, the scientists were interested in the relationship between worries about the workplace and about other people with a person's own mental health problems such as anxiety and depression and with their quality of life in general, how these are influenced by the support from friends or at work – and whether the results show differences between men and women.

The findings are unambiguous: in this complex of different variables and influencing factors, anxiety plays a central part. There are, however, distinct gender-specific differences: In men, anxiety increases along with concerns about the job, an effect which does not show in women. On the other hand, we were able to register an increase in anxiety levels in women parallel to an increase in their worries about family and friends."

Grit Hein, Professor of Translational Social Neuroscience, Clinic and Polyclinic for Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapym, University Hospital

In addition, the study shows that women in such times respond positively to support from friends and family by experiencing enhanced quality of life. In men, this phenomenon did not manifest itself. Data on the influence of gender were lacking

Grit Hein is Professor of Translational Social Neuroscience at the Clinic and Polyclinic for Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy at the University Hospital. She and her postdoc Martin Weiβ led the study, the results of which have now been published in the journal Scientific Reports.

"In the past, numerous studies have investigated the influence of psychosocial factors such as support from friends and colleagues and financial, professional or personal worries on mental health and the quality of life. Yet, data on whether these correlations are the same for men and women were lacking," says Grit Hein, explaining the background to the study. Broadening earlier studies, the Würzburg research team has therefore now examined the influence of these factors in relation to gender. A study with around 2,900 participants

The team obtained the relevant information from a large group of test subjects: the participants of the so-called STAAB study. This study comprises a cohort of around 5,000 randomly selected volunteers from the general population of Würzburg and originally focused on the development of cardiovascular diseases. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the program was spontaneously expanded to include the psychosocial impacts of the pandemic, the lockdown, and other side effects. Related StoriesBlack individuals who experience racial discrimination more likely to crave alcoholBirth control pills disrupt women's stress response, study showsBreakthrough stress sensor discovery reveals new mechanism of antimicrobial resistance

A total of 2,890 people (1,520 women and 1,370 men) took part in the survey. Their ages ranged from 34 to 85 years, with a median of 60 years. Between June and October 2020, they had to fill out an extensive questionnaire about their mental health. Among other things, they were asked to provide information about how strongly they felt supported by their social environment, their colleagues and superiors, and whether they had someone with whom they could discuss their problems.

They were also asked to what extent bans on the contact with parents and grandparents burdened them and how much stress they felt at work or at school. Financial problems or worries about them were the subject of further questions.

To evaluate the data, Hein and her team used a special method: the so-called network analysis. "Analyses based on a network approach enable a graphical representation of all variables as individual nodes," Hein explains. Thus, it is possible to identify variables that are particularly related to other variables. The network can, for example, show complex relationships between symptoms of different mental disorders and thus explain possible comorbidities. Results fit traditional gender norms

Grit Hein and Martin Weiβ were hardly surprised by the results. "The observation that men are more strongly associated with work and women more strongly with family and friends can be traced back to traditional gender norms and roles," Hein explains. Hence, men usually feel more affected by job insecurity and unemployment, which leads to higher psychological stress. Women, on the other hand, experience more strain when they feel that they are neglecting their family.

It is also plausible that women cope better psychologically when they receive support from friends and family: "This is in line with the traditional female family role, which includes a stronger tendency to maintain close social contacts and to seek social support in order to reduce stress and increase well-being," says Hein.

Even though these findings are unambiguous, the study leaders point to a number of limitations. The most important: "Since the COVID-19 pandemic presented a very specific context, it remains to be clarified whether our results are transferable to general pandemic-independent situations." One finding, however, is indisputable: "Our results underline the need to consider social aspects in therapeutic interventions in order to improve the mental health of women and men." Source:

Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Why seven household names – including Prince Harry – are suing one of Britain’s biggest media groups

Published

on

By

Why seven household names - including Prince Harry - are suing one of Britain's biggest media groups

Prince Harry and six other household names are suing the publishers of the Daily Mail newspaper over alleged unlawful information gathering dating back 30 years.

The case has been ongoing since 2022 and is just one of several Harry has filed against media organisations since 2019 over alleged breaches of privacy, unlawful practices and false stories.

Associated Newspapers (ANL) – which also publishes The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline – strongly denies any wrongdoing.

A full trial is not expected to start at London’s High Court until January, but a pre-trial hearing, which helps manage the case and resolve any outstanding issues, is set to take place today.

Here is everything you need to know about the case.

What’s alleged?

The alleged unlawful acts are said to have taken place from 1993 to 2011, including the publisher hiring private investigators to secretly place listening devices inside cars and homes and paying police officials for inside information.

When bringing the lawsuit in 2022, lawyers for the claimants said they had become aware of “highly distressing” evidence revealing they had been victims of “abhorrent criminal activity” and “gross breaches of privacy” by Associated Newspapers.

Associated Newspapers denies the allegations, describing them as “preposterous smears”, and claims the legal action is “a fishing expedition by [the] claimants and their lawyers”.

The accusations include:

• The hiring of private investigators to secretly place listening devices inside people’s cars and homes;

• The commissioning of individuals to surreptitiously listen into and record people’s live, private telephone calls while they were taking place;

• The payment of police officials, with corrupt links to private investigators, for inside, sensitive information;

• The impersonation of individuals to obtain medical information from private hospitals, clinics, and treatment centres by deception;

• The accessing of bank accounts, credit histories and financial transactions through illicit means and manipulation.

Pic: iStock
Image:
Pic: iStock

Who else is involved?

While Prince Harry is one of the key players, as a group litigation, he is not the only claimant.

The others include:

• Actress Elizabeth Hurley
• Actress Sadie Frost
• Sir Elton John and his husband, filmmaker David Furnish
• Baroness Doreen Lawrence, mother of Stephen Lawrence
• Former Liberal Democrat politician Sir Simon Hughes

Sadie Frost. Pic: PA
Image:
Sadie Frost. Pic: PA

Baroness Doreen Lawrence. Pic: AP
Image:
Baroness Doreen Lawrence. Pic: AP

They all allege they have been victims of “abhorrent criminal activity” and “gross breaches of privacy” by ANL.

David Sherborne is the lawyer representing all the claimants.

Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish (below). Pic: AP
Image:
Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish (below). Pic: AP

Pic: AP
Image:
Pic: AP

What happened in 2023?

During a preliminary hearing in March 2023, Judge Matthew Nicklin was tasked with ruling whether the case can proceed to trial.

ANL had asked for the case to be struck out entirely, arguing the legal challenges against it were brought “far too late”, but David Sherborne called for the publisher’s application to be dismissed.

Lawyers for the publishers said the claims fell outside the statute of limitations – a law indicating that privacy claims should be brought with six years – and the claimants should have known, or could have found out, they had a potential case before October 2016.

Prince Harry at the High Court in 2023
Image:
Prince Harry at the High Court in 2023

They also argued some aspects of the cases should be thrown out as they breach orders made by Lord Justice Leveson as part of his 2011 inquiry into media standards.

During the hearing, a number of the claimants attended the High Court, including Prince Harry, to the surprise of the British media.

Witness statements from all seven claimants were also released. The duke’s statement said he is bringing the claim “because I love my country” and remains “deeply concerned” by the “unchecked power, influence and criminality” of the publisher.

“If the most influential newspaper company can successfully evade justice, then in my opinion the whole country is doomed,” he said.

On 10 November 2023, Mr Justice Nicklin gave the go-ahead for the case to go to trial, saying ANL had “not been able to deliver a ‘knockout blow’ to the claims of any of these claimants”.

What’s happened since?

Earlier this year, lawyers for the claimants sought to amend their case to add a swathe of new allegations for the trial.

They argued that they should be allowed to rely on evidence that they said showed the Mail was involved in targeting Kate, the Princess of Wales.

However, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled this allegation was brought too late before trial.

In a further development in November, the High Court heard that a key witness in the case, private investigator Gavin Burrows, claimed his signature on a statement confirming alleged hacking had taken place, was forged.

Lawyer David Sherborne is representing all the claimants
Image:
Lawyer David Sherborne is representing all the claimants

In the statement from 2021, Mr Burrows allegedly claimed to have hacked voicemails, tapped landlines, and accessed financial and medical information at the request of a journalist at the Mail On Sunday.

The statement was important, as five of the seven claimants involved in the case told the court they embarked on legal action against ANL based on evidence apparently obtained by Mr Burrows.

Mr Burrows previously retracted his statement in 2023, but the court heard he reiterated the denial to ANL’s lawyers in September this year.

It is now up to the claimant’s lawyer Mr Sherborne to decide if he still wants to call Mr Burrows as a witness for the trial.

Mr Justice Nicklin previously said if Mr Burrows gave evidence that was inconsistent with the evidence they had obtained, then he could apply to treat him as “hostile”.

Could the case end before going to trial?

In short, yes.

During pre-trial reviews, cases can either be settled or dismissed from court in both civil and criminal cases, meaning no trial will take place.

This happened in Harry’s case against News Group Newspapers (NGN), which publishes The Sun. The duke made similar accusations about NGN, which involved unlawful information gathering by journalists and private investigators.

Before an up-to 10-week trial began earlier this year, it was announced both sides had “reached an agreement” and that NGN had offered an apology to Harry and would pay “substantial damages”.

The settlement was reported to be worth more than £10m, mostly in legal fees.

Another of Harry’s legal cases, this time against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) over accusations of historical phone hacking, did go to trial.

The trial saw Harry take to the witness box, making him the first senior royal to give evidence in a courtroom since the 19th century.

In December 2023, the Honourable Mr Justice Fancourt concluded that the duke’s phone had been hacked “to a modest extent” between 2003 and 2009, and 15 of 33 articles he complained about were the product of unlawful techniques.

He was awarded £140,600 in damages. During a further hearing in February 2024 a settlement was reached between Harry and MGN over the remaining parts of his claim.

If the ANL trial does go ahead early next year, it is unknown if Harry will travel to London to attend.

Continue Reading

US

Russia ‘making concessions’ and Ukraine ‘happy’ with peace deal talks, says Trump

Published

on

By

Russia 'making concessions' and Ukraine 'happy' with peace deal talks, says Trump

Donald Trump has claimed Russia is “making concessions” in talks to end the Ukraine war – and that Kyiv is “happy” with how talks are progressing.

Speaking to reporters on Air Force One as he flew out to his Florida estate for Thanksgiving, Mr Trump said “we’re making progress” on a deal and said he would be willing to meet with both Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy once they are close to an agreement.

He also said his previously announced deadline of Thursday, which is Thanksgiving, was no longer in place – and that the White House’s initial 28-point peace plan, which sparked such concern in Kyiv, “was just a map”.

Asked if Ukraine had been asked to hand over too much territory, Mr Trump suggested that “over the next couple of months [that] might be gotten by Russia anyway”.

Moscow’s concessions are a promise to stop fighting, “and they don’t take any more land”, he said.

“The deadline for me is when it’s over,” he added. “And I think everybody’s tired of fighting at this moment.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Ukraine still needs defence support,’ says Zelenskyy

Before boarding the plane, Mr Trump had claimed only a few “points of disagreement” remain between the two sides.

Mr Trump’s negotiator Steve Witkoff will be meeting with Mr Putin in Moscow next week, the president said, while American army secretary Daniel Driscoll is due to travel to Kyiv for talks this week.

The chief of Ukraine’s presidential staff, Andriy Yermak, wrote: “Ukraine has never been and will never be an obstacle to peace. We are grateful to the US for all its support.

“The meeting between the presidents will be thoroughly and promptly prepared on our part.”

Zelenskyy warns against ‘behind our back’ deal

Yesterday, a virtual “coalition of the willing” meeting that featured Ukraine’s allies took place, which was attended by US secretary of state Marco Rubio.

In a speech, Mr Zelenskyy told attendees: “We firmly believe security decisions about Ukraine must include Ukraine, security decisions about Europe must include Europe.

“Because when something is decided behind the back of a country or its people, there is always a high risk it simply won’t work.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What is Russia saying about the latest peace talks?

A joint statement from coalition leaders Sir Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron, and Friedrich Merz said they had agreed with Mr Rubio “to accelerate joint work” with the US on the planning of security guarantees for Ukraine.

But a Ukrainian diplomat has warned major sticking points remain in the peace deal being thrashed out – primarily the prospect of territorial concessions.

A warning from the Kremlin

Meanwhile, Moscow has stressed that it will not allow any agreement to stray too far from its own objectives.

Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov warned any amended peace plan must reflect the understanding reached between Mr Trump and Mr Putin over the summer.

“If the spirit and letter of Anchorage is erased in terms of the key understandings we have established then, of course, it will be a fundamentally different situation,” he said, referring to the two leaders’ meeting in Alaska.

Read more:
Zelenskyy races to beat Trump’s peace plan deadline

In full: Europe’s 28-point counterproposal

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Standing ovation for Zelenskyy

As negotiations continue, so have Russian attacks, with Kyiv hit by a barrage of missiles and hundreds of drones early yesterday morning.

Seven people were killed with power and heating systems disrupted, as residents sheltered underground.

Meanwhile, three people died and homes were damaged after Ukraine launched an attack on southern Russia.

‘A critical juncture’

French President Emmanuel Macron has said peace efforts are gathering momentum, but “are clearly at a critical juncture”.

And during the annual White House turkey pardon ahead of Thanksgiving, Mr Trump told reporters: “I think we’re getting close to a deal. We’ll find out.

“I thought that would have been an easier one, but I think we’re making progress.”

Continue Reading

Sports

CFP Bubble Watch after Tuesday’s ranking: Who needs a win during Rivalry Week?

Published

on

By

CFP Bubble Watch after Tuesday's ranking: Who needs a win during Rivalry Week?

Miami is inching closer but still needs some help.

With the Hurricanes creeping up to No. 12 on Tuesday night in the College Football Playoff selection committee’s fourth of six rankings, the ACC’s hope of having two teams qualify for the 12-team field is still alive. Time is running out, though, to convince the selection committee they’re better than Notre Dame — and right now a gap remains in spite of the head-to-head win. The ACC champion — even if it’s No. 18 Virginia — is almost certainly guaranteed a spot as one of the five-highest ranked conference champions. That’s evidenced by the fact that five ACC teams are still ranked above No. 24 Tulane, the only representative from a Group of 5 conference. The question is whether Miami can do enough to join the ACC champion as an at-large team with one game remaining, on Saturday at No. 22 Pitt.

Though the Canes have no margin for error and could still use some help above them, they might get it if Ole Miss doesn’t win the Egg Bowl against Mississippi State. No. 6 Oregon jumped one spot above No. 7 Ole Miss, indicating that the Rebels might not recover from a second stumble.

With Rivalry Week on the horizon, there are still plenty of scenarios that can unfold — and hope is still oozing from the bubble.

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 in this week’s bracket based on the committee’s fourth ranking. For each Power 4 conference, we’ve also listed Last team in and First team out. These are the true bubble teams hovering around inclusion. Teams labeled Still in the mix haven’t been eliminated but have work to do or need help. A team that is 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 committee’s fourth 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

Last team in: Alabama. The Tide can either lock up a spot in the SEC championship game with a win against Auburn in the Iron Bowl — or can miss the playoff entirely with a loss to its rival. The debate will come if Alabama finishes as a three-loss SEC runner-up. The Tide have played the ninth-hardest schedule in the country, according to ESPN Analytics, and their résumé would only be enhanced by facing a top-five opponent in the SEC championship game. A third loss, though, even in a close game to a top-five team, could drop Alabama into a dangerous spot in the top 12 where it might face elimination to make room for a guaranteed conference champion — or a second Big 12 team.

First team out: Vanderbilt. The Commodores could stay status quo this week, which means at No. 14 they remain a long shot for an at-large bid. Punctuating their résumé with a win against a ranked Tennessee would be the first step, but they’d also need multiple upsets ahead of them to get serious consideration. It’s conceivable, as Miami can lose at Pitt, Oklahoma can suffer a third loss to LSU, and Alabama can lose the Iron Bowl. None of that would matter, though, without a win in Knoxville.

Still in the mix: None.

Out: Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, Kentucky, LSU, Mississippi State, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas


Big Ten

Would be in: Indiana, Ohio State, Oregon

Last team in: Oregon. With the win against USC, Oregon eliminated the biggest threat to its playoff spot in the Big Ten and further solidified its place in the top 10. The win against USC boosted the Ducks’ résumé enough to jump Ole Miss, and the complete performance against another ranked contender answered some questions in the committee meeting room. Oregon now has a 16.5% chance to reach the Big Ten title game, according to ESPN Analytics, but it must beat Washington and it needs Michigan to defeat Ohio State.

First team out: Michigan. The No. 15 Wolverines are here because they can reach the Big Ten championship game with a win against Ohio State and a loss by Indiana or Oregon. Michigan no longer has to worry about the head-to-head defeat to USC because the Trojans have three losses and dropped behind the Wolverines to No. 17 in the latest ranking. The loss to No. 8 Oklahoma, though, will probably keep them behind the Sooners for an at-large bid if they both finish with the same record. Nobody in the country, though, will have a better win than Michigan if it beats the Buckeyes for a fifth straight season.

Still in the mix: None.

Out: Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, UCLA, USC, Washington, Wisconsin


Big 12

Would be in: Texas Tech

Last team in: Texas Tech. The Red Raiders can clinch a spot in the Big 12 title game with a win at West Virginia. As long as Texas Tech does that, it should be a lock for the CFP — win or lose in the Big 12 championship. It would be both stunning and difficult for the committee to justify dropping Texas Tech if its second loss is to a top-11 BYU team that it beat handily during the regular season. The Red Raiders would be the only team that could claim a regular-season win over the eventual Big 12 champs in that scenario.

First team out: BYU. The Cougars can clinch a spot in the Big 12 title game with a home win against UCF on Saturday. They’d be a CFP lock with the Big 12 title, but a loss would likely knock them out of the bracket because they’re already in a precarious position and would have lost to the same team twice. They would need multiple upsets to happen above them to stay in consideration as the two-loss Big 12 runner-up.

Still in the mix: Arizona State, Utah. ASU can earn a spot in the Big 12 title game with a win against Arizona and a BYU loss or a win and losses by both Texas Tech and Utah. The Utes will reach the Big 12 title game if they beat Kansas and both BYU and Arizona State win and Texas Tech loses.

Out: Arizona, Baylor, Cincinnati, Colorado, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, TCU, UCF, West Virginia


ACC

Would be in: Miami

Last team in: Miami. Miami’s chances of reaching the ACC title game are now 14.2% — third best in the league behind SMU and Virginia, which are both above 80%. That means their best chance to reach the CFP remains through an at-large bid. They must win at Pitt on Saturday, and it helped that the committee ranked the Panthers No. 22 on Tuesday night. Miami’s loss to SMU no longer looks as bad as it initially did after the Mustangs cracked the CFP top 25 at No. 21. Miami is getting some help, but it has also helped itself by winning three straight games by at least 17 points. Saturday at Virginia Tech brought Miami’s first road win outside of its home state, which is something the committee has been awaiting. Miami’s win against Notre Dame remains one of the best in the country, and the Canes are within range of the committee revisiting the head-to-head tiebreaker. They’re both in the same conversation as Alabama and BYU. If Miami can win at Pitt, the committee will certainly factor that into its discussion during the fifth ranking. It’s important to remember, though, that head-to-head isn’t the only factor in the room. The entire body of work is considered, and right now, the committee is more impressed by the Irish.

First team out: Virginia. Of all the convoluted scenarios still left in the ACC, this isn’t one of them: If Virginia beats rival Virginia Tech on Saturday, the Cavaliers will clinch a spot in the conference title game. And with No. 21 SMU now one of five ranked teams from the conference, the ACC title game is likely to feature two ranked opponents. The Mustangs have the best chance to reach the ACC championship game (86%) followed by Virginia (81%) after Week 13, but SMU lost to Baylor, TCU and Wake Forest — the latter two of which are above .500. If SMU wins at Cal on Saturday, the Mustangs will clinch a spot in the ACC title game. Virginia was the committee’s second-highest-ranked ACC team behind Miami in its fourth ranking, and the Cavaliers had a bye.

Still in the mix: Duke, Georgia Tech, Pitt, SMU. Here’s where you can find your convoluted scenarios. Pitt can get into the ACC championship game with a win and a loss by SMU or UVA. Duke can get in with a win plus losses by two of the following three teams: Pitt, SMU and Virginia. Georgia Tech needs so many things to happen it might want to find a church instead of playing Georgia.

Out: Boston College, Cal, Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, North Carolina, NC State, Stanford, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest


Independent

Would be in: Notre Dame. The Irish are doing everything right — they’re winning and looking good doing it. If they can seal the deal with what should be a relatively easy win against Stanford, Notre Dame will be in the familiar position of waiting and watching while the conference championship games unfold and possibly alter the picture. Notre Dame fans should be keeping a close eye on the SEC and Big 12 title games. If Miami beats Pitt, the committee will compare that common opponent with Notre Dame, which also beat Pitt. They would continue to talk about the head-to-head tiebreaker, but that’s not the final determinant. Both Miami and Notre Dame can earn at-large bids, but if there are two Big 12 teams in, someone currently in the top 10 will have to be excluded.


Group of 5

Would be in: Tulane. This is where the committee will probably continue to differ from the computers, which say James Madison (57%) and North Texas (54.4%) have the best chances to reach the playoff. JMU’s schedule is currently ranked No. 123, while North Texas is No. 127, and that has held both of them back in the committee meeting room. Tulane is No. 73 with wins against Duke and Northwestern. The No. 24-ranked Green Wave maintained their spot this week as the committee’s highest-ranked Group of 5 team following the 37-13 win at Temple, their largest margin of victory this season.

Still in the mix: East Carolina, James Madison, Navy, North Texas, South Florida. JMU has clinched the East Division and a spot in the Sun Belt Conference championship game. It will face the winner of Southern Miss vs. Troy. Five teams from the American are still eligible to play in the conference title game, and multiple tiebreaker scenarios are still looming. Tulane has one of the most direct paths. It would clinch with a win if it is the highest-ranked team from the American in the CFP ranking. North Texas would clinch a spot with a win — because Navy was not ahead of Tulane and North Texas in the CFP ranking Tuesday. Navy could clinch a spot with a win and a loss by Tulane or North Texas.

Bracket

Based on the committee’s fourth ranking, the seeding would be:

First-round byes

No. 1 Ohio State (Big Ten champ)
No. 2 Indiana
No. 3 Texas A&M (SEC champ)
No. 4 Georgia

First-round games

On campus, Dec. 19 and 20

No. 12 Tulane (American champ) at No. 5 Texas Tech (Big 12 champ)
No. 11 Miami (ACC champ) at No. 6 Oregon
No. 10 Alabama at No. 7 Ole Miss
No. 9 Notre Dame 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 Texas Tech winner vs. No. 4 Georgia
No. 11 Miami/No. 6 Oregon winner vs. No. 3 Texas A&M
No. 10 Alabama/No. 7 Ole Miss winner vs. No. 2 Indiana
No. 9 Notre Dame/No. 8 Oklahoma winner vs. No. 1 Ohio State

Continue Reading

Trending