Connect with us

Published

on

The New York Rangers had the NHL’s best regular-season record. The Carolina Hurricanes finished directly in their rearview mirror, three points back — and objects in the mirror are closer than they appear.

“The Rangers were the best team, and we were on their heels all year,” Carolina coach Rod Brind’Amour said. “You gotta get through the best at some point, so might as well have at it now.”

They meet in the second round of the Stanley Cup playoffs, after the Rangers swept the Washington Capitals and the Hurricanes eliminated the New York Islanders in five games. Game 1 of their series is Sunday (4 p.m. ET, ABC/ESPN+).

The last time these teams collided was in the second round of the 2022 playoffs, a series the Rangers won in seven games. Center Vincent Trocheck was on that Hurricanes team, scoring three goals in the series. He’s now a key forward on the Rangers.

“It was a battle. But it’s two completely different teams now. A lot of new guys since I’ve been there,” he said. “But still the same style of hockey [in Carolina].”

One constant is Brind’Amour behind the Hurricanes bench. He and Rangers coach Peter Laviolette have a unique history: In 2006, Laviolette coached the Hurricanes to the Stanley Cup … and Brind’Amour was his captain.

The similarities between these titans of the East don’t end there. Here are five things that could swing this incredibly tight series in either direction.

Can the Rangers thrive at 5-on-5?

By now, the Rangers’ vulnerabilities at 5-on-5 play are canon. We wrote about them in December. We wrote about them again in April.

They did little to dispel those concerns against the Capitals, with a 38.8% expected goals percentage at 5-on-5 in their sweep. But score effects were a big part of that disparity, especially on offense: The Rangers were tied for just 13 minutes and 50 seconds in the series and trailed for just 17 seconds at 5-on-5.

New York is considered an underdog by many in this series, a notion that tracks to how middling it is when it is not on special teams, combined with how dominant the Hurricanes have been at 5-on-5. Carolina earned 59.5% of the shot attempts in the regular season, best in the league. They were second in expected goals percentage (56.9%), while the Rangers were 22nd overall (49%). That’s been a hallmark of Brind’Amour’s teams.

It should be noted that the Rangers have improved at 5-on-5 (51.8% expected goals percentage) since adding Jack Roslovic and Alex Wennberg to the lineup at the trade deadline.

Of course, the Hurricanes were still rolling at a 59.3% expected goals percentage after the deadline themselves.

“When it comes to how you run your offense, you have to look at how a team defends,” Laviolette said. “It does change a little bit for me based on what the D-zone coverage is doing.”

Under Laviolette, the Rangers have played a tough, simplified game that involves quick puck movement. That’s helped them find better results than last season, when they were overwhelmed by the speed of a team such as the New Jersey Devils, who eliminated them in the first round.

Carolina also moves the puck fast, but it moves its skates faster.

“It’s just fast hockey. They’ll swarm at times. They can get going, and you’ve just kind of got to keep your cool in your own zone and get the puck out and live to fight another day. They come in waves,” Rangers defenseman Jacob Trouba said.

Brind’Amour felt that the 5-on-5 battle was going to be a tight one defensively. “They give you no room because they’re a good team,” he said.

One wild card for the Rangers: Center Filip Chytil, who’s been practicing with the team but hasn’t played since Nov. 2 due to a suspected concussion. He had four goals in seven games against Carolina in 2022, all of them at 5-on-5.


This series features two starting goaltenders who have hit their strides at the right time.

Even as the Rangers were stacking wins, Shesterkin was inconsistent earlier in the season, leading to backup Jonathan Quick getting 26 starts. But Shesterkin had a .918 save percentage and 5.9 goals saved above average in his 14 games since the NHL trade deadline.

Following a 4-1-0 start, doctors discovered a blood clotting issue affecting Andersen. He missed 49 games over a four-month span. Following his return to the lineup, Andersen posted a 9-1-0 record, 1.30 goals-against average, .951 save percentage and three shutouts. He led the NHL with 11.6 goals saved above average in that span, per Natural Stat Trick.

Andersen was named a finalist for the Masterton Trophy awarded “to the player who best exemplifies the qualities of perseverance, sportsmanship and dedication to hockey.”

Shesterkin had better numbers in the first round with a .931 save percentage and a 1.75 goals-against average. Andersen had a .912 save percentage with a 2.25 GAA. Shesterkin faced more high-danger shot attempts per 60 minutes (7.47) than did Andersen (6.6), but both netminders saw their teams keep the heat off of them at even strength.

Andersen lost his only start against the Rangers this season, but stopped 24 of 26 shots. Shesterkin was 2-1 against the Hurricanes with a .915 save percentage and one shutout.

Of course, when discussing the Hurricanes, it’s never just one goalie in the conversation. Rookie Pyotr Kochetkov started 40 games for the Canes in the regular season, posting a .911 save percentage. He faced the Rangers twice in that 2022 series.

“There will be time when we’re going to rely on everyone on this team and he’s going to be a part of that,” Andersen said.


Will a revamped Carolina offense put it over?

Brind’Amour has coached the Hurricanes since the 2018-19 season. They’ve made the conference finals twice since then, including last season, when they were swept by the Florida Panthers in four straight one-goal games.

That encapsulated a frequent postseason issue for the Hurricanes: For all of their puck possession and shot attempts, they’ve often been unable to conjure up a goal at a critical time to swing a game or a series. It’s been one of the starker differences between the Rangers and the Hurricanes: Despite New York’s average play at 5-on-5, it finishes chances it creates more efficiently than Carolina.

The Hurricanes have traditionally not chased high-profile offensive rentals at the NHL trade deadline. That changed this season when they won the derby for Pittsburgh Penguins pending free agent winger Jake Guentzel. He’s an elite top-line talent who drives play and finishes chances. He’s also been one of the most effective playoff performers in the NHL over the past several seasons, with 62 points in 63 games, including four points in five games against the Islanders.

Carolina also added former Capitals center Evgeny Kuznetsov at the deadline. After registering seven points in 20 regular-season games, he had four points in five games in the first round.

Guentzel was plugged onto the Hurricanes’ top line with Sebastian Aho and Andrei Svechnikov.

Ask around the team and the fact that Svechnikov is in this series might be more important than any trade deadline pickup. He had five points in five games against the Islanders after missing the postseason in 2023 due to an ACL tear. He’s a difference-maker.


Can the Panarin line level up?

Artemi Panarin blamed himself for the Rangers’ first-round exit last season, tallying just two assists in seven games and skating to a minus-2 rating. He refocused in the offseason, symbolically shaving his head, and returned to have a career year: 120 points in 82 games, including 49 goals.

In his return to the playoffs, Panarin was solid: two goals and an assist in four games. The Rangers had such an advantage against the overmatched Capitals that they really didn’t need Panarin to carry them. That likely changes against the Hurricanes, given how tight this series will be played.

But that’s not just on Panarin. His line with Trocheck and Alexis Lafreniere had as many scoring chances at 5-on-5 as they surrendered in four games against the Capitals (20). They were slightly underwater in expected goals percentage (49%). The Rangers need this line to be better than one that trades chances with opponents.


The special teams stalemate?

The Rangers feed off their power play, which ranked third in the regular season (26.4%). They used it to close out three of their four victories against the Capitals, going 6-for-16 in the opening round. Not to be outdone was their penalty kill, which ranked No. 3 in the regular season (84.5%) and didn’t allow a Capitals power-play goal in three of the four games. In fact, they had as many short-handed goals as the Capitals had power-play goals (2) in the sweep.

New York would have a special teams advantage over anyone in the playoffs.

Well, almost anyone.

The Hurricanes had the best penalty kill (86.4%) and second-best power play (26.9%) in the regular season. In the first round against the Islanders, the Canes went 5-for-15 with the man advantage — although they did allow three power-play goals on 11 opportunities to the Islanders.

“As you get deeper in the playoffs, it gets more and more important,” Trouba said. “All the teams at this point have good power plays and good penalty kills.”

Back in their 2022 series, the Rangers’ power play was the difference, with seven goals vs. just two tallies for the Hurricanes. But that Carolina power play wasn’t nearly as good as this one, with Guentzel (11 power-play points in 22 games with the Hurricanes) now on the top unit.

This might be the most even matchup of the series — at least on paper — so to have it tip in either direction could tip the series as well.

Continue Reading

Sports

Week 15 Anger Index: The case for Texas and monthlong gripes for Miami, BYU

Published

on

By

Week 15 Anger Index: The case for Texas and monthlong gripes for Miami, BYU

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.

Continue Reading

Sports

CFP Bubble Watch: Could the ACC get left out?

Published

on

By

CFP Bubble Watch: Could the ACC get left out?

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

Continue Reading

Sports

Vanderbilt flips five-star QB Curtis from Georgia

Published

on

By

Vanderbilt flips five-star QB Curtis from Georgia

Five-star quarterback Jared Curtis, ESPN’s No. 1 pocket passer prospect, has flipped his commitment from Georgia to Vanderbilt, he announced Tuesday night, sealing a seismic move atop the 2026 class less than 24 hours before the start of the early signing period.

Curtis, a senior at Nashville (Tennessee) Christian School, is the No. 5 recruit in the 2026 ESPN 300. Multiple sources told ESPN earlier on Tuesday that Curtis’ intention was to commit to the hometown Commodores during this week’s early signing period before closing his high school career at the Division II-A state championship Thursday night.

Curtis initially shot down reports that he’d made a final decision Tuesday afternoon. According to sources close to his recruitment, he finalized the move Tuesday night and announced his pledge to Vanderbilt following phone calls with each coaching staff. He’ll sign with the Commodores on Wednesday morning as the highest-ranked signee in program history.

“Being here in Nashville and seeing what Vandy has been doing this season has been amazing and over the past few weeks, I felt more and more that I wanna be a part of that, to be close to home, to play in front of family and friends and to be what I love to be, an underdog,” Curtis wrote in a statement posted to social media. “I am excited to be a [Commodore] and excited to be part of building something here at home with Coach [Clark] Lea.”

Curtis’ flip ends a winding recruitment for ESPN’s No. 2 quarterback, who first committed to Georgia in 2024. Per ESPN sources, Vanderbilt escalated its pursuit of Curtis in October, selling the 6-foot-4, 225-pound quarterback on the chance to stay home and the lure of early playing time as a potential day one successor to Heisman Trophy contender Diego Pavia.

That push continued into November after the Commodores hosted Curtis during the program’s 17-10 win over Missouri on Oct. 25. Although Curtis affirmed his commitment to Georgia’s coaching staff multiple times over the past month, per ESPN sources, conversations between Curtis’ camp and Vanderbilt continued into the final weeks of his senior season.

Per sources close to Curtis’ recruitment, Commodores coach Lea’s potential candidacy for multiple job openings across the country remained a sticking point among Curtis’ camp in recent weeks. After Lea agreed to a reported six-year contract extension on Nov. 28, sources told ESPN that Vanderbilt’s efforts with Curtis intensified further, culminating in his flip on Tuesday.

Curtis’ pledge marks the latest victory for the Commodores amid a historic season in which Vanderbilt achieved its highest AP Top 25 ranking since 1937 earlier this fall. He now stands as the cornerstone member of the program’s 19-man recruiting class in 2026, which ranked 50th in ESPN’s class rankings for the cycle prior to his commitment.

Curtis’ signature will hand Vanderbilt its first ESPN 300 addition since cornerback Martel Hight (No. 274) in the 2023 class. The program’s first-ever five-star signee, he’ll soon replace wide receiver Jordan Cunningham (No. 107 in the 2013 ESPN 300) as the Commodores’ highest-ranked recruit in school history. Curtis will also represent Vanderbilt’s first top-10 quarterback signee since Kyle Shurmer arrived as ESPN’s No. 7 pocket passer in the 2015 class.

Curtis rose to status as one of the nation’s top pocket passers as a four-year starter at Nashville Christian. He threw for 7,637 yards and 92 touchdowns across his first three varsity seasons and led Nashville Christian to a Division II-A state championship as a junior in 2024.

Curtis initially committed to Georgia in March 2024 before reopening his process late last fall. He rejoined the Bulldogs’ incoming class on May 5, picking Georgia over Oregon in a tight, two-school recruiting battle, and Curtis remained the program’s top-ranked 2026 pledge until Tuesday, maintaining frequent contact with the school’s coaching staff this fall.

His decommitment leaves Georgia without a quarterback commitment in the nation’s second-ranked recruiting class. First-year Bulldogs starter Gunner Stockton holds another season of eligibility beyond 2025. Behind him, Georgia’s current quarterback depth includes redshirt freshman Ryan Puglisi and class of 2025 signees Ryan Montgomery and Hezekiah Millender. It is not immediately clear whether the Bulldogs will pursue another quarterback in the 2026 class.

Wednesday marks the start of the three-day early signing period for the 2026 class. The recruiting cycle will officially close with national signing day on Feb. 4.

Continue Reading

Trending