Connect with us

Published

on

Happy Roki Sasaki Week!

After announcing his intention to come to MLB at the start of the 2024-25 offseason, the 23-year-old Japanese free agent immediately became the most coveted pitcher available this winter thanks to his combination of talent and age, and the parameters of his contract.

With the 2025 international free agent signing period opening Jan. 15 and Sasaki’s posting window closing on Jan. 23, we could find out where Sasaki is headed as soon as Wednesday.

Because Sasaki decided to come to the majors before his 25th birthday, he is limited to a minor league deal with a signing bonus coming from a team’s international bonus pool (capped at just over $7.5 million). That makes the emerging ace a rare free agent star every team can afford to sign.

As we wait for Sasaki’s destination to come into focus, we asked our MLB experts what makes him so good, which major league pitchers he reminds us of, and which teams seem most likely to land him.

Monday update: Sasaki plans to sign with either the Los Angeles Dodgers, San Diego Padres or Toronto Blue Jays at some point over the next week or so, sources told ESPN, with a cadre of big-name teams informed in recent days they are no longer in consideration.


What makes Sasaki such a coveted free agent?

Bradford Doolittle: He’s young, accomplished and with measurable tools that might make him baseball’s top prospect right now. But he’s not a prospect in the “maybe he’ll be ‘X’ if he reaches his ceiling” but one that’s already been successful in a high-level league and can slide into a big league rotation. A limited workload threshold, for now, is the only thing that’s really holding back Sasaki’s 2025 projection. With his full collection of team control seasons intact, there is no risk to signing him. And as good as he is now, he has room to grow in terms of his arsenal and how he fills out physically. You just don’t get a combination of factors all lining up like this, not the least of which Sasaki was so anxious to make the jump that he was willing to make max earnings a secondary factor.

Buster Olney: As we’ve seen with Yoshinobu Yamamoto and with Juan Soto — as we’ve witnessed all the way back to Alex Rodriguez — excellence at a young age is everything. Sasaki is expected to be a high-ceiling talent already at 23, and the team that lands him will have years of control while paying him relative pennies.

Kiley McDaniel: In describing his client’s upcoming potential nine-figure deal to me this winter, an agent underlined why he was confident that would happen, even if he had a down year, by saying: “age is a hack.” Rosters are getting younger, thus teams have more money to spend, but don’t want to offer long-term deals to older players, so they are (generally) seeking short-term free agent deals or trades for players with a year or two of control. That means long-term deals are generally acceptable to a large swath of teams only when they can land a standout young star still in his peak years. (like the Red Sox chasing Yoshinobu Yamamoto and Juan Soto, extending Rafael Devers, but not offering huge money to any older players). Sasaki could be under team control for his entire peak of a bona fide ace, at a price every team can afford: a true unicorn of an opportunity for all 30 teams.

David Schoenfield: He is entering his age-23 season and it’s not a stretch to say he has the potential to be the best starter in baseball. In four years in Japan, he has a 2.02 ERA, averaging 11.4 strikeouts per nine. He has hit 102 mph and is 6-foot-3 and athletic. You can argue that he’s right up there on the Stephen Strasburg/Paul Skenes scale as a pitching prospect, except he has already dominated as a professional.


Which current or former MLB pitcher does he remind you of on the mound?

Schoenfield: With his power fastball/splitter combo, I think of two former MLB greats: Roger Clemens and Curt Schilling. There are certainly some similarities as well to Shohei Ohtani, although Ohtani slowly ramped down his splitter usage and didn’t use it much in 2022-23, going more often to his sweeper. In Japan in 2024, Sasaki induced a 57% whiff rate on his splitter, which would have ranked second in MLB behind Reds (now Yankees) reliever Fernando Cruz.

Doolittle: I don’t know that there is any one guy. The splitter kind of reminds me of the one Logan Gilbert throws, one with a spin rate so low it’s kind of freaky to watch in slow motion. The easy, heavy, hard stuff he offers kind of reminds me of Kevin Brown, only with a different fastball. The thing that’s most exciting about Sasaki is that it’s hard to call him the next so-and-so. He’s his own thing, and novelty is a great and too-rare thing in sports these days.

McDaniel: There isn’t a perfect comp, and Sasaki is still changing as a pitcher, so I’ll point out some players with qualities that are similar. Hunter Greene had a similar combination of arm speed and hype at the same age, along with some questions on his fastball shape and breaking ball quality. Obviously, Sasaki’s standout splitter has a number of comps to former NPB pitchers but only a handful of U.S.-born players, such as Clemens and Schilling. The total package (power fastball, slider, and splitter-ish offspeed pitch) is similar to Paul Skenes’, though Sasaki’s command and fourth and fifth pitch are areas he’ll need to address to have a chance to truly stand up to Skenes’ MLB debut.

Buster Olney: He reminds me of Yu Darvish, with his build and his rangy athleticism. He looks like he’ll have an ability to make adjustments, as needed. Darvish is known for being able to mimic the deliveries of other pitchers, and watching Sasaki move, it would not surprise me if he had the same gift.


Are there any concerns about how his game will translate from Japan to MLB?

McDaniel: Sasaki’s fastball shape and velocity regressed last season, his slider velocity also tailed off even more, he likely needs to add a fourth and maybe fifth pitch, and his execution within the strike zone could be a bit better. These are all simple enough on their own to be addressed in the first half of 2025 as long as Sasaki chooses a strong pitching development club, as I suspect he will. Some mechanical adjustments and mental cues could do a lot of the heavy lifting as these things can all be related. I would expect to see glimpses of Sasaki’s potential in 2025 while we wait until 2026 for the first dominating string of five or six starts in a row.

Olney: We really need our colleague Eduardo Perez to jump in here, because he’d be the one to tell us if Sasaki has any blatant tells such as pitch-tipping. That’s what Yamamoto experienced in his first months with the Dodgers. But Sasaki could have such excellent stuff that it doesn’t matter. His splitter seems to be so good that it won’t be hit even if the batter knows it’s coming.

Doolittle: Well, the different ball means we don’t know exactly how the measurements on his pitches will change, but that’s not a major concern. He looked great in the World Baseball Classic which offers a nice preview of that adjustment. It’s really durability. He has never thrown a lot of innings, his best pitch is a splitter and his velo was down last season. These things would be much more worrisome if he was getting a Yamamoto-like contract, but he’s not. I’ve seen his splitter carry an 80-grade and when you match that with a triple-digit fastball that moves and a track record of plus command, health is the only thing there is to worry about.

Schoenfield: The same as every starter: Health and durability. He has topped out at 20 starts and 129 innings in Japan, back in 2022. His fastball velocity was down a bit in 2024 as he missed time with a torn oblique and shoulder fatigue. He’ll also have to adjust to facing more power hitters than he faced in Japan.


Are the Dodgers the team to beat as his decision approaches?

Doolittle: They always are.

McDaniel: They are the most likely landing spot and have been seen that way for a while, but don’t underrate how little we truly know about Sasaki’s process of eliminating and ultimately choosing a club. We have some clues and potential leans, but don’t truly know very much right now.

Olney: Sure, because they seemingly land every player they want, with a bottomless pit of money. The Dodgers will be the team to beat for years on the field, and off.

Schoenfield: I’ll say no. I’m betting on Sasaki wanting to forge his own path and signing with a team that doesn’t already have Ohtani and Yoshinobu Yamamoto.


Which other teams do you think have the best chance of landing him?

McDaniel: The Padres, led by their ultra-aggressive GM A.J. Preller, are perceived as the second-most-likely landing spot behind the Dodgers, and San Diego clearly needs Sasaki more: He would change the outlook for the whole franchise. Beyond that, we’re mostly guessing from teams we know he has met with that seem to have a good environment for Sasaki to develop and compete in meaningful games: the Giants, Mariners, Mets, Yankees, Cubs, and Rangers seem to come up the most but I can’t even say that’s a complete list of teams getting a long look.

Doolittle: For me, the Mets stand out. Sasaki and his representation have been pretty opaque when it comes to offering glimpses of his thinking, which has led to a lot of reading between the lines. It’s such a rare thing for a player of this caliber to be able to choose any team he wants with money barely being a part of the equation. So who knows? The Mets offer a good pitching environment, a strong possibility of sustained contention and a budding pitching development program highlighted by the pitching lab they built in Port Saint Lucie. Why be another Dodger?

Olney: It’s pretty evident that Sasaki is not afraid to ignore conventional wisdom, in the same way Ohtani did when he arrived — he passed up many, many tens of millions of dollars by pushing to get to the majors now, rather than just waiting. With that in mind, I think the Padres will be the most intriguing alternative to the Dodgers, because of the weather, Darvish’s presence and the chance to play against the best, in the same division.

Schoenfield: If Sasaki is primarily concerned with his own development as a pitcher, is there a better place than Seattle? Unlike the Dodgers, the Mariners have kept their young starters healthy. They also play in a great pitcher’s park, they play on the West Coast and it’s not like Seattle doesn’t have a chance to win. But we haven’t heard much about the Mariners being in the running.

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

Sports

Week 14 Anger Index: Why Notre Dame deserves the benefit of the doubt

Published

on

By

Week 14 Anger Index: Why Notre Dame deserves the benefit of the doubt

We don’t talk nearly enough about luck in sports.

It’s only reasonable to want to believe the best team always wins, that the outcome of a game is the reward for a better process, that, in the end, we all get what we deserve.

But then you watch 10 minutes of Florida State football and it’s impossible to deny that there are football gods at work and they can be awfully vengeful.

And so it is that, at this late point in the season, the College Football Playoff rankings still hinge, in no small part, on a botched extra point at the end of Notre Dame-Texas A&M.

We can look back at Miami‘s game against SMU on Nov. 1 — a game that, with 2 minutes to go the Canes had a 90% chance of winning, according to ESPN’s metrics — and consider it a bad loss, then a week later, see Oregon — with less than a 40% chance of beating Iowa with 2 minutes remaining — pull off a comeback and have it constitute a critical point on the Ducks’ résumé.

Alabama nearly doubled Oklahoma‘s yardage but lost, Ole Miss gave up 526 yards to Arkansas and won, Georgia has trailed in the second half five times this year but has just one loss to show for it.

These things happen, and while there’s clearly valuable data involved — Georgia wins those games, because the Dawgs are really good — any time we’re discussing a one-game sample size, there’s room for ample debate over what matters and what doesn’t.

The committee’s job is to counterbalance the fickleness of luck with a calculated, rational, repeatable process of evaluation that, if applied again and again by dozens of different people, would largely yield the same results; something akin to scientific testing, a way to filter out the noise and get to what matters most. “The process,” as everyone from Nick Saban to Michael Lombardi have called it.

And yet, it’s hard to say exactly what the committee’s process really is. Even when it’s explained — Miami isn’t in the same bucket as Notre Dame, so they can’t be compared directly, for example — the logic often crumbles under the slightest bit of scrutiny.

Instead, the committee has mostly relied on its own luck, and each year, by the time the final rankings are revealed, the 13 games played on the field provide enough clarity that most reasonable people will proclaim the committee got things right, save for the occasional reminder to Florida State that, yes, the football gods are not Seminoles fans.

This year though, it’s increasingly likely the committee’s luck could run out.

We have one full weekend of games left. There are reasonably 16 teams who’ll make a case as to why they should earn one of the seven coveted at-large spots. Without a little luck in Week 14, the committee’s going to have some incredibly hard choices to make.

And that means we’ve got plenty of outrage left to send the committee’s way.

This past week seemed to be the apex of the biggest rankings debate: Notre Dame or Miami?

The argument here is easy to understand. The committee has consistently had the Irish well ahead of the Hurricanes, despite both teams having the same record and Miami holding a head-to-head win.

But you know what’s even easier to understand? BYU has a better record than both.

In fact, let’s look at some résumés.

Team A: Best win vs. SP+ No. 19, next best vs. No. 21. Loss to SP+ No. 2. Two wins vs. teams 7-4 or better. No. 5 strength of record.

Team B: Best win vs. SP+ No. 9, next best vs. No. 25. Loss to SP+ No. 3. Six wins vs. teams 7-4 or better. No. 6 strength of record.

Both look like pretty obvious playoff teams, right?

Well Team A just moved up a spot in the rankings, seems assured not just of making the playoff, but of hosting a home game, and no one seems to be arguing about its spot in the rankings. That’s Oregon at No. 6.

Team B would currently be our first team out, a team with a résumé that shows equally impressive wins, an equally understandable loss and a far more impressive breadth of quality opponents. And yet, no one seems to be arguing much about BYU’s spot in the rankings either.

Why is it that the Cougars — the forgotten one-loss team with a higher ranked win than Oregon or Notre Dame and a better loss than Alabama or Oklahoma — sit at No. 11 and no one seems to care?

We get the frustration over Miami’s placement. There’s plenty of anger to go around. But don’t let BYU get lost in the shuffle. The Cougars’ résumé holds up against all the two-loss teams and is on par with Oregon and Ole Miss. Somehow, the committee — and nearly everyone else outside of Provo — seems to be ignoring it.


Wait, are we really defending Notre Dame here? Hey, somebody’s got to do it.

Let’s take a closer look at the Irish, who’ve become the punching bag for every fan frustrated with the committee’s rankings.

Right now, Notre Dame is effectively the golfer who wrapped up his round early and is waiting in the clubhouse, hoping no one else makes too many birdies. The Irish are safely in the field, and only a road trip to lowly Stanford is left on the docket.

But as the committee’s rankings hold steady week after week, there has been more and more time to debate the merits of Notre Dame’s résumé, and when we reach the end of championship week, it’s hard to ignore that one team aiming for a playoff bid doesn’t actually play in a conference.

So, does Notre Dame really deserve the benefit of the doubt?

In short: Heck yeah.

The Irish have five wins against bowl-eligible opponents — more than Georgia, Ole Miss, Vanderbilt or Texas Tech.

Both of Notre Dame’s losses were one-possession affairs against top-12 opponents. The loss to Texas A&M came down to a fluke occurrence, as the Irish flubbed a point after try.

Notre Dame’s game control — about as good an estimation as we have for the eye test — puts the Irish ahead of everyone but Ohio State, Indiana, Texas Tech and Oregon.

In four games since Nov. 1, Notre Dame has beaten its opposition by a combined score of 181-42, lambasting Syracuse so badly in Week 13 that Fran Brown might not shower for a month.

Look at any of the underlying metrics — explosive play rates, defensive stop rates, Jeremiyah Love being awesome rates — and Notre Dame is as good as anyone in the country.

So yes, we get the more logical debates about Miami’s Week 1 win or Alabama’s superior schedule, but the bottom line is, outside of Ohio State, there’s probably no team in the country playing better, more balanced football than the Irish. That probably shouldn’t be the only consideration, but as we debate which teams ought to be docked a few points in the rankings, Notre Dame probably shouldn’t be at the front of the line either.


Yes, Miami has a good argument against the committee’s treatment of the Hurricanes. The committee, too, seems to acknowledge under-appreciating Miami early on, and is adjusting by slowly moving the Canes up one spot each week, hoping that’ll be enough to appease the masses.

But here’s a question: What if Miami’s real beef should be with the ACC, not with the committee?

For each of the past two years, there has been widespread consensus that the ACC’s best team is Miami. But, barring some truly high-level chaos in Week 14 — something the ACC is apt to provide — the Canes won’t be playing for a conference championship again.

When leagues were smaller and had two divisions, the idea of pitting one division champ against the other made intuitive sense. But with expansion and the end of division play, what we’ve gotten is wildly diverse scheduling and the potential for confounding tiebreakers to ultimately decide which two teams get to play for a conference title.

In the Big Ten and SEC, where winning the league isn’t a do-or-die proposition, that’s fine. In the ACC, where only the champion might get a playoff bid and there’s a real chance that six different teams will tie atop the conference with a 6-2 league record — well, that’s a big issue.

So, why not just tweak the rules of how a conference championship game is seeded? What if one spot goes to the team with the best conference record and the other spot goes to the next highest ranked team? Doing so would ensure both the most deserving team (best record) and best team (highest ranked) got a shot, and it would’ve ended any concerns about the ACC being passed by multiple Group of 5 leagues, because a mediocre team like Duke would’ve had no shot at winning the league.

The ACC has bent over backward to try to find unique solutions to potentially existential problems in recent years. This is a change that would be forward thinking, easy and beneficial to the league’s playoff prospects.

It just won’t come in time to save Miami in 2025.


Remember last week when Tulane was also No. 24, just ahead of Arizona State, and behind Illinois, Houston and Missouri, who all lost? It might seem reasonable, given that precondition, that Tulane would then move up, say, three spots or so, while remaining a tick ahead of Arizona State.

But no, a week later, the Green Wave still check in at No. 24, a spot the committee seems to have set aside as “Where we put a Group of 5 team,” like the junk drawer in your kitchen that holds packing tape and birthday candles and those weird scented oils your mother-in-law ordered for you off TV — a placeholder for all the stuff you don’t know what else to do with.

In the big picture, it probably doesn’t matter. As long as Tulane stays ahead of its compatriots in the Group of 5 — winning the American, out-ranking James Madison — the Green Wave will make the playoff. And perhaps that’s all that matters.

But of the teams that jumped Tulane in the rankings this week are Arizona State — still with a chance to win the Big 12 — and Pitt and SMU, who have decent odds of making the ACC title game. Georgia Tech, despite a miserable loss to Pitt, also held firm ahead of the Green Wave.

A year ago, the ACC’s championship game implosion earned Clemson a bid into the playoff, but also shifted the ACC behind Boise State, the best Group of 5 champion, allowing the Broncos to land a bye. The stakes have changed for 2025-26 — the top four conference champs are no longer guaranteed an off week — but that doesn’t mean Tulane should be fine settling for the 12-seed either.

Tulane’s strength of record is ahead of Georgia Tech, Virginia and Pitt. If one of those teams claims the ACC’s playoff berth, what’s the rationale for putting them ahead of the Green Wave? And the difference between the No. 11 seed and the No. 12 seed might be about traveling to the SEC or the Big 12 for a playoff game.

The Group of 5 has largely been set to the side by this committee all year, so none of this comes as a surprise. But Tulane — or JMU or Navy or North Texas or San Diego State — all deserve to be judged on the merits of their résumés, not by which conference they’re affiliated with.


The bottom of the top 25 seems to be prime real estate for the ACC, but the one ACC team who might most deserve one of those coveted spots between 20 and 25 is nowhere to be found.

Wake Forest has the same record as SMU, and it beat the Mustangs head-to-head.

Wake Forest has a better overall résumé than Georgia Tech, and it only lost to the Yellow Jackets (in overtime) as a result of an officiating call the ACC later apologized for.

Wake Forest is a game behind Virginia in the standings, and the Deacons have a head-to-head win over the No. 18 Cavaliers, too.

Look, Wake Forest doesn’t ask for much. The Deacons are like the friend who’s always willing to pick you up from the airport, only better because they’ll probably bring along a box of Krispy Kreme. So if some ACC team that no one respects is going to be ranked 23rd regardless, why not Wake? Because the next time a committee member’s connection gets delayed out of CLT, it won’t be Pitt offering to pick them up and give them an air mattress to crash on. That’s strictly a Wake Forest thing.

Also angry this week: James Madison Dukes (10-1, unranked), North Texas Mean Green (10-1, unranked and now losing their coach), Navy Midshipmen (8-2, unranked), Utah Utes (9-2, No. 13 after being this week’s team that somehow isn’t as good as Miami anymore), Alabama Crimson Tide (9-2, No. 10 and far too close to the edge of the playoff for comfort)

Continue Reading

Sports

NDSU announces extension for coach Polasek

Published

on

By

NDSU announces extension for coach Polasek

North Dakota State and head coach Tim Polasek have agreed on a contract extension, athletic director Matt Larsen announced Tuesday.

The deal is for seven years, which will carry it through the 2033 season, sources told ESPN’s Pete Thamel. It also includes a significant raise, additional staff money and more program resources, a move that sources said was pushed for by Larsen. It comes as Polasek had been pursued by multiple Football Bowl Subdivision schools.

“After several productive conversations with coach Polasek, we have affirmed our commitment to both him and the long-term success of NDSU football,” said Larsen, who did not divulge details about the length or value of the extension.

North Dakota State is 12-0 this year, won its record 10th Football Championship Subdivision title in 2024 in Polasek’s first year and is the No. 1 overall seed in the current FCS playoffs.

“Coach Polasek’s impact on the football program over 12 seasons, and especially the past two seasons as our head coach has been remarkable,” Larsen said in his statement.

Polasek was an assistant for the Bison’s first two titles in Frisco, Texas, at the end of the 2011 and 2012 seasons and had two different spells with the team as an assistant before being hired as head coach.

Continue Reading

Trending