‘Zero interest,’ ‘zero market’: What does Nico Iamaleava’s future hold after his Tennessee exit?
More Videos
Published
8 months agoon
By
admin
-
Max Olson
Close
Max Olson
ESPN Staff Writer
- Covers the Big 12
- Joined ESPN in 2012
- Graduate of the University of Nebraska
Apr 15, 2025, 02:25 PM ET
The shock waves that came with the breakup of quarterback Nico Iamaleava and the Tennessee football program continue to reverberate.
Iamaleava’s case, which involved contract discussions, a skipped practice before the spring game and quick roster exit, has produced a flurry of action since Saturday, when coach Josh Heupel told reporters that “no one is bigger than” the program. It’s also a case study into the changing world of college football and has produced heated reaction, hyperbole and countless theories on how to fix the sport as the entire collegiate model awaits a judge’s blessing on how it will move forward.
But the most interesting aspects of the Iamaleava saga are still unresolved. His departure from Tennessee leaves a brand-name school and player at a compelling crossroads as both sides scurry to find answers for the 2025 season.
The early read after talking to sources in college football is that neither Tennessee nor Iamaleava is likely to have far better options for next season.
Iamaleava’s future is in the hands of his father, Nic, and a trusted family friend named Cordell Landers, a former Florida personnel staffer. Both are representing the quarterback in discussions with schools. Iamaleava’s next step is tied to a tricky spring transfer portal market where headwinds for a desirable landing place include awkward timing and the reputational damage from his Tennessee exit.
Finding a better football fit than Iamaleava had at Tennessee, where he was entering his third year, will be difficult. He’s coming off a season in which he threw for 2,616 yards with 19 touchdowns and five interceptions, and the Volunteers had the talent around him to again be one of college football’s top offenses. At his new school, however, he’ll need to win the starting job, learn the offense and be surrounded by a strong enough supporting cast to show significant enough improvement to stay on the radar of NFL teams. He also needs to win over the locker room.
And then there’s the money. Multiple sources have told ESPN that Iamaleava’s camp is seeking much more through the portal than the $4 million they hoped to earn with the Vols this year. The read after talking to sources, however, is that he’s unlikely to find a situation that gets him to that number.
“I think he has zero market,” said a general manager at a Power 4 school. “It will be an interesting test of how smart and disciplined colleges are in looking at him.”
There has not been a flood of immediate interest in Iamaleava from big brands. Schools with less-than-established quarterback situations such as Notre Dame, USC, North Carolina and UCF have not expressed significant interest, according to team sources. Big paydays come from leverage, and there appears to be little out there.
Sources caution that Iamaleava is talented enough that some market will form. He led the SEC’s ninth-best scoring offense in conference play and finished ninth in QBR (70.5) last season. There will be a place for a solid SEC starter with a five-star pedigree somewhere in the sport. But can he find a contender willing to invest millions and guarantee him a starting job?
SEC rules prohibit immediate eligibility for players who transfer within the conference during the spring portal window. That’s a limiting factor that cuts into the market. And the timing of the move has made coaches hesitant to go all-in.
Iamaleava’s camp strongly considered entering the transfer portal at the end of December, according to sources close to the quarterback. Had he made a move at that time, fresh off a 10-win season and College Football Playoff appearance, he likely would’ve been greeted with a strong list of options from teams desperate for an experienced arm and willing to pay top dollar, as Miami was for Georgia‘s Carson Beck in January.
USC and Notre Dame have been linked to Iamaleava, but sources at both schools have denied interest. The Trojans are moving forward with Jayden Maiava, who started their final four games last season. The Fighting Irish are in the middle of a three-man competition between Steve Angeli, CJ Carr and Kenny Minchey.
North Carolina is in the market for an upgrade at quarterback in the spring portal window, but sources expect the Tar Heels to focus their efforts on South Alabama‘s Gio Lopez when he officially enters the portal Wednesday.
UCF has an Iamaleava connection with quarterbacks coach McKenzie Milton, who worked with the quarterback during his stint as a Tennessee offensive analyst. But the Knights have already brought in Indiana transfer Tayven Jackson this offseason and are not expected to be in the mix.
3:00
Iamaleava’s departure from Vols opens opportunities for others
With Nico Iamaleava leaving the Tennessee program and headed for the transfer portal, the quarterback job is up for grabs between Jake Merklinger and George MacIntyre
UCLA has been perceived as a contender for the Southern California native almost by default, despite adding veteran App State transfer Joey Aguilar in the winter portal window. It’s worth noting the Bruins previously held a commitment from Iamaleava’s younger brother, Madden, before he flipped to Arkansas in December, so there’s already a hurdle for his camp to overcome. Madden Iamaleava had been the local gem of UCLA coach DeShaun Foster’s first full recruiting class, but he and Long Beach Poly teammate Jace Brown bailed on the Bruins on signing day for Arkansas.
From the timing to the public nature of the exit to the attention he’d draw upon arrival, there’s a general vibe of hesitancy around the market. Essentially, coaches see a narrow path to success with the time frame, learning the offense and the pressure on Iamaleava to produce at the amount he’s expected to be paid.
“Absolutely zero interest,” another Power 4 general manager said.
Meanwhile, Tennessee will need to find an immediate and significant upgrade who can seamlessly transition and thrive in 2025. This would involve a transfer learning a new offense, winning over the team and having the arm talent to be an adequate maestro in Heupel’s up-tempo system. If this is going to be an established Power 4 starter, he’d also have to be OK walking away from a locker room, coaching staff and teammates who he’s bonded with for months ahead of the season.
“This is a terrible time,” said an industry source familiar with the quarterback market, with observations applying to both the quarterback and Tennessee. “You are setting yourself up to fail. You are so late. You get no spring ball, and all new wide receivers and a new system. The kids being paid a lot of money are already in the system, or they are four months into it.”
So far, Tennessee has appeared to have little luck in its search for talent. Sources told ESPN that at least one starting quarterback has received a raise thanks to an inquiry his agent received from Tennessee. Expect the agents of nearly every established starter in the ACC, Big Ten and Big 12 to get a call.
“I feel 100% confident that we have nothing to worry about,” one general manager of a Big 12 program said, “but how do you ever truly know?”
You may like
Sports
Week 15 Anger Index: The case for Texas and monthlong gripes for Miami, BYU
Published
1 hour agoon
December 3, 2025By
admin

-

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

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

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

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

Bracket
Based on the committee’s fifth ranking, the seeding would be:
First-round byes
No. 1 Ohio State (Big Ten champ)
No. 2 Indiana
No. 3 Georgia (SEC champ)
No. 4 Texas Tech (Big 12 champ)
First-round games
On campus, Dec. 19 and 20
No. 12 Tulane (American champ) at No. 5 Oregon
No. 11 Virginia (ACC champ) at No. 6 Ole Miss
No. 10 Notre Dame at No. 7 Texas A&M
No. 9 Alabama at No. 8 Oklahoma
Quarterfinal games
At the Goodyear Cotton Bowl, Capital One Orange Bowl, Rose Bowl Presented by Prudential and Allstate Sugar Bowl on Dec. 31 and Jan. 1.
No. 12 Tulane/No. 5 Oregon winner vs. No. 4 Texas Tech
No. 11 Virginia/No. 6 Ole Miss winner vs. No. 3 Georgia
No. 10 Notre Dame/No. 7 Texas A&M winner vs. No. 2 Indiana
No. 9 Alabama/No. 8 Oklahoma winner vs. No. 1 Ohio State
Sports
Vanderbilt flips five-star QB Curtis from Georgia
Published
2 hours agoon
December 3, 2025By
admin

-

Eli LedermanDec 2, 2025, 12:33 PM ET
Close- Eli Lederman covers college football and recruiting for ESPN.com. He joined ESPN in 2024 after covering the University of Oklahoma for Sellout Crowd and the Tulsa World.
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.
Trending
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024
