NHL draft tracker: List of all 224 picks, plus scouting notes for every first-rounder
More Videos
Published
4 months agoon
By
admin
-

Rachel DoerrieJun 28, 2025, 05:05 PM ET
Close- Rachel Doerrie is a professional data consultant specializing in data communication and modelling. She’s worked in the NHL and consulted for professional teams across North American and Europe. She hosts the Staff & Graph Podcast and discusses sports from a data-driven perspective.
The 2025 NHL draft is taking place on Friday (Round 1) and Saturday (Rounds 2-7) at the Peacock Theater in Los Angeles.
This page will be your home for the entire event, as each pick is added below, including scouting notes and team fit analysis for the first-rounders.
More: Grades for all 32
Winners and losers
Prospect rankings
Needs for all 32 teams
Round 1

Team: Erie (OHL)
DOB: 09/05/2007 | Ht: 6-1¾ | Wt: 183 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 17 | G: 7 | A: 15 | P: 22
Scouting notes: Schaefer is projected to become a true No. 1 cornerstone for years to come. A dynamic presence at both ends of the ice, he skates with ease and elite mobility to shut down opponents in all situations, while creating offense with quality transition play.
Executives and scouts view him as a future elite NHL defenseman and a foundational piece for a championship-caliber roster. Schaefer’s ability to control play from the blue line, play tough matchups, and run a power play — combined with the belief in his character and leadership — result in many believing that Schaefer has the tools to become a top-10 defender in the league, while wearing a letter as part of a team’s leadership group.
How he fits: After trading Noah Dobson earlier in the day, the Islanders drafted their franchise cornerstone defender. Schaefer does everything well, and is a dynamic skater with elite mobility. He will take on the toughest matchups, help the Islanders exit the zone with smooth passes and carry outs, and drive offense from the back end. He’s a future No. 1 defenseman who will log 25-28 minutes per night and run the power play.
Schaefer’s ability to dictate play from the back end is franchise-changing for the Isles. Schaefer will attend development camp next week, and it is highly likely he starts the season in the NHL lineup. Don’t be surprised if Schaefer is running the power play and logging major minutes by November.
A very emotional Schaefer hugged his family and pulled on the Isles jersey for the first time, with a cancer patch. Through tears, he shared his excitement and emotion, and gained the hearts of a lot more than just Isles fans.

Team: Saginaw (OHL)
DOB: 02/16/2007 | Ht: 6-¾ | Wt: 184 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 65 | G: 62 | A: 72 | P: 134
Scouting notes: Granted exceptional status in the OHL in 2022, Misa delivered one of the most remarkable goal-scoring seasons in recent memory in 2024-25, netting 62 goals in just 65 games. He projects to be a top-line forward capable of consistently exceeding 90 points per season in the NHL.
Misa’s offensive instincts are elite. He processes the game at a high level and executes at top speed. Scouts believe he is NHL-ready and has the potential to become an elite top-line center. Away from the puck, Misa excels at finding soft areas in coverage and has a flair for delivering in clutch moments. His combination of high-end playmaking and goal-scoring ability makes him a constant dual threat in the offensive zone.
How he fits: The Sharks kept everyone guessing until the very last moment, but ultimately selected Misa. He is a special talent and adds a second elite two-way center to the organization. He projects as a first-line star, with dual-threat playmaking and scoring ability — notching 62 goals in 65 OHL games.
If Misa’s two-way game continues to improve, there’s a real chance the Sharks will have two centers capable of dominating play in all three zones with 2024 No. 1 pick Macklin Celebrini already in place. On the power play, Misa can facilitate, be a shooting threat and carry the puck on entries. Because of his dual-threat capabilities, he can play the bumper, the flank or down low. With this selection, the Sharks have the potential to feature the best one-two punch down the middle for years to come.

Team: Djurgarden (SWEDEN-2)
DOB: 05/07/2007 | Ht: 6-1 | Wt: 198 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 29 | G: 11 | A: 14 | P: 25
Scouting notes: Frondell is a versatile two-way forward that plays both center and right wing. His flexibility is attractive to teams, although many believe he is most likely to reach his potential as a winger in the NHL.
Frondell is coming off one of the most productive seasons by an under-18 player in Allsvenskan history, giving him a confident projection as a first-line NHL forward. He’s a cerebral player, who picks apart defenders in one-on-one situations and defensive coverage in offensive zone play. The details of Frondell’s game are translatable, including excellent forechecking ability, willingness to attack the middle of the ice and high-end anticipation on both sides of the puck.
He has shown play-driving capabilities against men in the Allsvenskan, which has translated to the NHL for other prospects in the past. He’s projected to produce between 75-85 points per season. His style of play translates well and has executives excited about his ability to step in the league in the next 18 months.
How he fits: It was no secret that Chicago wanted to add some size up front, and Frondell is exactly that. He can play center or the wing, and brings an excellent two-way game. He confidently projects as a first-line forward that beats defenders one-on-one, drives play on both ends of the ice, and should score nearly a point per game.
He plays on the inside of the ice and has the ability to score 30-plus goals in the NHL because of his excellent shot. Frondell is a year away from playing in the NHL, and probably two or three from hitting his potential as a top-line forward who drives play. Chicago can play him behind Connor Bedard up the middle, or on Bedard’s line to capitalize on the versatility he brings.

Team: Moncton (QMJHL)
DOB: 04/11/2007 | Ht: 6-1½ | Wt: 178 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 56 | G: 35 | A: 49 | P: 84
Scouting notes: Described as a “coach’s dream” because of his ability to take an offensive or checking assignment and execute consistently. He makes smart, simple plays, provides a physical presence on the forecheck and generally agitates and makes life difficult on defenders.
He projects to be a quality second-line center with a decent chance of becoming a first-line player. He’s cerebral, with quick hands and playmaking ability. He’s not flashy, but he’s consistently effective and makes intelligent plays with the puck. As one scouting director described “he’s the type of player you win with.” Some have quietly compared him to Patrice Bergeron and Jonathan Toews, who are lofty comparisons, to say the very least.
How he fits: The Mammoth kept everyone guessing: Would they trade or keep the pick? Ultimately, they kept the pick and selected Desnoyers. He can play in any situation as one of the best two-way players available. He’s a serial winner who plays whatever style of game required to win. If he needs to produce offense, he does. If he needs to shut down the opponent’s best, he does that too.
Utah needed some size and two-way capability to mesh with Logan Cooley, Clayton Keller and Dylan Guenther, and Desnoyers is exactly that. He’ll be NHL-ready a lot sooner than people think because his professional details are top-notch. He projects as a play-driving, two-way, second line center that the Mammoth will turn to in key situations. As noted above, there’s a lot of Jonathan Toews in Desnoyers’ game, which will excite Mammoth fans, management and coaches.

Team: Sault Ste. Marie (OHL)
DOB: 03/16/2007 | Ht: 6-0 | Wt: 178 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 57 | G: 33 | A: 39 | P: 72
Scouting notes: A Swiss Army knife type of player who will be most effective on the wing because of his strong wall play, Martin projects as a middle-six forward capable of scoring 20 goals routinely, with upside as a second-line forward.
He’s a wrecking ball that will bring value in all three zones, on and off the puck. Martin has scouts raving about him after an excellent performance at the IIHF under-18 championship, with many opining that he could go very early in the first round. He’s a workhorse without an off switch, who brings a blend of physicality and hard skill. He’s a nightmare to contain with his brute strength, and forces defenders into precarious positions with good speed and willingness to make “winning” plays.
Several teams mentioned how impressive Martin was during interviews at the combine. Combine an attractive personality with the hard-nosed style, and it forms a rare combination that is valuable to many scouts who believe he’s the type of player teams need to win in the playoffs. Surely, his mention of Conn Smythe winner Sam Bennett as a role model grabbed attention.
How he fits: Another pick that was rumored to be on the move, the Predators kept it and selected Martin. Martin is a raw player with functional strength and projects to be a middle-six forward. He will shine as the games get tighter and more physical, and can swing momentum with a brilliant forecheck or big hit.
The hard-nosed style of game was very attractive to many teams, especially with Bennett and the Panthers’ recent success. Martin needs at least another season or two to develop his offensive game, and while the Predators did leave some skill with James Hagens and Porter Martone on the board, they believe Martin can be an impactful player for years to come.

Team: Brampton (OHL)
DOB: 10/26/2006 | Ht: 6-2¾ | Wt: 208 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 57 | G: 37 | A: 61 | P: 98
Scouting notes: A big, cerebral forward, Martone is a dual-threat offensive player with ability to score on his own and facilitate. He projects to be a second-line scoring winger who should see top power-play minutes.
His competitive nature will make him an effective agitator as he learns to physically impose himself on opponents. He needs to hone the competitiveness and physicality to increase its effectiveness, but he is exactly the type of player teams covet because of the unique combination of offensive talent and competitive fire.
His unique combination of scoring ability, size and hard skill make him a very attractive prospect. While his most confident projection is as a top-six forward, Martone has a legitimate chance to become a top-line winger if his skating improves.
How he fits: The Flyers got a lot bigger and better with Porter Martone. Considered the smartest player in the draft by scouts, Martone is a dual-threat offensive player with excellent playmaking and shooting ability. There is an aura of competitiveness and physicality that will develop and will undoubtedly make him a fan favorite in Philly.
Martone projects to be a scoring winger who will be tough to handle as he develops his power forward game. The Flyers have some elite young players, and Martone has a big frame with elite talent, and can create offense and make special plays happen. He needs a year or two to improve his skating to fully unlock his potential as a top-six scorer, but Rick Tocchet is going to love this player.
2:00
Charles Barkley announces Porter Martone as No. 6 pick in NHL draft
NBA Hall of Famer Charles Barkley helps the Flyers select Porter Martone with the sixth pick of the NHL draft.

Team: Boston College (H-EAST)
DOB: 11/03/2006 | Ht: 5-10½ | Wt: 177 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 37 | G: 11 | A: 26 | P: 37
Scouting notes: Hagens is projected to be a top-line center, or one of the NHL’s best second-line centers. He lacks the dynamism of Misa, opting for a highly cerebral and efficient play style. He brings a good work rate with excellent speed and passing ability that should see him effectively drive play at the NHL level. Scouts and executives are impressed with the professional details of his game (puck support, winning battles, defensive puck play), and they believe it will ease the transition to the NHL while he finds his offensive gear.
Another season at Boston College to further develop a more a dynamic offensive gear to become a top-line NHL center — the one that had scouts impressed during his NTDP season (with 102 points) — could be the remedy. After playing on one of college hockey’s top lines with Gabe Perreault (New York Rangers) and Ryan Leonard (Washington Capitals), Hagens would now be relied upon to drive his own line, create offense through his own playmaking and play a significant matchup role.
Hagens has the potential to be the complete package in the NHL. His understanding of spacing and ability to anticipate stands out among his peers. He’s smaller and slighter than other prospects, which worries some teams, but there’s a mix of Clayton Keller and Jack Hughes in him in terms of transition play and creativity.
How he fits: The organization starved for centers lucks out as Hagens falls to No. 7. He’s a highly cerebral player, with a nonstop motor, excellent speed and playmaking ability. There is little doubt he will be a play driver at the NHL level. His professional details are already top-notch with puck support, battle success, and strong defensive play.
Another year up the road at Boston College will mean Bruins fans won’t have to go far to watch their prized prospect. Hagens will step into the Bruins’ lineup as their first-line center when he is ready, and David Pastrnak will love that. Hagens has one of the highest ceilings in the draft, especially if his offense continues to develop. Bruins fans should be extremely excited to have their center of the future because he should not have been available at this point.
1:48
Adam Sandler announces Bruins pick at NHL draft
Adam Sandler gives a nod to his famous “Happy Gilmore” character to announce the Bruins picking Boston College’s James Hagens with the seventh pick.

Team: Brantford (OHL)
DOB: 06/16/2007 | Ht: 6-1¾ | Wt: 172 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 66 | G: 32 | A: 66 | P: 98
Scouting notes: Deceptive and incredibly smooth, O’Brien projects to be a point-producing, top-six center with a chance to become a top-line center. The right-handed pivot is one of the best playmakers in the draft, creating high-danger chances with regularity; for my money, he is the best pure creator in the draft.
He consistently manipulates defenders, distributes the puck on the forehand and backhand and uses fakes that send turn defenders and goalies into pretzels. The development will come from simplifying offensive plays to eliminate turnovers caused by holding the puck for too long.
O’Brien’s shot is going to be a necessary development area if his passing is to be an elite threat in the NHL. There is risk here, because he’s slighter than other players available at the center position, but he has room to fill out over the next few years. O’Brien’s elite playmaking skills will be that much more valuable if he can add a speed gear and increase his shooting threat.
How he fits: The Kraken are collecting centers like infinity stones, but O’Brien’s ceiling was too good to pass on at No. 8. O’Brien sees the ice extraordinarily well, has elite playmaking ability and will certainly help facilitate offense. Matty Beniers and Shane Wright play a two-way game, while O’Brien and Berkly Catton can drive offense.
The Kraken are now loaded up the middle, and can easily move one or two players to the wing to round out their top six. O’Brien needs a couple of years to physically mature and improve his shot to become a dual-threat offensive player. As it is, he is more than capable of quarterbacking a power play and facilitating offense. There is no need for the Kraken to rush him, and allowing him to further develop his elite playmaking skills might improve his projection to a first-line forward who tallies a point per game in the NHL.

Team: Seattle (WHL)
DOB: 06/09/2007 | Ht: 6-5¾ | Wt: 207 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 43 | G: 3 | A: 32 | P: 35
Scouting notes: A 6-6, right-handed defenseman with decent mobility who plays in all situations has scouts very excited. He’s very difficult to get around, routinely thwarting attackers in their tracks and killing plays. He projects as a top-four, shutdown defenseman because of his excellent stick work, mobility and transition defense. Mrtka uses his mobility to escape pressure, activate in the rush and make quality passes to the middle of the ice.
Mrtka should develop into a strong transition defender, a reliable penalty killer and efficient puck mover. He shoots the puck hard and could become more of a scoring threat if he can pick his spots to get pucks through. While everything flowed through him in Seattle, there are well-placed concerns about his lack of offense.
His size and physicality give him the tools to develop into a minute-munching, shutdown defender if his mobility continues to progress. His late birthday gives him lots of development runway to refine his skating, offensive playmaking, and physicality in all areas of the ice.
How he fits: A big, right-handed defenseman who plays a hard game, Mrtka is at least two or three years away from playing in the NHL. The Sabres have certainly been lacking players who play a hard game, and Mrtka provides that. He is a mobile skater with good puck-moving ability and projects as a shutdown defenseman at the NHL level. Mrtka’s ability to defend in transition, force attackers to the outside and kill plays is attractive.
Mrtka has a late birthday and his development runway is longer than others, giving him time to improve his playmaking, pick his spots physically and become an effective shutdown defender. There was some belief the Sabres would take a forward, and this pick raised some eyebrows, but the Sabres felt they needed a defender like Mrtka to complement Rasmus Dahlin and Owen Power.

Team: Brandon (WHL)
DOB: 10/02/2006 | Ht: 6-5¼ | Wt: 197 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 17 | G: 10 | A: 10 | P: 20
Scouting notes: Described as “a unicorn” because he’s a 6-5 center who skates with the speed and mobility that you would expect from a smaller player, McQueen a hot topic all season. He profiles as a prototypical modern-day power forward who blends soft skill with physicality. Elite right-handed centers are rare in the NHL, and McQueen’s size and willingness to physically dictate play adds undeniable value. He has professional defensive habits that are translatable to the NHL, and unique offensive upside that is still developing given the loss of playing time due to a back injury during his draft season.
McQueen dominates the cycle game, creates offense on the rush and uses his physical gifts to dominate the cycle and protect pucks. His projection as an elite top-line center lacks confidence, due to lack of playing time from his back injury. Without the injury, we might be discussing McQueen near the top of this draft class because his package of skating, skill and physical gifts are rare, and the type of toolbox of which executives dream.
He is a textbook case of high-risk, high-reward player; however, his performance at the scouting combine went along to proving his back injury had healed completely. Playing against tougher competition, where McQueen will be forced to develop his ability to protect himself, the puck control and ability to create offense against bigger bodies will be important. If developed without setback, he could become a two-way force in the NHL for years to come.
How he fits: The Ducks swung the bat, and are hoping McQueen is a home run for them at No. 10. Had it not been for injury, there’s a very real chance that McQueen gets taken in the top five. McQueen moves with the speed and agility of a much smaller player. He can dictate play physically, drive play at both ends of the ice and possesses unique offensive upside.
Anaheim has some high-end forwards — and McQueen likely has the highest upside of them all. He can dominate off the rush, on the cycle, and at the net front. The combination of McQueen’s physical gifts, skill and skating make him an easily projectable power forward who changes the course of games. If he can remain healthy, get stronger and improve his puck-protection skills, the Ducks have a special player.
Patience will be key as McQueen needs a few years to develop his skill set, but if he hits his ceiling, he’s going to be a dominant two-way force in the NHL.

Team: Calgary (WHL)
DOB: 04/19/2007 | Ht: 5-10 | Wt: 176 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 65 | G: 35 | A: 64 | P: 99
Scouting notes: Kindel is a scoring machine. Following a 60-point rookie campaign in the WHL in 2023-24, he vaulted into elite status this season, finishing seventh in overall scoring, and was excellent at even strength.
Though undersized, Kindel blends pace, vision and quality instincts, and he projects to be a middle-six winger with two-way ability. Kindel’s motor is relentless, which makes up for his lack of speed, and enables him to weave through traffic and execute give-and-go’s with ease. A dual-threat attacker, he pairs an accurate shot with dangerous passing ability. His elite hockey sense allows him to consistently outsmart opponents and set teammates up with creative plays in dangerous areas with time and space, while playing positionally sound hockey off the puck.
Defensively and on the forecheck, Kindel leverages his intelligence, anticipation and effort to win battles despite size disadvantages. He’ll need to refine and improve his skating posture and puck control, while adding another speed gear to succeed in the NHL.
While the potential exists for Kindel to a top-six NHL player, he is more likely to find himself in the middle-six as a complementary piece.
How he fits: Kindel is a facilitator of offense, a brilliant playmaker and somewhat of a surprise at No. 11. Kindel brings high-end hockey sense to identify opportunities to set up teammates in space. He’s undersized, but his package of speed, playmaking and relentless motor should translate well to the NHL.
Kindel’s ceiling is a second-line center who facilitates for his teammates and drives play. If he doesn’t, he’s likely to be a middle-six, secondary producer who plays on the second power-play unit. The Penguins need players who are cerebral, skate well and drive offense — and are certainly swinging on Kindel’s ceiling. If he grows an inch or two as he develops over the next two years, the comparable to Brayden Point is a good one given the similarities in skating, cerebral play, and driving play at that size.

Team: Windsor (OHL)
DOB: 01/12/2007 | Ht: 6-4¼ | Wt: 185 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 65 | G: 25 | A: 39 | P: 64
Scouting notes: Nesbitt is an intelligent, two-way center whose game is rooted in competitiveness, defensive reliability, and off-puck hockey IQ. He excels defensively by using his 6-4 frame to break up plays with physical engagement and smart stick positioning to pick off pucks. His hockey sense consistently places him in strong positions in all three zones, allowing him to create turnovers and execute quick passes to create dangerous chances off those turnovers.
His offensive upside hinges on his skating, which is a concern. His stiff skating stride and lack of demonstrated flexibility at the combine might limit how much he can improve. Despite flashes of skill, he struggles to maneuver past defenders, and his inconsistent puck handling under pressure often disrupts his playmaking.
Nesbitt showed improvement throughout the season, leveraging his size offensively and initiating more contact more consistently. If these improvements continue, and he’s able to improve his skating stride, he projects confidently as a dependable middle-six center who can anchor a defensive line and support skilled players higher up the lineup.
How he fits: The Flyers traded with their state rival the Penguins to select Nesbitt. He’s a high-floor player who probably tops out as a third-line center. At his height, he has been described as a “hard to play against” center who plays a throwback game, which fits with the style the Flyers want to play.
There were a lot of rumors this week that Nesbitt would get taken early because of his positional value, blend of size, hard skill and hockey sense. A very intelligent player who executes quality passes, he plays a reliable game. His skating stride will be the ultimate determining factor in his NHL ceiling. If he adds mobility and an extra gear, there’s more offense to unlock, but the focus will be his ability to check. He needs two or three years to develop, but Nesbitt had one of the most confident, low-volatility projections in the draft class as a third-line center.

Team: Everett (WHL)
DOB: 11/04/2006 | Ht: 6-0 | Wt: 179 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 56 | G: 40 | A: 42 | P: 82
Scouting notes: Bear is the type of player that a team looking for high-end instincts and playmaking covet. Before a season-ending injury in March, Bear was one of the CHL’s most dangerous offensive players and a reliable defensive forward. He’s versatile, in that he plays center and the wing, and projects as a 65- to 75-point, second-line player, most likely on the wing.
He’s a quality playmaker using different passes to create advantages in dangerous areas. His ability to manipulate defenders and create space for teammates while pulling coverage towards him should translate well in the NHL. He’s got good hands in tight spaces, which make him a threat around the net, and is one of the best offensive facilitators in the draft class.
On top of his offensive gifts, Bear’s defensive play makes him a quality two-way player. His stick positioning allows him to disrupt passes, and he’s a tenacious forechecker who tracks well on the backcheck and finishes hits. His skating posture needs to be more upright to allow him to develop a more explosive stride to take advantage of his offensive skills in transition, but the instincts and execution of plays already exist.
Bear is a good mix of soft and hard skill with projectable traits on both sides of the puck, and he is the type of player who should thrive in a matchup role while contributing offensively.
How he fits: There’s a lot to like about how Bear plays the game, and I’m a believer that there is more offense to give. He has elite hockey sense that he relies on to impact the game on both ends of the ice. A projection as a second-line, two-way player who scores close to 75 points per season should be very exciting for Red Wings fans.
His playmaking ability makes up for a lack of speed, and should fit nicely into what the Red Wings have up front. He’s a unique blend of soft and hard skill that will be reliable in all situations. He can win puck battles, get under the skin of opponents and make a difference in all areas of the ice. He’ll need two or three years to improve his skating and fill out physically, but when he’s ready, he’ll slide right into the Wings’ middle six as an impactful player.

Team: Tri-City (WHL)
DOB: 05/13/2007 | Ht: 6-3¼ | Wt: 195 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 68 | G: 11 | A: 43 | P: 54
Scouting notes: Smith is a big, physical defenseman with untapped offensive ability. He possesses all the qualities of a top-four matchup guy. He defends the rush well, closes gaps and steers the play in transition, making him one of the best neutral-zone, transition defenders in the class. Given the importance of transition defense in a matchup role, Smith has a real chance to the guy coaches rely upon to play heavy minutes against the best players.
His blend of skating, size and poise with an offensive game that progressed positively as the season wore on makes me a believer that there is more to give, and playing at Penn State next season should help it along.
Smith stands 6-3, and executives love the simplicity of his game, reading pressure, disrupting plays and making effective passes to exit the zone. He lacks explosive skating, and the consistent creativity required to be a quality offensive contributor at the NHL level, but his reads are there to be a plus transition player and join the rush as a support player.
Smith’s development from here will be about using his excellent mobility to prevent rush offense and becoming a more consistent offensive threat with better puck management. If Smith can drive play on both sides of the puck in transition and become a power-play threat, there’s a real chance he becomes a No. 2 defender at the NHL level.
How he fits: The Blue Jackets tugged on everyone’s heartstrings by having Meredith Gaudreau, the wife of the late Johnny Gaudreau, select Smith. The Penn State commit has untapped offensive potential to blend with his package of physicality, size and skating. He’s poised with the puck, makes quality breakout passes and influences the play. Defensively, he’s excellent in transition, closing gaps and forcing players to the perimeter.
The Blue Jackets needed a defenseman, and getting Smith outside the top 12 is great value. He should reliably play a matchup role on the second pair, and has the potential to play in a No. 2 role. Smith’s development will be about leveraging his mobility to improve his offensive game, and become a more consistent threat with the puck in the offensive zone.
2:50
Johnny Gaudreau’s wife announces the Blue Jackets’ draft pick
Meredith Gaudreau, Johnny Gaudreau’s widow, joins the NHL draft to announce the Blue Jackets selecting Jackson Smith with the 14th pick.

Team: Seattle (WHL)
DOB: 02/09/2007 | Ht: 5-11¼ | Wt: 183 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 60 | G: 26 | A: 37 | P: 63
Scouting notes: Cootes lacks explosive offense, but with some development of his shooting mechanics, he could become a 60-point, two-way center. Scouts love how consistently he moves his feet throughout his shifts, his drive to play through the middle of the ice and his ability to create advantages for himself with his skating and compete level.
His ability to create space for his teammates and move the puck to advantageous areas of the ice is highly translatable. He’s proactive with his contact, moves the puck to the middle of the ice and is reliable on both sides of the puck, in every area of the ice.
A strong skater and leader, his floor is likely a third-line checking center, but there’s potential for him to become a two-way, second-line center.
How he fits: The Canucks need centers, as president of hockey operations Jim Rutherford has stated numerous times this offseason. It was thought the Canucks might select the falling Viktor Eklund, but instead they addressed an organizational need by drafting Cootes.
He’s an-all situations player who can comfortably play a middle-six role, with a floor as a high-energy, third-line center. He’s a quality two-way player with a nonstop motor. The Canucks love his compete level, his willingness to drive the middle of the ice and a tenacious quality to his game.
Cootes has the ability to create space for his teammates, be reliable on both ends of the ice and outskate opponents. There is reason to believe he will develop more offensively. If he does, there’s a chance he becomes a second-line, play-driving center.

Team: Djurgarden (SWEDEN-2)
DOB: 10/03/2006 | Ht: 5-11 | Wt: 161 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 42 | G: 19 | A: 12 | P: 31
Scouting notes: Eklund projects as a top-six forward with a good chance of becoming a top-line contributor. Despite concerns about his size, Eklund’s style of play is very translatable to the NHL. He plays a lot bigger than his measurements suggest, and there is room to add strength. Should he grow, which has happened to other prospects in the past, Eklund’s projection becomes more confident as a 70-point producer with a high-end motor and excellent forechecking capability.
Eklund is excellent in transition and attacks defenders with speed and fearlessness, darting to the inside, and positioning his body to win or protect pucks. His smaller size has forced him to learn how to protect the puck with excellent body positioning. If he develops a bigger, stronger frame, those skills will make him even more difficult to defend in the offensive zone.
His off-puck play is mature, and will quickly earn the trust of NHL coaches. Eklund has the potential to be a difference-maker in a second-line role, and his blend of hard-nosed play with soft skill should translate more seamlessly than other players.
How he fits: With their second pick in the first round, the Isles got tremendous value by selecting Eklund. He plays bigger than his frame with excellent forechecking, hard skill and puck-protection skills. He uses above-average speed to attack the middle of the ice, creating offense in transition and below the circles.
Eklund has a motor without an off switch, and competitive fire to burn. The combination of hard-nosed play and soft skill should allow Eklund’s game to translate seamlessly to the NHL. He should fill out physically, and there is a real chance he becomes a difference maker in the top six on the wing. The ceiling for Eklund is higher than any other player who was available in this spot, and he might be ready sooner than some expect. Isles fans should be extremely excited with this pick.

Team: Barrie (OHL)
DOB: 09/21/2006 | Ht: 6-1½ | Wt: 196 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 64 | G: 26 | A: 33 | P: 59
Scouting notes: His projection as a No. 4/5 defender sees him below other players with higher upside. Aitcheson plays with all kinds of truculence and aggression, while possessing an aura of confidence on and off the puck. He’s got all the makings of being a complete menace who plays tough minutes as a No. 4 defender.
Whether it is a preseason game or the playoffs, Aitcheson plays the same rough style, and is unafraid of lowering the boom on opponents. He needs to pick his spots better to avoid unnecessary penalties, but he’s the type of player that requires opponents to be aware when he’s on the ice. Scouts see him as hard-nosed, two-way defender with significant bite who can be a momentum-shifter with his physical presence.
He needs development time, as his skating and playmaking are very raw, but the competitive attributes and his development curve this season are very promising. Aitcheson’s offensive involvement developed as the season progressed, rotating with his teammates, diving down towards the high-danger area and becoming more dangerous with open ice.
He’s likely two or three years away from being ready to step in. But when he does, he’s exactly the type of defender every coach and GM want on their team.
How he fits: With their third selection of the first round, the Islanders selected a lot of nastiness in Aitcheson. One of the meanest, aggressive defensemen in the draft, Aitcheson is going to be a nightmare to play against. He’s very raw, and has untapped offensive potential. The competitive attributes make Aitcheson’s playstyle a throwback, and he is likely to become a fan favorite on the island. He can change a game’s momentum with a big hit, but also showed the ability to contribute offensively as the season progressed.
His skating and playmaking are the biggest areas of development, but even if he doesn’t find more than 30 points at the NHL level, Aitcheson is the type of defenseman with whom you win a lot of games. He makes life difficult for opponents, defends his teammates, sacrifices his body to win and is relentless in puck battles. At his ceiling, Aitcheson could become a second-pairing matchup defender who makes forwards think twice before engaging in a puck battle or cutting across the blue line with their head down.

Team: Victoria (WHL)
DOB: 04/06/2007 | Ht: 5-10½ | Wt: 183 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 62 | G: 26 | A: 66 | P: 92
Scouting notes: The two-way center brings an excellent mix of hockey sense, playmaking and creativity to be a middle-six contributor capable of consistently producing 60 points. He lacks elite skating, but his combine results raised eyebrows — tying Frondell for tops in VO2 max. While that isn’t indictive of NHL success, it shows a particular dedication to conditioning, and those in NHL circles pay attention to those results.
Reschny is smaller, and relies on his cerebral approach and excellent passing abilities to create advantage all over the ice. He processes the game better than many in the draft class, allowing him to manage pressure and put himself in better puck-protection positions.
Defensively, Reschny’s instincts result in positionally sound play, regularly playing above the puck, disrupting passes, and communicating assignment switches. He’s got the potential to be a great two-way complementary center that creates offense without separating speed. His reads will almost surely see him play a penalty-killing role and someone who is relied upon when his team is holding a lead.
How he fits: The Flames needed a center and they got their guy, drafting Reschny. He is a quality two-way center with creative playmaking abilities and high-end hockey sense. He picks apart defensive coverage with those abilities, consistently putting his team in dangerous areas to score. Off the puck, he’s positionally sound, reliable defensively and he should be a secondary penalty killer.
Reschny’s speed will need to develop, but his ability to process the game better than most players will help him be in the right spots, identify scoring opportunities and drive play. He’ll need two years in the NCAA before he’s ready, but when he is, he’s likely to slot in to a middle-six role and provide value on both ends of the ice.

Team: Blainville-Boisbriand (QMJHL)
DOB: 11/25/2006 | Ht: 6-1 | Wt: 191 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 62 | G: 46 | A: 43 | P: 89
Scouting notes: Carbonneau possesses an offensive toolbox that teams covet, including powerful skating and eye-popping creativity. He projects as a second-line scoring forward with significant variance and is likely to end up as a middle-six player who thrives against secondary matchups. Carbonneau can drive offense with his playmaking and shooting ability and plays a well-rounded offensive game that includes playing through contact, excellent puckhandling skills and above-average skating.
As is the case with any player who possess incredible upside, there is inherent risk. He has a physically mature body, and will need to adjust to the speed of the professional game. He thrives when given time and space, and his growth will come from learning to simplify his offensive play and make better decisions with the puck. There are tools to become a very effective power forward in the NHL who can score 25 goals if he adds a cerebral component to his game.
How he fits: Carbonneau is a high-upside, dual-threat player who drives the middle of the ice and has an excellent shot. Off the puck, he finds quiet areas on the inside of the ice and takes advantage of scoring opportunities. Carbonneau has the size and physicality to become a power forward in the NHL, and should fit nicely on the second line and first power-play unit.
He’s a raw player who will need to develop his skating to take advantage of his offensive toolbox, but the upside is very high. Carbonneau’s blend of size, fearless play, creativity and elite shooting ability bode well for his NHL projection. If the Blues are patient, Carbonneau should become a quality power forward in three to four years.

Team: CSKA Jr. (RUSSIA-JR.)
DOB: 01/22/2007 | Ht: 6-0 | Wt: 207 | Catches: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 37 | Mins: 2,195 | GAA: 1.75 | SV%: 0.942 | SO: 3
How he fits: With their second pick of the night, the Blue Jackets raised a lot of eyebrows selecting Andreyanov. Many had expected them to take a second defenseman, but they identified the Russian goalie as their guy.
He’s athletic, and plays an aggressive style, cutting angles down and making life difficult for shooters. He’s a battler, fighting through screens, managing his movements with traffic at the net front, and freezing the puck without sacrificing position. His rebound control needs to improve, but the Blue Jackets like his toolbox and his ability to come up with key saves at critical times.
He could be a reliable NHL backup, with some potential to become a 1B tandem goaltender if his rebound control improves. This is a big bet in the first round, one that the Blue Jackets hope pays off.

Team: Kitchener (OHL)
DOB: 04/08/2007 | Ht: 5-11¾ | Wt: 193 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 67 | G: 14 | A: 40 | P: 54
Scouting notes: There’s a lot to love about Reid’s game — and a lot of varying opinions. Some scouts see him as a top-15 value, others see him as a mid-20s value, and it all hinges on their belief in his offensive game. Reid is a play driver from the back end with excellent puck-moving skills and excellent skating. He flashes high-end offensive ability in the form of setups and moving to find and create passing lanes to high-danger areas; however, his shot will need to become more of a threat to avoid his distribution being neutralized in the NHL.
In transition, he’s one of the best on both sides of the ice. His smooth puck retrievals — where he constantly shoulder checks and scans to avoid pressure — led to efficient breakouts. When under duress, he uses elite edgework to escape and shake pressure, following with a quick outlet pass to beat the forecheck.
The consensus belief is that he’s a middle-pairing, transition defender who can turn into a bona fide No. 3 if he develops his offense and grows an inch or two; currently he’s listed at 5-11.
How he fits: Nashville traded up to get Reid, and he’s going to be a stalwart on the blue line. An excellent transition defenseman, Reid makes a quality first pass, and has the potential to drive offense from the back end. Reid’s terrific skating ability allows him to escape forecheckers and join the rush. Defensively, Reid has good gap control, uses his skating to close attackers early and match speed to limit dangerous chances.
He’s going to be a high-end transition defender who could become a 50-plus point producer if his offensive development continues. His elite skating ability allows him to be patient, not get caught doing too much and he’s rarely out of position. He’s two or three years away from making an impact at the NHL level, but when he does, he’ll be a quality second-pairing defender on both ends of the ice.

Team: Rouyn-Noranda (QMJHL)
DOB: 10/03/2006 | Ht: 6-1¾ | Wt: 187 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 64 | G: 28 | A: 55 | P: 83
Scouting notes: Zonnon is a relentless and detail-oriented two-way forward who has carved out a reputation as one of the CHL’s hardest-working players. With an 83-point breakout campaign in his first full-time season at center, Zonnon combined a high-end motor, raw but effective playmaking and relentless puck pursuit that allowed him to be a play driver in all three zones. He excels on the forecheck, pressuring defenders into rushed decisions, winning battles and moving pucks to teammates in scoring areas.
Offensively, he makes good reads under pressure, threading pucks through tight lanes and consistently puts his team in advantageous positions. His ability to support defensively, facilitate transitions and physically impose himself makes him ideal the type of forward who teams want in the playoffs.
His skating remains a limiting factor, and he’ll need to improve his agility and posture to reach his offensive ceiling. If Zonnon can refine his stride and continue to develop his playmaking, he projects as a middle-six driver who blends tenacity and has the makings of a valuable third-liner whom playoff teams covet.
How he fits: With their second selection of the first round, the Penguins selected Zonnon, a high-energy, relentless winger. He has elite details, supports the puck, wins puck battles, forces turnovers on the forecheck and finds his teammates in space. Zonnon makes sound decisions with the puck under pressure, facilitates offense and is reliable defensively. His nonstop motor and willingness to get to the hard areas of the ice should help him score at the net front, win pucks back to extend offensive zone time and make life easier for his linemates.
His skating will determine where in the lineup he plays, but his floor as a bottom-six competitive forward who can penalty kill and forecheck is a confident one. If Zonnon’s skating improves over the next two to three years, he should be able to drive play in a middle-six role with tenacity and reliability.

Team: Wisconsin (BIG10)
DOB: 10/14/2006 | Ht: 6-2¼ | Wt: 192 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 32 | G: 2 | A: 10 | P: 12
Scouting notes: The 6-2 defender projects to become a second-pair blueliner that excels in transition. He is one of the best neutral-zone defenders and puck movers in the draft, who steadily improved as a true freshman in the NCAA. His puck retrievals, breakout passes and offensive-zone passes consistently put his team in more advantageous attacking positions. Being a right-handed defender with excellent mobility and an easily translatable game makes Hensler a very attractive prospect in this class.
The are concerns among NHL scouts related to Hensler’s offensive abilities and how he might fare in the NHL. However, Hensler showed flashes in the back half of the NCAA season, drawing defenders in and making slick plays for high-danger scoring opportunities. He’s unlikely to become a 60-point defender, but 35-45 points as a steady transition defender who plays a shutdown role seems to be the appropriate projection.
His NHL-ready frame is a plus, and will only improve throughout his collegiate career, which is likely to be another two seasons.
How he fits: The Sens extracted tremendous value by getting Hensler at No. 23. As one of the younger players in college hockey last season, Hensler became an impactful player once he adjusted to that level. His skating and mobility are high-end, allowing him to shut opponents down in transition, kill plays and be a reliable defensive presence. One of the best neutral-zone defenders in the draft, Hensler’s gap control forces dump-ins, and his skating allows him to turn and retrieve those forced dump-ins with ease.
He showed flashes of higher-end offense toward the end of the season, making quality plays to create high-danger chances. He’s physically ready for the NHL, but will benefit from more NCAA development to improve his offensive play and solidify his defensive game. When he’s ready, he could become a great partner for Jake Sanderson or play secondary matchups in the middle pairing.

Team: Michigan (BIG10)
DOB: 01/23/2007 | Ht: 6-4¾ | Wt: 190 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 18 | G: 4 | A: 6 | P: 10
Scouting notes: The son of former NHLer Shawn Horcoff, Will projects as a defensively reliable third-line center with size, strength and strong off-puck instincts. At nearly 6-5, he’s a disruptive force in his own zone, using his range and physicality to pressure puck attackers and cause turnovers.
Offensively, he facilitates with smart passes and uses his size to play with contact and protect the puck. He’ll need to develop his skating from a speed and mobility perspective to grow offensively. If he adds a step with some explosiveness and fills out his frame, Horcoff could become a physically imposing, two-way pivot in a bottom-six NHL role who plays against secondary matchups.
How he fits: The Penguins traded up seven spots to make their third selection of the first round in Horcoff. The youngest player in college hockey this season was a steady riser in the back half of the campaign. A bit of a late bloomer, Horcoff has room to fill out his frame, and plays a quality two-way game. Horcoff drives the net and converts chances better than almost any other draft-eligible player, a scoring skill that will translate well to the NHL level.
He projects as a third-line center who uses physicality to separate players from pucks, protect pucks and drive to the middle of the ice. Horcoff will need a few years to develop in the NCAA, and if he can add some speed and explosiveness, there is more offensive potential as a power forward.

Team: Muskegon (USHL)
DOB: 04/06/2007 | Ht: 6-5¼ | Wt: 187 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 61 | G: 19 | A: 23 | P: 42
Scouting notes: Nestrašil is a high-upside power forward who projects as a top-six NHL winger if his development continues on its current path.
He is a unique blend of above-average puck skill and playmaking with size, motor and punishing physical play. He excels with give-and-go’s, attacking off the wall, and creating space in traffic. He consistently moves the puck through carries or passes to the middle of the ice, creating more threatening opportunities.
He is raw and somewhat erratic with his reads and timing; his continued improvement and physical toolkit give him legitimate upside. If he becomes a more consistent threat, he’s a second-line force; if not, his defensive value and intensity still project a role as a physical, bottom-six winger.
How he fits: With their second selection in the first round, Chicago selected Nestrašil. I had connected him to the Blackhawks in the final mock draft, given the organization’s edict to draft quality skaters with high-end skill.
Nestrašil has high upside as a power forward in the top six, and brings a package of size, puck skill and playmaking. Another player with a high-end motor, Nestrašil plays well off teammates, attacks off the wall and bullies his way to the middle of the ice.
He has a projectable physical game that will create space for his teammates, and he can separate opponents from pucks and be reliable defensively. He’s a few years away from being ready, but there’s a lot to be excited about with the blend of size, physicality, playmaking and skill.

Team: Madison (USHL)
DOB: 11/08/2006 | Ht: 6-0 | Wt: 170 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 58 | G: 31 | A: 37 | P: 68
Scouting notes: One of the most skilled and creative forwards in the draft. Some scouts had Lee ranked in the late teens because of their belief in his upside.
Lee is a dynamic offensive player who consistently cuts through defensive coverage with elite puckhandling and deceptive passes. His one-timer is one of the best in the draft class. With a full complement of high-end tools, Lee has a rare ability to create offense in tight quarters with limited space, and he stood out amongst his USHL peers. He manipulates defenders and delivers elite passes under pressure. He consistently makes translatable plays like one-touch breakouts, fake receptions, and quick releases in scoring areas. As the season progressed, he showed a willingness to forecheck, battle and apply pressure defensively.
The glaring question is his skating. His stride is stiff and lacks explosiveness. Lee will need major strides in mobility to maximize his offensive toolkit at the NHL level. That being said, if he adds a step or two to pair with his skill, Lee has the skill to become a creative, middle-six playmaker with top-six upside.
How he fits: Nashville used its third selection in the first round to select one of the highest-upside players left on the board. Lee is extraordinarily skilled, and is one of the best pure creators in the draft class. A real dynamic player who is a dual threat with his playmaking and elite shooting ability. He creates offense out of nothing, can play in tight spaces, and make defenders look silly.
His play away from the puck developed as the season progressed. To reach his ceiling as a top-six, dynamic offensive threat, Lee needs to add speed and explosiveness. The ability to execute high-skill plays at speed will make or break him as a prospect in the top six. If he hits, the Preds have a special player — but patience is critical. I love this swing from the Preds, as it is exactly the type of player they need in their system.

Team: Moose Jaw (WHL)
DOB: 12/12/2006 | Ht: 6-4¼ | Wt: 190 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 47 | G: 27 | A: 31 | P: 58
Scouting notes: The 6-4 left winger has translatable scoring ability, and excellent speed for his size. With room to fill out his frame, Lakovic is an attractive prospect.
He attacks with linear crossovers using his big frame to protect the puck, and makes plays using good deception. He has the potential to be a dual-threat winger at the NHL level if his passing translates the way many believe his shooting will. Lakovic projects to be a middle-six winger with fair confidence because of his scoring ability, speed and size, but there is a chance he becomes a second-line scoring threat.
Lakovic’s development will come on the physical side. While he is supremely skilled, he needs to lean on defenders and force his way to the middle of the ice to take advantage of his quick hands and shot. If he does, he becomes a significantly more dangerous player, as he’ll be a threat in transition and off the cycle. That is certainly a developable skill that translates to any level, and combined with quality offensive instincts and skill, could see Lakovic become a dual-threat, 65-point winger.
How he fits: The Capitals selected Lakovic, a big forward with an excellent shot and quality skating. Lakovic has NHL scoring ability and speed. If he can fill out his frame, should be able to get to the hard areas of the ice with ease. He understands how to protect the puck and play connected with his teammates.
He projects as a middle-six winger with dual-threat ability, and would certainly benefit from adding some physicality to his playstyle to become a skilled power forward. He’ll have Tom Wilson to learn from, and the Capitals have time to develop Lakovic into the complementary scorer he is capable of becoming. This is excellent value for the Capitals at the end of the first round because Lakovic could be ready to contribute in two or three years.

28. Winnipeg Jets: Sascha Boumedienne, D
Team: Boston University (H-EAST)
DOB: 01/17/2007 | Ht: 6-1 | Wt: 175 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 40 | G: 3 | A: 10 | P: 13
Scouting notes: One of the most discussed and debated defenders in the draft, Boumedienne projects as a second-pair, two-way defender.
Already known as a brilliant breakout passer with a heavy slap shot and strong stick play, Boumedienne’s defensive game evolved noticeably at Boston University. Buoyed by steadily improving his skating weaknesses, particularly his agility and edge work, he looked the part of a modern shutdown defenseman, specifically in transition. He developed greater stability, enabling more effective gap control and quicker pivots. Proactive reads, strong positioning, physicality and effective disruption of passing lanes allowed his defensive game to blossom.
While his offensive game remains primarily rush-based rather than in the offensive zone, Boumedienne’s willingness to experiment with fakes and deception improved his transition impact significantly. The volatility of his projection remains high, but Boumedienne’s substantial in-season growth, defensive reliability and refined skating offer realistic upside as an effective second-pair, two-way defender at the NHL level who can produce secondary offense.
How he fits: The Jets drafted a fantastic breakout passer in Boumedienne, who should blossom into a quality transition defender. He possesses a quality slap shot, an evolved defensive game and excellent transition play. His skating looks smooth, and still has room to improve in terms of edge work and stability. If it does, he’ll become even more difficult to beat in transition and able to join the rush offensively. He’s strong positionally, engaged physically and kills plays.
He’ll need two or three years before he’s NHL-ready, but the potential to become a second power-play quarterback and middle-pairing, secondary-matchup player is tangible. At a minimum, he’ll provide quality breakout passes, good transition defense and a threatening slapshot.

Team: Edina (HIGH-MN)
DOB: 08/03/2007 | Ht: 6-5¾ | Wt: 215 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 31 | G: 27 | A: 22 | P: 49
Scouting notes: Without a doubt, the best overall athlete in the draft class. A high school quarterback with legitimate college football potential and a hockey player who went in the first round of the NHL draft does not come around too often.
West possesses rare mobility, physical tools and intriguing upside. A natural shooter and smooth skater, his production on the Minnesota High School circuit at Edina High was impressive. When he stepped into the USHL, his development hit warp speed.
For obvious reasons, West is very raw as a prospect. He shows flashes of skill, an immovable net-front presence and growing physical engagement. Given his rawness, he will need to develop his puck control, positioning and decision-making. However, he will be able to rely on his QB scanning skills to help develop his decision-making in hockey. With continued development, there is a real chance he becomes a middle-six NHL power forward. The pure raw ability of this elite athlete has executives and scouts very excited.
How he fits: Chicago traded up to make a third selection in the first round, grabbing West, a quarterback and hockey player from Edina High School. One of the youngest players in the draft, West is one of the best pure athlete in the class, elite at two sports.
He has a very long development runway and won’t play in the USHL until after his football season. He combines smooth skating, a strong net-front presence and good play facilitation. West is very raw, with room to develop his puck skill, positioning and decision-making. His spatial awareness is excellent and will allow him to identify open space, bully his way to the middle of the ice and create offense. He’s still a long way away, but if he hits, West has a chance to be a powerful middle-six forward who can score and facilitate offense.

Team: Prince George (WHL)
DOB: 11/27/2006 | Ht: 6-5¼ | Wt: 190 | Catches: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 51 | Mins: 2964 | GAA: 3 | SV%: 0.901 | SO: 0
Scouting notes: Ravensbergen projects a composed, confident demeanor, with a confident projection as a starting NHL goaltender who can handle a significant workload.
At 6-5, he leverages size, elite anticipation and crisp lateral agility, consistently positioning himself perfectly to deny shooters without unnecessary flash. He tracks the puck a level above his peers, which allows him to confidently challenge shooters and cut angles effectively. He is particularly vulnerable through the five-hole, which isn’t atypical for large goalies who hover sticks above the ice. As he develops and refines his technique, this weakness should be corrected long before he reaches the NHL.
A reliable backstop for Prince George, Ravensbergen’s .901 save percentage stands out even more when considering the high-danger chances he regularly faced. His rebound control is well above average, and he has an above-average glove hand. He regularly has his blocker angled well, enabling him to direct shots safely away from danger.
It is likely that Ravensbergen becomes a platoon starter until his mid-20s, when he is capable of become a full-time NHL starter who plays 60-65 games per season.
How he fits: Some thought the Sharks would take a defenseman after getting Misa with the No. 2 pick, but instead they added to their goaltending group with Ravensbergen. There is a very real possibility that Ravensbergen and Yaroslav Askarov develop into one of the best goaltending tandems in the NHL.
Ravensbergen is a southpaw goaltender. He’s composed in his movements, reads the play to limit erratic movement, and challenges shooters effectively. He is the best puck tracker in the draft, finding pucks in traffic, moving efficiently to thwart opportunities and control rebounds. Goaltending development is not linear, and much more difficult to predict, but Ravensbergen should find himself in strong contention for Team Canada at the IIHF world junior championship before turning professional.

Team: London (OHL)
DOB: 02/09/2007 | Ht: 6-1¾ | Wt: 203 | Shot: R
2024-25 stats: GP: 67 | G: 10 | A: 32 | P: 42
Scouting notes: Brzustewicz is the next prospect from the factory that is the London Knights. The blueliner projects as a steady, mobile transition defender with the potential to grow into a No. 4 or 5 NHL blueliner.
A right-handed shot with a strong defensive foundation, he maintains good gap control, moves the puck very well and supports plays while remaining positionally sound. In an elevated role, his offensive creativity developed dramatically. He jumped into the rush, evaded forecheckers and created scoring chances with quality passes to the slot.
If he continues to develop his confidence and play-driving ability, Brzustewicz could evolve into a reliable second-pairing defender. Without that growth, he still holds value as a depth puck mover with a good defensive foundation.
How he fits: The Kings addressed a significant area of need by drafting Brzustewicz. A right-shot defender with quality mobility and reliable transition play. As the season progressed, Brzustewicz facilitated offense, using his skating to attack open space. He makes a good first pass that puts his teammates in position to attack off the rush. Once he moves the puck, he jumps in the play, supports as a secondary rush attacker and can shake defenders to create scoring chances.
He’ll be the go-to guy in London next season, with opportunities to play a matchup role and run the power play, both of which will expedite his development. He’s likely three years away from becoming an NHL contributor but should become a reliable middle-pairing defender.

Team: Arizona State (NCHC)
DOB: 01/10/2007 | Ht: 5-10 | Wt: 172 | Shot: L
2024-25 stats: GP: 35 | G: 13 | A: 9 | P: 22
Scouting notes: Potter is a dynamic skater who is the fastest straight-line skater in the draft class, and his explosive mobility ranks among the draft’s best. Making an uncommon jump from the NTDP’s under-17 team straight to NCAA play, Potter displayed elite acceleration and agility, effortlessly shifting from stride to crossover and cutting sharply through defenders. Initially reliant on raw skill, Potter often avoided physical battles and forced “hope plays,” limiting his effectiveness in the first half of the NCAA season.
Potter’s evolution in the second half of the season elevated his game dramatically, and it was impossible not to notice. He embraced defensive responsibilities, improved his physical play despite his 5-10 frame, won puck battles and filled lanes on the backcheck. Potter’s positional play improved, and his off-puck play improved as a result.
The added defensive dimension complements his offensive talents, elevating his floor to a bottom-six checker, while his upside is very high as a top-six forward because of his steep development curve. Development of his transition play and learning to use his explosive skating and accurate shot while changing gears will make him a more dangerous offensive threat.
How he fits: With their second pick in the first round, the Flames took Potter, the fastest player in the draft. A quality transporter of the puck, Potter uses his elite speed to create offense off the rush with dynamic zone-entry ability. He catches defenders on their heels, and should be able to beat NHL defenders on the outside and cross them up with his crossovers if he can add strength and understand when to change gears.
Potter can tap into his offensive potential by relying on his ability to use speed to create space for his incredibly accurate shot. When given the opportunity, Potter can really rip it, and his release catches goaltenders off guard. If his development curve continues, Potter should become an elite college player and be ready for an NHL role in two years. His floor as a bottom-six checker is good value at this spot, but his upside as a second-line player who scores off the rush should excite Flames fans.
Round 2
33. San Jose Sharks: Haoxi (Simon) Wang, D, Oshawa (OHL)
34. Montreal Canadiens: Alexander Zharovsky, RW, Ufa Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
35. Nashville Predators: Jacob Rombach, D, Lincoln (USHL)
36. Seattle Kraken: Blake Fiddler, D, Edmonton (WHL)
37. Washington Capitals: Milton Gästrin, F, MoDo (J20 Nationell)
38. Philadelphia Flyers: Carter Amico, D, USNTDP (USHL)
39. Pittsburgh Penguins: Peyton Kettles, D, Swift Current (WHL)
40. Philadelphia Flyers: Jack Murtagh, LW, USNTDP (USHL)
41. Carolina Hurricanes: Semyon Frolov, G, Spartak Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
42. New York Islanders: Daniil Prokhorov, RW, Dynamo St. Petersburg (Russia-Jr.)
43. New York Rangers: Malcolm Spence, LW, Erie (OHL)
44. Detroit Red Wings: Eddie Genborg, RW, Linkoping (Sweden)
45. Anaheim Ducks: Eric Nilson, C, Djurgarden Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
46. Utah Mammoth: Max Psenicka, D, Portland (WHL)
47. Vancouver Canucks: Alexei Medvedev, G, London (OHL)
48. Philadelphia Flyers: Shane Vansaghi, RW, Michigan State (BIG10)
49. Carolina Hurricanes: Charlie Cerrato, C, Penn State (BIG10)
50. New Jersey Devils: Conrad Fondrk, C, USNTDP (USHL)
51. Boston Bruins: William Moore, C, USNTDP (USHL)
52. Minnesota Wild: Theodor Hallquisth, D, Orebro Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
53. San Jose Sharks: Cole McKinney, C, USNTDP (USHL)
54. Calgary Flames: Theo Stockselius, C, Djurgarden Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
55. Vegas Golden Knights: Jakob Ihs Wozniak, Lulea Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
56. Tampa Bay Lightning: Ethan Czata, C, Niagara (OHL)
57. Philadelphia Flyers: Matthew Gard, Red Deer (WHL)
58. Nashville Predators: Jack Ivankovic, G, Brampton (OHL)
59. Los Angeles Kings: Vojtech Cihar, LW, Karlovy Vary (Czechia)
60. Anaheim Ducks: Lasse Boelius, D, Assat Jr. (Finland-Jr.)
61. Boston Bruins: Liam Pettersson, D, Vaxjo Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
62. Carolina Hurricanes: Ivan Ryabkin, C, Muskegon (USHL)
63. New Jersey Devils: Ben Kevan, RW, Des Moines (USHL)
64. Toronto Maple Leafs: Tinus Luc Koblar, C, Leksand Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
Round 3
65. Vancouver Canucks: Kieren Dervin, C, St. Andrew’s College (HIGH-ON)
66. Chicago Blackhawks: Nathan Behm, RW, Kamloops (WHL)
67. Carolina Hurricanes: Kurban Limatov, D, Dynamo Moscow Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
68. Seattle Kraken: Will Reynolds, D, Acadie-Bathurst (QMJHL)
69. Montreal Canadiens: Hayden Paupanekis, C, Kelowna (WHL)
70. New York Rangers: Sean Barnhill, D, Dubuque (USHL)
71. Buffalo Sabres: David Bedkowski, D, Owen Sound (OHL)
72. Anaheim Ducks: Noah Read, C, London (OHL)
73. Pittsburgh Penguins: Charlie Trethewey, D, USNTDP (USHL)
74. New York Islanders: Luca Romano, C, Kitchener (OHL)
75. Detroit Red Wings: Michal Pradel, G, Tri-City (USHL)
76. Columbus Blue Jackets: Malte Vass, D, Farjestad Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
77. Colorado Avalanche: Francesco Dell’elce, D, UMass (H-East)
78. Utah Mammoth: Stepan Hoch, LW, C. Budejovice Jr. (Czechia-Jr.)
79. Boston Bruins: Cooper Simpson, LW, Shakopee (HIGH-MN)
80. Calgary Flames: Maceo Phillips, D, USNTDP (USHL)
81. Montreal Canadiens: Bryce Pickford, D, Medicine Hat (WHL)
82. Montreal Canadiens: Arseni Radkov, G, Tyumen Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
83. Edmonton Oilers: Tommy Lafreniere, RW, Kamloops (WHL)
84. Pittsburgh Penguins: Gabriel D’Aigle, G, Victoriaville (QMJHL)
85. Vegas Golden Knights: Mateo Norbert, C, Blainville-Boisbriand (QMJHL)
86. Toronto Maple Leafs: Tyler Hopkins, C, Kingston (OHL)
87. Carolina Hurricanes: Roman Bausov, D, Dynamo St. Petersburg Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
88. Los Angeles Kings: Kristian Epperson, LW, Saginaw (OHL)
89. New York Rangers: Artyom Gonchar, D, Magnitogorsk Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
90. New Jersey Devils: Mason Moe, C, Madison (USHL)
91. Pittsburgh Penguins: Brady Peddle, D, Waterloo (USHL)
92. Winnipeg Jets: Owen Martin, C, Spokane (WHL)
93. Ottawa Senators: Blake Vanek, RW, Stillwater (HIGH-MN)
94. Dallas Stars: Cameron Schmidt, RW, Vancouver (WHL)
95. San Jose Sharks: Teddy Mutryn, C, Chicago (USHL)
96. Washington Capitals: Maxim Schafer, LW, Eisbaren Berlin (Germany)
Round 4
97. Ottawa Senators: Lucas Beckman, G, Baie-Comeau (QMJHL)
98. Chicago Blackhawks: Julius Sumpf, C, Moncton (QMJHL)
99. New Jersey Devils: Trenten Bennett, G, Kemptville (CCHL)
100. Boston Bruins: Vashek Blanar, D, Troja-Ljungby U18 (Sweden-Jr. U18)
101. Anaheim Ducks: Drew Shock, D, USNTDP (USHL)
102. Minnesota Wild: Adam Benak, C, Youngstown (USHL)
103. Buffalo Sabres: Matous Kucharcik, C, Slavia Jr. (Czechia-Jr.)
104. Anaheim Ducks: Elijah Neuenschwander, G, Fribourg Jr. (Swiss-Jr.)
105. Pittsburgh Penguins: Travis Hayes, RW, Sault Ste. Marie (OHL)
106. New York Islanders: Tomas Poletin, LW, Pelicans (Finland)
107. Chicago Blackhawks: Parker Holmes, LW, Brantford (OHL)
108. Tampa Bay Lightning: Benjamin Rautiainen, C, Tappara (Finland)
109. Detroit Red Wings: Brent Solomon, RW, Champlin Park (HIGH-MN)
110. Utah Mammoth: Yegor Borikov, RW, Minsk (Russia)
111. New York Rangers: Mikkel Eriksen, C, Farjestad Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
112. Florida Panthers: Mads Kongsbak Klyvo, LW, Frolunda Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
113. Montreal Canadiens: L.J. Mooney, C, USNTDP (USHL)
114. New Jersey Devils: Gustav Hillstrom, C, Brynas Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
115. San Jose Sharks: Ilyas Magomedsultanov, D, Yaroslavl Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
116. Buffalo Sabres: Samuel Meloche, G, Rouyn-Norando (QMJHL)
117. Edmonton Oilers: David Lewandowski, LW, Saskatoon (WHL)
118. Colorado Avalanche: Linus Funck, D, Lulea Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
119. Detroit Red Wings: Michael Svrcek, LW, Brynas Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
120. Los Angeles Kings: Caeden Herrington, D, Lincoln (USHL)
121. Minnesota Wild: Lirim Amidovski, RW, North Bay (OHL)
122. Nashville Predators: Alex Huang, D, Chicoutimi (QMJHL)
123. Minnesota Wild: Carter Klippenstein, C, Brandon (WHL)
124. San Jose Sharks: Zachary Sharp, D, Western Michigan (NCHC)
125. Los Angeles Kings: Jimmy Lombardi, C, Flint (OHL)
126. Dallas Stars: Brandon Gorzynski, C, Calgary (WHL)
127. Tampa Bay Lightning: Aiden Foster, C, Prince George (WHL)
128. Florida Panthers: Shea Busch, LW, Everett (WHL)
Round 5
129. Florida Panthers: Shamar Moses, RW, North Bay (OHL)
130. Pittsburgh Penguins: Ryan Miller, C, Portland (WHL)
131. Edmonton Oilers: Asher Barnett, D, USNTDP (USHL)
132. Philadelphia Flyers: Max Westergard, LW, Frolunda Jr. (Sweden)
133. Boston Bruins: Cole Chandler, C, Shawinigan (QMJHL)
134. Seattle Kraken: Maxim Agafonov, D, UFA Jr. (Russia)
135. Buffalo Sabres: Noah Laberge, D, Acadie-Bathurst (QMJHL)
136. Anaheim Ducks: Alexis Mathieu, D, BAIE-Comeau (QMJHL)
137. Toronto Maple Leafs: William Belle, RW, USNTDP (USHL)
138. New York Islanders: Sam Laurila, D, Fargo (USHL)
139. New York Rangers: Zeb Lindgren, D, Skelleftea Jr. (Sweden)
140. Detroit Red Wings: Nikita Tyurin, D, Spartak Jr. (Russia)
141. Minnesota Wild: Justin Kipkie, D, Victoria (WHL)
142. Utah Mammoth: Ivan Tkach-Tkachenko, G, UFA (Russia)
143. Vancouver Canucks: Wilson Bjorck, C, Djurgarden Jr. (Sweden)
144. Calgary Flames: Ethan Wyttenbach, LW, Sioux Falls (USHL)
145. Montreal Canadiens: Alexis Cournoyer, G, Cape Breton (QMJHL)
146. Dallas Stars: Atte Joki, C, Lukko Jr. (Finland)
147. St. Louis Blues: Mikhail Fyodorov, RW, Magnitogorsk Jr. (Russia)
148. Pittsburgh Penguins: Quinn Beauchesne, D, Guelph (OHL)
149. Ottawa Senators: Dmitri Isayev, LW, Yekaterinburg Jr. (Russia)
150. San Jose Sharks: Max Heise, C, Penicton (BCHL)
151. Tampa Bay Lightning: Everett Baldwin, D, St. George’s School (HIGH-RI)
152. Los Angeles Kings: Petteri Rimpinen, G, K-Espoo (Finland)
153. Toronto Maple Leafs: Harry Nansi, RW, Owen Sound (OHL)
154. Pittsburgh Penguins: Jordan Charron, RW, Sault Ste. Marie (OHL)
155. Washington Capitals: Jackson Crowder, C, Chicago (USHL)
156. Winnipeg Jets: Viktor Klingsell, RW, Skelleftea Jr. (Sweden)
157. Philadelphia Flyers: Luke Vlooswyk, D, Red Deer (WHL)
158. Dallas Stars: Mans Goos, G, Farjestad Jr. (Sweden)
159. Anaheim Ducks: Emile Guite, LW, Chicoutimi (QMJHL)
160. Columbus Blue Jackets: Owen Griffin, C, Oshawa (OHL)
Round 6
161. New Jersey Devils: David Rozsival, RW, Liberec Jr. (Czechia-Jr.)
162. Chicago Blackhawks: Ashton Cumby, D, Seattle (WHL)
163. Nashville Predators: Daniel Nieminen, D, Pelicans (Finland)
164. Philadelphia Flyers: Nathan Quinn, C, Quebec (QMJHL)
165. Boston Bruins: Kirill Yemelyanov, C, Yaroslav Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
166. New York Rangers: Samuel Jung, RW, Karpat Jr. (Finland-Jr.)
167. Buffalo Sabres: Ashton Schultz, C, Chicago (USHL)
168. Anaheim Ducks: Anthony Allain-Samake, D, Sioux City (USHL)
169. Pittsburgh Penguins: Carter Sanderson, LW, Muskegon (USHL)
170. New York Islanders: Burke Hood, G, Vancouver (WHL)
171. New York Rangers: Evan Passmore, D, Barrie (OHL)
172. Detroit Red Wings: Will Murphy, D, Cape Breton (QMJHL)
173. Columbus Blue Jackets: Victor Raftheim, D, Brynas Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
174. Utah Mammoth: Ludvig Johnson, D, Zug (Swiss)
175. Vancouver Canucks: Gabriel Chiarot, RW, Brampton, (OHL)
176. Calgary Flames: Aiden Lane, RW, St. Andrew’s College (HIGH-ON)
177. Montreal Canadiens: Carlos Handel, D, Halifax (QMJHL)
178. New Jersey Devils: Sigge Holmgren, D, Brynas U18 (Sweden-Jr. U18)
179. St. Louis Blues: Love Harenstam, G, Skelleftea Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
180. Washington Capitals: Aron Dahlqvist, D, Brynas Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
181. Ottawa Senators: Bruno Idzan, LW, Lincoln (USHL)
182. Utah Mammoth: Reko Alanko, D, Jokerit Jr. (Finland-Jr.)
183. Carolina Hurricanes: Viggo Nordlund, LW, Skelleftea Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
184. Los Angeles Kings: Jan Chovan, C, Tappara Jr. (Finland-Jr.)
185. Toronto Maple Leafs: Rylan Fellinger, D, Flint (OHL)
186. Vegas Golden Knights: Alexander Weiermair, C, Portland (WHL)
187. Vegas Golden Knights: Gustav Sjoqvist, D, AIK (Sweden-2)
188. Winnipeg Jets: Edison Engle, D, Dubuque (USHL)
189. Montreal Canadiens: Andrew MacNiel, D, Kitchener (OHL)
190. Dallas Stars: Dawson Sharkey, RW, Acadie-Bathurst (QMJHL)
191. Edmonton Oilers: Daniel Salonen, G, Lukko Jr. (Finland-Jr.)
192. Florida Panthers: Arvid Drott, RW, Djurgarden Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
Round 7
193. Tampa Bay Lightning: Caleb Heil, G, Madison (USHL)
194. Chicago Blackhawks: Ilya Kanarsky, G, Akm Tula Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
195. Buffalo Sabres: Melvin Novotny, LW, Leksand Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
196. Los Angeles Kings: Brendan McMorrow, C, Waterloo (USHL)
197. Florida Panthers: Brendan Dunphy, D, Wenatchee (WHL)
198. Columbus Blue Jackets: Jeremy Loranger, C, Sherwood Park (BCHL)
199. Buffalo Sabres: Yevgeni Prokhorov, G, Dinamo-Shinnik Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
200. Anaheim Ducks: Brady Turko, RW, Brandon (WHL)
201. Pittsburgh Penguins: Kale Dach, C, Sherwood Park (BCHL)
202. New York Islanders: Jacob Kvasnicka, RW, USNTDP (USHL)
203. New York Rangers: Felix Farhammar, D, Orebro Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
204. Detroit Red Wings: Grayden Robertson-Palmer, C, Phillips Andover Academy (HIGH-MA)
205. Seattle Kraken: Karl Annborn, D, HV71 Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
206. Tampa Bay Lightning: Roman Luttsev, C, Yaroslavl Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
207. Vancouver Canucks: Matthew Lansing, C, Fargo (USHL)
208. Calgary Flames: Jakob Leander, D, HV71 Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
209. Montreal Canadiens: Maxon Vig, D, Cedar Rapids (USHL)
210. San Jose Sharks: Richard Gallant, LW, USNTDP (USHL)
211. Calgary Flames: Yan Matveiko, LW, CSKA Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
212. Tampa Bay Lightning: Grant Spada, D, Guelph (OHL)
213. Ottawa Senators: Andrei Trofimov, G, Magnitogorsk Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
214. Colorado Avalanche: Nolan Roed, C, Tri-City (USHL)
215. Tampa Bay Lightning: Marco Mignosa, RW, Sault Ste. Marie (OHL)
216. Los Angeles Kings: William Sharpe, D, Kelowna (WHL)
217. Toronto Maple Leafs: Matthew Hlacar, LW, Kitchener (OHL)
218. Seattle Kraken: Loke Krantz, RW, Linkoping Jr. (Sweden-Jr.)
219. Buffalo Sabres: Ryan Rucinski, C, Youngstown (USHL)
220. Winnipeg Jets: Jacob Cloutier, RW, Saginaw (OHL)
221. Carolina Hurricanes: Filip Ekberg, RW, Ottawa (OHL)
222. Dallas Stars: Charlie Paquette, RW, Guelph (OHL)
223. Edmonton Oilers: Aidan Park, C, Green Bay (USHL)
224. Florida Panthers: Yegor Midlak, G, Spartak Jr. (Russia-Jr.)
You may like
Sports
Potential fatal flaws that could sink 26 playoff contenders
Published
10 hours agoon
November 10, 2025By
admin

-

Bill ConnellyNov 9, 2025, 06:00 PM ET
Close- Bill Connelly is a writer for ESPN. He covers college football, soccer and tennis. He has been at ESPN since 2019.
It was an “almost” sort of Saturday in college football. No. 2 Indiana flirted with disaster at Penn State but survived thanks to an Omar Cooper Jr. toe tap. No. 9 Oregon nearly got Iowa’d but saved itself with an Atticus Sappington field goal. Auburn came close to actually winning a close game against a ranked team for once but got Diego Pavia‘d in overtime and couldn’t respond. We even had almosts at the FCS and Division II levels, where top-ranked teams North Dakota State and Ferris State each trailed late but rallied.
Granted, we still got some upsets. Two more top-15 ACC teams fell (in what feels like a weekly occurrence), No. 23 Washington fell to 2-6 Wisconsin in drizzly Madison, and Hawai’i knocked San Diego State out of playoff contention late Saturday night. Lord knows the ACC race doesn’t make any more sense than it did a week ago, but Week 11 wasn’t quite as chaotic as it could have been, and it ended up offering us a decent amount of clarity in the College Football Playoff hunt.
Using the same average CFP odds formula that I used last week — combining those of the Allstate Playoff Predictor with my own odds derived from SP+ — we now have eight teams with at least an 81% chance of making the field of 12. Loads of teams are in the hunt for those other four (or so) spots, but with three Saturdays remaining before Championship Week, let’s again break contenders into tiers and talk about their most toxic traits, the flaws that will likely keep them from either winning the national title or reaching the CFP at all.

Playoff contenders’ fatal flaws
Tier 1
At a combined 28-0 with a 95% (Indiana), 75% (Ohio State) and 49% (Texas A&M) chance of finishing the regular season 12-0, respectively, these three teams are just about at the finish line when it comes to sealing playoff bids. Indiana needed all 60 minutes to get to that point at Penn State, however. For these teams, we’re definitely gauging fatal flaws in terms of what will prevent them from winning the national title; almost nothing will prevent them from reaching the CFP.
Indiana (average CFP odds: 99.9%): Big-play glitches. Indiana has had a dynamite defense since Curt Cignetti and coordinator Bryant Haines moved to Bloomington, but when the Hoosiers give up a successful play, it’s a very successful play. Usually that comes via run defense — as evidenced by a 59-yard run for Penn State’s Nicholas Singleton on Saturday — but IU also gave up six completions of 19 or more yards against an iffy PSU passing attack, and, combined with an ill-timed interception from Fernando Mendoza, it almost cost them their unbeaten record.
Ohio State (99.6%): A merely decent run game. Indiana’s combined playoff odds are ever-so-slightly higher than those of top-ranked Ohio State, primarily because the Hoosiers only have two remaining regular-season games left and the Buckeyes have three (including one against 7-2 Michigan). But OSU is indeed the top-ranked team per both the computers. It’s not hard to see why: The defense ranks first nationally in points per drive and yards per play, and the offense features the best receiver in the country (Jeremiah Smith) and a quarterback completing over 80% of his passes (Julian Sayin).
Sayin will face plenty of elite defenses down the stretch, however — Michigan ranks ninth in defensive SP+, likely Big Ten championship opponent Indiana ranks fourth despite the big plays, and the CFP will obviously feature lots of good defenses — and there’s a chance the Buckeyes are rendered one-dimensional at some point because of a run game that ranks 19th in rushing success rate* but doesn’t really go anywhere (4.7 yards per carry). Sayin could carry the offense anyway, but he’s still a redshirt freshman.
(* Success rate: how frequently an offense is gaining 50% of necessary yards on first down, 70% on second and 100% on third and fourth.)
Texas A&M (99.3%): Run defense. A&M once again proved its versatility on Saturday. The Aggies thumped a Missouri team that was admittedly without starting quarterback Beau Pribula — third-string freshman Matt Zollers was a dire 7-for-22 passing — but they showed off a wonderfully spaced passing game and an elite pass rush, and after a poor first half, the run game showed up in the second half, too. But even with no pass threat, Mizzou rushed for 207 yards, furthering a scary trend: A&M ranks 130th in yards allowed per carry (no sacks). I’m really struggling to see them winning three or four straight playoff games with that anchor dragging them down.
Tier 2
All of the teams in Tier 2 have one loss; four are part of either the Big Ten or SEC, while Texas Tech lands here both because of its overwhelming quality (the Red Raiders remain fourth in SP+) and its increasingly likely Big 12 title push. Only James Madison (74%) can top Tech’s 71% conference title odds, per SP+. There’s still a chance that one of these five teams misses the dance, so we’ll say fatal flaws mean a couple of different things here.
Texas Tech (average CFP odds: 90.1%): Quarterback. On one hand, Tech has played a pretty weak schedule featuring only two SP+ top-40 opponents. On the other hand, after Saturday’s win over BYU, the Red Raiders have beaten those two opponents by a combined 63-17. The dream season rolls on in Lubbock. But the school of Patrick Mahomes and the Air Raid’s legacy is still merely good throwing the ball, not great. Behren Morton is (A) injury-prone and (B) only 45th in Total QBR, and while the Red Raiders have scored 34 or more eight times, they’re 53rd in three-and-out rate and are mortal against good defenses.
Ole Miss (87.7%): The run game is a wash. Trinidad Chambliss‘ emergence at quarterback has given Ole Miss another dimension, both passing efficiently and running well at times. But even with Chambliss, and even with Kewan Lacy ranking 10th nationally in rushing yards (first in rushing TDs), Ole Miss still averages only 4.8 yards per carry while allowing the same. They have big advantages in the passing game (8.7 yards per dropback, 5.6 allowed), but it’s their only path to victory against awesome opponents, and it will be hard to win three or four playoff games without a solid Plan B.
Oregon (87.0%): No easy points against good defenses. Oregon’s defense has rounded nicely into form, and beating Iowa in cold and rain, as the Ducks did Saturday, is a great way to prove your resourcefulness. But in their five games against SP+ top-50 defense, they’ve scored just 22.0 points per game in regulation, with Dante Moore averaging just 9.2 yards per completion (he averages 15.3 against everyone else). The run game almost always shows up, but can Moore make big throws in a run of big games?
Georgia (85.4%): The defense only shows up when it has to. Georgia tried something novel Saturday, showing up before the fourth quarter and putting away Mississippi State early with a 38-0 run. But the season stats are still alarming: In the first half, the Dawgs rank 74th in points allowed per drive (2.1) and 106th in success rate allowed (44.8%). It’s hard to beat a string of elite teams if you’re taking 30-45 minutes to play your way into the game.
Alabama (81.0%): No run game. As you’re probably picking up by now, a lot of contenders struggle either with or against the run (or both). Alabama ranks 83rd in yards allowed per carry (not factoring in sacks) despite a solid showing against an admittedly poor LSU run game, but the more alarming part was on the other side of the ball, where Jam Miller and Daniel Hill combined to rush 15 times for 34 yards. Bama is 126th in yards per carry and continues to put everything on Ty Simpson and the (strong) passing game.
Tier 3
Notre Dame was, as expected, the highest-ranked two-loss team in last week’s CFP rankings, while BYU and Georgia Tech have each suffered only one loss (even though both losses were recent and rather demoralizing). It’s highly unlikely all three will reach the CFP, but they each have a decent chance.
Notre Dame (average CFP odds: 59.6%): Third-and-longs. They face too many of them on offense and allow too many conversions on defense. Thanks in part to a lot of negative run plays (which are often offset by explosive runs), CJ Carr & Co. have needed at least seven yards on 50% of third downs, 86th in the country. They’ve converted 46.9% of them (second), but that will be harder to do against elite teams. Meanwhile, they rank 87th in third-and-long conversion rate allowed.
BYU (45.4%): Not enough offensive threat. Despite Saturday’s loss at Texas Tech, BYU still has plenty to offer: The Cougars defend the pass well and both create and avoid negative plays. But against two SP+ top-30 defenses, they’ve scored just 31 combined points and averaged 4.8 yards per play. Quarterback Bear Bachmeier has been excellent for a freshman, but he doesn’t get the help he needs against the best defenses.
Georgia Tech (37.4%): Defense. The Yellow Jackets rank 82nd in points allowed per drive, and they don’t offer enough in terms of either efficiency (87th in success rate) or explosiveness (113th in percent of 20-yard gains allowed). Haynes King and the offense are dynamite, but the dam broke in Week 10’s 48-36 loss to NC State, and it will probably break again moving forward.
Tier 4a: Non-ACC teams
All of these teams are in “win out to finish the regular season, and you have to feel good about your chances” territory. Unfortunately, SP+ gives only one of them (Utah) a greater than 35% chance of winning out, and a 10-2 Utah team wouldn’t have a spectacular résumé to lean on.
Texas (average CFP odds: 28.0%): Negative plays. Offensive line issues have plagued Texas this season; it ranks 108th in stuff rate allowed (run stops at or behind the line) and 122nd in pressure rate allowed. Running back injuries and Arch Manning taking forever to throw haven’t helped, obviously, and shuffling the line a bit paid off against Vanderbilt. But it’s a lot to ask for the O-line to suddenly become a strength in November.
Oklahoma (27.0%): Offensive mistakes. Despite their past two games coming against top-10 offenses, the Sooners rank fifth in points allowed per drive and first in success rate allowed. The defense will keep showing up. But the offense has had to master the art of doing just enough to overcome a lack of big plays (102nd in yards per successful play), too many negative plays (84th in percentage of snaps gaining zero or negative yards) and turnovers (12 of them, for 71st).
Utah (25.6%): Untrustworthy explosiveness. In their seven wins, the Utes have been the 1985 Chicago Bears — average score: 46-10 (same as Super Bowl XX) — but in two losses they’ve scored just 31 total points, with below-average efficiency, minimal big-play presence and six turnovers. Even including the wins, quarterback Devon Dampier averages just 10.3 yards per completion. As with other teams here, a lack of easy points will likely be their downfall.
Vanderbilt (25.5%): The defense is fading quickly. While a majority of contenders are less trustworthy on offense, Vandy has few issues in that regard. Just ask Auburn, which was allowing 17.0 points per game in regulation this season but allowed 38 to the Commodores. But after allowing 34 points to Texas and 38 to Auburn, Vanderbilt ranks just 84th in points allowed per drive and 124th in completion rate allowed.
USC (15.8%): Run defense. My line for a while has been that if Lincoln Riley could just craft a top-40 defense, he’d have himself a playoff team. Well, the Trojans are 42nd in defensive SP+. Close. But they’ll probably need to beat Iowa and Oregon to reach the CFP, and both teams have offenses built to punish a terribly passive run defense that ranks 126th in rushing success rate allowed. USC can do the bend-don’t-break thing pretty well, but that’s far too much bending.
Michigan (7.6%): Not enough risk or reward. Michigan runs the ball well, prevents big plays and takes as few risks as possible with freshman quarterback Bryce Underwood. The issue: The Wolverines can’t force the issue very well. They can’t knock opponents off schedule to take advantage of a good pass rush, and among 132 QBR-eligible QBs, Underwood ranks 95th in completion rate (60.9%) despite ranking 86th in air yards per attempt (7.6).
Tier 4b: ACC teams
Someone has to win the ACC, and after both Louisville and Virginia went down Saturday, everything is as blurry as possible. Here are the current ACC title odds, per SP+: Georgia Tech 25.5%, Virginia 17.6%, Duke 17.1%, SMU 15.8%, Pitt 11.3%, Louisville 8.5%, Miami 4.2%. Tech is in Tier 3 thanks to its one-loss status, but there’s a 74.5% chance someone not named the Yellow Jackets will win the conference title.
Miami (15.7%): Not enough big plays. The Canes still have a chance despite two demoralizing losses in the past month, but the offense has underachieved against projections five times in six games, primarily due to a total lack of explosiveness.
They have Georgia’s efficiency but Kentucky’s explosiveness. A lack of easy points will likely be their downfall.
Virginia (14.5%): The offense has run out of juice. Even before Chandler Morris left Saturday’s loss to Wake Forest injured, Virginia had gained just 36 yards in 14 scoreless snaps, furthering a recent downward trend.
First six games: 6.4 yards per play, 46.5% success rate, 3.25 points per drive
Last four games: 5.0 yards per play, 37.0% success rate, 1.37 points per drive
That the Cavaliers reached 8-1 before finally dropping a close game was remarkable. It was also unsustainable. We’ll see if they’re able to rebound in an elimination game at Duke this week.
SMU (11.8%): Alls vs. nothings. Let’s bring that efficiency and explosiveness chart back up for a moment and highlight a different team.
SMU has won five of six thanks to a surging defense and an offense that gets chunk plays from receivers Romello Brinson and Jordan Hudson and back Chris Johnson Jr. But even with some recent improvement, the Mustangs still rank 86th in success rate and 114th in three-and-out rate. That will make beating Louisville, Cal and a potential ACC championship game opponent awfully difficult.
Louisville (8.1%): Negative plays. In Saturday’s 29-26 upset loss to Cal, Louisville ran 69 plays; 29 of them (42.0%) gained zero or negative yardage. The Cardinals turned positive yardage on just four of their last 13 snaps. That raised their season average to 35.0%, which ranks 116th nationally. Running back injuries and unreliable QB and line play are dragging Louisville down.
Pittsburgh (7.8%): Red zone and turnovers. Pitt is on a five-game winning streak since making freshman Mason Heintschel the starting quarterback, and even if the Panthers don’t win the ACC or make the CFP, they’ll decide who will — their last three games are against Notre Dame, Georgia Tech and Miami. Pitt’s defense ranks fourth in three-and-out rate but 112th in red zone TD rate allowed. Meanwhile, even looking only at Heintschel’s starts, the offense ranks 78th in red zone TD rate and 73rd in turnover rate.
Tier (Group of) 5
With Memphis and San Diego State getting more-or-less eliminated in Week 11 – Memphis due to a tight loss to Tulane, SDSU due to a blowout loss at Hawai’i – we’re basically looking at a 1-in-3 playoff chance for James Madison and a 2-in-3 chance for whoever emerges from the American Conference battle royale.
James Madison (34.3%): Turnovers and short fields. JMU ranks third in success rate allowed (31.2%) and eighth in yards allowed per play (4.5), but the Dukes have given up at least 20 points against all four top-60 offenses they’ve faced, in part because of turnovers (including a pair of fumble-return scores) or short fields generated by special teams issues. The Dukes are good at almost everything, but underdogs can’t afford egregious breakdowns in the CFP.
North Texas (28.3%): Run defense. Drew Mestemaker is on pace for about 4,000 passing yards, UNT ranks third nationally in points per drive, and the defense – forever flawed in Denton – ranks a solid 26th in yards allowed per dropback. There’s a lot to like here. One thing to dislike? The Mean Green are 125th in rushing success rate allowed. In their lone loss, to USF, they gave up 306 rushing yards. That feels quite damning.
South Florida (22.4%): Soft pass defense. Like North Texas, USF can score in all sorts of ways, and the Bulls’ run defense creates negative plays and renders opponents one-dimensional. But they can let opponents off the hook. They’re just 73rd in both third-down conversion rate allowed and sack rate, and in two losses their opponents completed 69% of their passes.
Tulane (7.5%): Defensive inefficiency. When Tulane looks good, you see a clear playoff contender. The Green Wave have two power-conference wins on their résumé, and they look the part athletically. But they rank 117th in success rate allowed, they don’t create negative plays and their defense no-showed in two losses, allowing a combined 93 points and 1,071 yards to Ole Miss (forgivable) and UTSA (less so).
This week in SP+
The SP+ rankings have been updated for the week. Let’s take a look at the teams that saw the biggest change in their overall ratings. (Note: We’re looking at ratings, not rankings.)
Moving up
Here are the five teams that saw their ratings rise the most this week:
Hawai’i: up 4.1 adjusted points per game (ranking rose from 90th to 72nd)
Utah State: up 3.3 points (from 95th to 79th)
Akron: up 3.1 points (from 126th to 123rd)
Florida International: up 3.1 points (from 125th to 118th)
Kentucky: up 3.1 points (from 63rd to 52nd)
Hawai’i’s blowout of San Diego State was a lovely highlight for a lovely season out on the islands. The Rainbow Warriors hadn’t won more than six games in a season since 2019 and haven’t finished in the SP+ top 75 since 2010, but they’re currently 7-3 and 72nd. College football is a lot more fun when Hawai’i’s doing mean things to opponents late on Saturday night.
Meanwhile, Kentucky has overachieved against SP+ projections by double digits in three of its last four games and has won two in a row to get to 4-5 and keep bowl hopes alive. Nice second-half improvement from Mark Stoops’ Wildcats.
Moving down
Here are the five teams whose ratings fell the most:
San Diego State: down 4.5 points (ranking fell from 44th to 56th)
Navy: down 4.0 points (from 50th to 63rd)
Florida: down 3.1 points (from 39th to 48th)
Nevada: down 2.8 points (from 123rd to 128th)
BYU: down 2.8 points (from 16th to 22nd)
In my Friday preview, I wrote that if BYU’s Bachmeier was ever going to look like a freshman, it was going to be against a hostile crowd and hostile defense in Lubbock. He didn’t completely implode by “freshman implosion” standards, but he averaged just 4.7 yards per dropback, found no room to run, threw what amounted to a game-clinching interception in the third quarter and lost a late fumble for good measure. Tech was too good, and BYU’s offensive SP+ ranking fell from 25th to 39th.
Who won the Heisman this week?
I am once again awarding the Heisman every single week of the season and doling out weekly points, F1-style (in this case, 10 points for first place, nine for second, and so on). How will this Heisman race play out, and how different will the result be from the actual Heisman voting?
Here is this week’s Heisman top 10:
1. Diego Pavia, Vanderbilt (25-for-33 passing for 377 yards and 3 touchdowns, plus 114 non-sack rushing yards and a TD against Auburn).
2. Emmett Johnson, Nebraska (28 carries for 129 yards and a touchdown, plus 103 receiving yards and 2 TDs against UCLA).
3. Jake Retzlaff, Tulane (16-for-23 for 332 yards and 3 touchdowns, plus 53 non-sack rushing yards and a TD against Memphis).
4. Byrum Brown, USF (14-for-15 for 239 yards and 2 touchdowns, plus 109 non-sack rushing yards and a TD against UTSA).
5. Ashton Daniels, Auburn (31-for-44 for 353 yards and 2 touchdowns, plus 103 non-sack rushing yards and 2 TDs against Vanderbilt).
6. Bryun Parham, UConn (16 tackles, 1.5 TFLs, 1 sack, 1 forced fumble and 1 interception against Duke).
7. Julian Sayin, Ohio State (27-for-33 for 303 yards, 1 TD and 1 INT against Purdue).
8. Isaiah Smith, SMU (nine tackles, four sacks against Boston College).
9. Beau Sparks, Texas State (10 catches for 186 yards and a touchdown, plus a 49-yard TD run against Louisiana).
10. Antwan Raymond, Rutgers (41 carries for 240 yards and a touchdown against Maryland).
Vandy’s defense is running on fumes, and Auburn’s offense showed up for just about the first time all season, but the Commodores’ playoff hopes remain alive because Diego Pavia pulled another Diego Pavia. Vanderbilt trailed by 14 early and nearly blew it at the end of regulation, but Pavia’s third TD pass of the evening, to Cole Spence in overtime, saved the day and put him atop this list.
Honorable mentions:
• Sieh Bangura, Ohio (17 carries for 102 yards and a touchdown, plus 30 receiving yards and a 97-yard kick return TD against Miami of Ohio).
• Jacob De Jesus, Cal (16 catches for 158 yards and a touchdown against Louisville).
• Phillip Dunnam, UCF (four tackles and three interceptions, including a pick-six, against Houston).
• Nate Frazier, Georgia (12 carries for 181 yards and a touchdown against Mississippi State).
• Makai Lemon, USC (five catches for 166 yards and a touchdown against Northwestern).
• Jayden Maiava, USC (24-for-33 for 299 yards, 2 TDs and 1 INT, plus 19 non-sack rushing yards and 1 TD against Northwestern).
• Josh Moten, Southern Miss (six tackles, three interceptions and 1 pass breakup against Arkansas State).
• Mason Posa, Wisconsin (11 tackles, 2.5 sacks, 1 forced fumble, 1 fumble recovery and 1 pass breakup against Washington).
• Jaron-Keawe Sagapolutele, Cal (30-for-47 for 323 yards and 2 touchdowns against Louisville).
• Gunner Stockton, Georgia (18-for-29 for 264 yards and 3 touchdowns, plus 31 non-sack rushing yards against Mississippi State).
Through 11 weeks, here are your points leaders. Where there’s a tie, I’ll use players’ points from the past four weeks as a tiebreaker.
1. Julian Sayin, Ohio State (29 points, 20 in the past four weeks)
2. Ty Simpson, Alabama (29 points, zero in the past four weeks)
3. Taylen Green, Arkansas (27 points)
4. Trinidad Chambliss, Ole Miss (25 points)
5. Diego Pavia, Vanderbilt (24 points)
6. Demond Williams Jr., Washington (21 points)
7. Gunner Stockton, Georgia (19 points, 10 in the past four weeks)
8. Fernando Mendoza, Indiana (19 points, nine in the past four weeks)
9. Luke Altmyer, Illinois (16 points)
10. Jake Retzlaff, Tulane (14 points)
I understand that it’s my own damn fault for bringing stats to the vibes-based Heisman race, but I’m never going to fully understand Heisman odds. Sayin entered the week as the Heisman betting favorite and went 27-for-33 for 303 yards, a touchdown and an interception. His Total QBR for the week was 89.2, he kept his season completion rate above 80% — a ridiculously high number — and his interception happened when the Buckeyes were up 21.
Fernando Mendoza, meanwhile, went just 19-for-30 for 218 yards against a Penn State defense that Sayin just torched. He averaged 6.1 yards per dropback with a 75.0 Total QBR, both his worst numbers since Week 1. He threw a devastating fourth-quarter pick that could have cost the Hoosiers the game. But then he rallied, making a couple of lovely throws on Indiana’s game-winning drive, and receiver Omar Cooper Jr. made maybe the greatest TD catch of the season — or the 2020s? The 21st Century? Ever? — to save his team.
And after all that … Mendoza became the Heisman betting favorite? Cooper’s amazing catch became Mendoza’s Heisman moment because Sayin’s team won too easily? Do I have that right? Mendoza winning the Heisman would be a spectacular story (just add it to Indiana’s list of spectacular stories at this point), but if anything happened Saturday, it should have been Sayin solidifying his lead.
My 10 favorite games of the weekend
1. No. 2 Indiana 27, Penn State 24. Regardless of my confusion toward Heisman odds, this was a brilliant football game. Penn State reminded everyone of its talent, the Nittany Lions’ home crowd came through, and Indiana drove 80 yards in 1:15 for a glorious game-winning TD. Brilliant stuff, with a brilliant in-game win probability chart.
2 and 3. Division II: No. 1 Ferris State 51, Saginaw Valley State 45 (2OT); No. 6 Colorado State-Pueblo 41, Colorado Mines 34 (OT).
Division II brought it Saturday. Ferris State won its first nine games by an average of 54-15, but redshirt freshman Wyatt Bower, Trinidad Chambliss’ successor, looked incredibly freshman-like Saturday, throwing three picks on eight passes and losing two fumbles. With the Bulldogs trailing 24-7 early in the third quarter, backup QB Chase Carter keyed a 31-7 run, but SVSU tied the game on a Mason McKenzie-to-Zarek Zelinski touchdown pass with 1:55 left. FSU missed a 39-yard field goal at the buzzer and couldn’t seal the deal until Taariik Brett’s 12-yard touchdown run in the second OT. If not for the Mendoza-to-Cooper touchdown, this would have easily been the No. 1 game of the week.
Meanwhile, after coming back from 21 points down to beat a top-10 Western Colorado team last week, CSU-Pueblo spotted rival Colorado Mines a 28-6 lead late in the first half, then slowly clawed all the way back. Roman Fuller found Marcellus Honeycutt Jr. for a tying 32-yard touchdown with 56 seconds left, then hit Reggie Retzlaff for the go-ahead score in OT. Peyton Shaw then sealed the ThunderWolves’ win with an interception.
4. Delaware 25, Louisiana Tech 24. The Blue Hens led 16-10 with under four minutes remaining, but Louisiana Tech scored twice in 46 seconds, first on a short TD run, then on a Jacob Fields pick-six, to take a 24-16 lead. Delaware’s Nick Minicucci rebounded with a TD pass to Elijah Sessoms with 34 seconds left, then the Blue Hens recovered an onside kick and set Nate Reed up for a game-winning 51-yard field goal.
1:16
Louisiana Tech Bulldogs vs. Delaware Blue Hens: Full Highlights
Louisiana Tech Bulldogs vs. Delaware Blue Hens: Full Highlights
5. No. 9 Oregon 18, No. 20 Iowa 16. Iowa proved its top-20 bona fides, Dante Moore and Oregon proved their playoff chops and Atticus Sappington nailed a huge field goal. Just a great game in November Iowa weather.
SAPPINGTON CONNECTS FOR THE DUCKS! pic.twitter.com/8QZdcfVMhW
— CBS Sports College Football 🏈 (@CBSSportsCFB) November 8, 2025
6. No. 16 Vanderbilt 45, Auburn 38 (OT). Indiana’s win probability chart was a classic of one genre (blow it, and then save yourself). Vandy’s was a classic in another (rally, then nearly fall apart multiple times).
7 and 8. FCS: No. 2 Montana 29, Eastern Washington 24; No. 1 North Dakota State 15, No. 15 North Dakota 10. Top-ranked teams struggled in the FCS as well. NDSU, barely challenged all year, trailed its in-state rival 10-9 heading into the fourth quarter. The Bison finally took their first lead on Cole Payton‘s 8-yard touchdown with 2:22 remaining, but UND drove inside the NDSU 30 in the closing seconds before Anthony Chideme-Alfaro made a lunging interception to seal the win.
0:31
Picked! Anthony Chideme-Alfaro hauls in the interception
Picked! Anthony Chideme-Alfaro hauls in the interception
Of course, we’ve seen game-sealing picks before. Have you ever seen a game-sealing fumbled spike?
0:23
Eastern Washington loses on fumbled spike attempt
Jake Schakel fumbles the spike attempt, and the Grizzlies’ defense recovers it.
Unbeaten Montana took a 29-14 lead early in the third quarter but shifted into cruise control too early, allowing 4-6 EWU to score twice, recover a late onside kick — it was a great week for successful onside kicks, by the way — and drive inside the 10 with eight seconds remaining. But Jake Schakel, who shined in his first career start, let the ball slip out of his hands on a spike, and the Griz survived.
9. UConn 37, Duke 34. There were 12 scores in this game; 10 gave a team the lead, including all six in the second half. Skyler Bell‘s 19-yard touchdown catch gave UConn the advantage with 1:58 remaining, but the game wasn’t iced until Trent Jones II recovered a sack-and-strip of Darian Mensah with 18 seconds left.
10. Sam Houston 21, Oregon State 17. Oregon State has been utterly snake-bitten this season, but this one takes the cake. The Beavers led 17-0 midway through the second quarter, but thanks to an interception (which set up a 35-yard touchdown pass), a kick return touchdown to open the second half and a blocked punt return score with 8:29 remaining, SHSU somehow came back to win its first game of the season despite a yardage disadvantage of 474-157. Shocking stuff. And you know what? Good. I ache for Beavers fans this year, but fielding even a bad team is so difficult, and every team deserves to celebrate at least one win. Now we just need to get 0-9 UMass off the schneid at some point in the next three weeks.
Honorable mention:
• Division II: Chadron State 27, No. 11 Western Colorado 24 (OT)
• FCS: No. 10 Mercer 49, No. 24 Western Carolina 47
• FCS: Mercyhurst 16, Saint Francis 15
• Missouri State 21, Liberty 17
• Ohio 24, Miami (Ohio) 20 (Tuesday)
• Division II: Ouachita Baptist 42, SW Oklahoma State 38
• Tulane 38, Memphis 32 (Friday)
• FCS: William & Mary 30, Campbell 27 (OT)
• Wisconsin 13, No. 23 Washington 10
• Division III: No. 14 Wisconsin-Platteville 24, Wisconsin-Stout 23
One last special shoutout: Army’s 14-13 win over Temple didn’t quite make the list, but Army’s last drive — an epic, 18-play, 9:53 clock killer — deserved to.
The midweek playlist
Ohio at Western Michigan (Tuesday, 8 p.m., ESPN2). One week into our midweek MACtion slate, the conference title race is as blurry as ever. Ohio’s win over Miami gave the Bobcats the slightest of edges, but it could disappear this week. Current MAC title odds, per SP+: Ohio 22.2%, Toledo 20.2%, Western Michigan 20.1%, Miami 19.2%, Buffalo 16.7%. What a race! The winner of this one should inch ahead in the odds.
Sports
Potential fatal flaws that could sink 26 playoff contenders
Published
13 hours agoon
November 9, 2025By
admin

-

Bill ConnellyNov 9, 2025, 06:00 PM ET
Close- Bill Connelly is a writer for ESPN. He covers college football, soccer and tennis. He has been at ESPN since 2019.
It was an “almost” sort of Saturday in college football. No. 2 Indiana flirted with disaster at Penn State but survived thanks to an Omar Cooper Jr. toe tap. No. 9 Oregon nearly got Iowa’d but saved itself with an Atticus Sappington field goal. Auburn came close to actually winning a close game against a ranked team for once but got Diego Pavia‘d in overtime and couldn’t respond. We even had almosts at the FCS and Division II levels, where top-ranked teams North Dakota State and Ferris State each trailed late but rallied.
Granted, we still got some upsets. Two more top-15 ACC teams fell (in what feels like a weekly occurrence), No. 23 Washington fell to 2-6 Wisconsin in drizzly Madison, and Hawai’i knocked San Diego State out of playoff contention late Saturday night. Lord knows the ACC race doesn’t make any more sense than it did a week ago, but Week 11 wasn’t quite as chaotic as it could have been, and it ended up offering us a decent amount of clarity in the College Football Playoff hunt.
Using the same average CFP odds formula that I used last week — combining those of the Allstate Playoff Predictor with my own odds derived from SP+ — we now have eight teams with at least an 81% chance of making the field of 12. Loads of teams are in the hunt for those other four (or so) spots, but with three Saturdays remaining before Championship Week, let’s again break contenders into tiers and talk about their most toxic traits, the flaws that will likely keep them from either winning the national title or reaching the CFP at all.

Playoff contenders’ fatal flaws
Tier 1
At a combined 28-0 with a 95% (Indiana), 75% (Ohio State) and 49% (Texas A&M) chance of finishing the regular season 12-0, respectively, these three teams are just about at the finish line when it comes to sealing playoff bids. Indiana needed all 60 minutes to get to that point at Penn State, however. For these teams, we’re definitely gauging fatal flaws in terms of what will prevent them from winning the national title; almost nothing will prevent them from reaching the CFP.
Indiana (average CFP odds: 99.9%): Big-play glitches. Indiana has had a dynamite defense since Curt Cignetti and coordinator Bryant Haines moved to Bloomington, but when the Hoosiers give up a successful play, it’s a very successful play. Usually that comes via run defense — as evidenced by a 59-yard run for Penn State’s Nicholas Singleton on Saturday — but IU also gave up six completions of 19 or more yards against an iffy PSU passing attack, and, combined with an ill-timed interception from Fernando Mendoza, it almost cost them their unbeaten record.
Ohio State (99.6%): A merely decent run game. Indiana’s combined playoff odds are ever-so-slightly higher than those of top-ranked Ohio State, primarily because the Hoosiers only have two remaining regular-season games left and the Buckeyes have three (including one against 7-2 Michigan). But OSU is indeed the top-ranked team per both the computers. It’s not hard to see why: The defense ranks first nationally in points per drive and yards per play, and the offense features the best receiver in the country (Jeremiah Smith) and a quarterback completing over 80% of his passes (Julian Sayin).
Sayin will face plenty of elite defenses down the stretch, however — Michigan ranks ninth in defensive SP+, likely Big Ten championship opponent Indiana ranks fourth despite the big plays, and the CFP will obviously feature lots of good defenses — and there’s a chance the Buckeyes are rendered one-dimensional at some point because of a run game that ranks 19th in rushing success rate* but doesn’t really go anywhere (4.7 yards per carry). Sayin could carry the offense anyway, but he’s still a redshirt freshman.
(* Success rate: how frequently an offense is gaining 50% of necessary yards on first down, 70% on second and 100% on third and fourth.)
Texas A&M (99.3%): Run defense. A&M once again proved its versatility on Saturday. The Aggies thumped a Missouri team that was admittedly without starting quarterback Beau Pribula — third-string freshman Matt Zollers was a dire 7-for-22 passing — but they showed off a wonderfully spaced passing game and an elite pass rush, and after a poor first half, the run game showed up in the second half, too. But even with no pass threat, Mizzou rushed for 207 yards, furthering a scary trend: A&M ranks 130th in yards allowed per carry (no sacks). I’m really struggling to see them winning three or four straight playoff games with that anchor dragging them down.
Tier 2
All of the teams in Tier 2 have one loss; four are part of either the Big Ten or SEC, while Texas Tech lands here both because of its overwhelming quality (the Red Raiders remain fourth in SP+) and its increasingly likely Big 12 title push. Only James Madison (74%) can top Tech’s 71% conference title odds, per SP+. There’s still a chance that one of these five teams misses the dance, so we’ll say fatal flaws mean a couple of different things here.
Texas Tech (average CFP odds: 90.1%): Quarterback. On one hand, Tech has played a pretty weak schedule featuring only two SP+ top-40 opponents. On the other hand, after Saturday’s win over BYU, the Red Raiders have beaten those two opponents by a combined 63-17. The dream season rolls on in Lubbock. But the school of Patrick Mahomes and the Air Raid’s legacy is still merely good throwing the ball, not great. Behren Morton is (A) injury-prone and (B) only 45th in Total QBR, and while the Red Raiders have scored 34 or more eight times, they’re 53rd in three-and-out rate and are mortal against good defenses.
Ole Miss (87.7%): The run game is a wash. Trinidad Chambliss‘ emergence at quarterback has given Ole Miss another dimension, both passing efficiently and running well at times. But even with Chambliss, and even with Kewan Lacy ranking 10th nationally in rushing yards (first in rushing TDs), Ole Miss still averages only 4.8 yards per carry while allowing the same. They have big advantages in the passing game (8.7 yards per dropback, 5.6 allowed), but it’s their only path to victory against awesome opponents, and it will be hard to win three or four playoff games without a solid Plan B.
Oregon (87.0%): No easy points against good defenses. Oregon’s defense has rounded nicely into form, and beating Iowa in cold and rain, as the Ducks did Saturday, is a great way to prove your resourcefulness. But in their five games against SP+ top-50 defense, they’ve scored just 22.0 points per game in regulation, with Dante Moore averaging just 9.2 yards per completion (he averages 15.3 against everyone else). The run game almost always shows up, but can Moore make big throws in a run of big games?
Georgia (85.4%): The defense only shows up when it has to. Georgia tried something novel Saturday, showing up before the fourth quarter and putting away Mississippi State early with a 38-0 run. But the season stats are still alarming: In the first half, the Dawgs rank 74th in points allowed per drive (2.1) and 106th in success rate allowed (44.8%). It’s hard to beat a string of elite teams if you’re taking 30-45 minutes to play your way into the game.
Alabama (81.0%): No run game. As you’re probably picking up by now, a lot of contenders struggle either with or against the run (or both). Alabama ranks 83rd in yards allowed per carry (not factoring in sacks) despite a solid showing against an admittedly poor LSU run game, but the more alarming part was on the other side of the ball, where Jam Miller and Daniel Hill combined to rush 15 times for 34 yards. Bama is 126th in yards per carry and continues to put everything on Ty Simpson and the (strong) passing game.
Tier 3
Notre Dame was, as expected, the highest-ranked two-loss team in last week’s CFP rankings, while BYU and Georgia Tech have each suffered only one loss (even though both losses were recent and rather demoralizing). It’s highly unlikely all three will reach the CFP, but they each have a decent chance.
Notre Dame (average CFP odds: 59.6%): Third-and-longs. They face too many of them on offense and allow too many conversions on defense. Thanks in part to a lot of negative run plays (which are often offset by explosive runs), CJ Carr & Co. have needed at least seven yards on 50% of third downs, 86th in the country. They’ve converted 46.9% of them (second), but that will be harder to do against elite teams. Meanwhile, they rank 87th in third-and-long conversion rate allowed.
BYU (45.4%): Not enough offensive threat. Despite Saturday’s loss at Texas Tech, BYU still has plenty to offer: The Cougars defend the pass well and both create and avoid negative plays. But against two SP+ top-30 defenses, they’ve scored just 31 combined points and averaged 4.8 yards per play. Quarterback Bear Bachmeier has been excellent for a freshman, but he doesn’t get the help he needs against the best defenses.
Georgia Tech (37.4%): Defense. The Yellow Jackets rank 82nd in points allowed per drive, and they don’t offer enough in terms of either efficiency (87th in success rate) or explosiveness (113th in percent of 20-yard gains allowed). Haynes King and the offense are dynamite, but the dam broke in Week 10’s 48-36 loss to NC State, and it will probably break again moving forward.
Tier 4a: Non-ACC teams
All of these teams are in “win out to finish the regular season, and you have to feel good about your chances” territory. Unfortunately, SP+ gives only one of them (Utah) a greater than 35% chance of winning out, and a 10-2 Utah team wouldn’t have a spectacular résumé to lean on.
Texas (average CFP odds: 28.0%): Negative plays. Offensive line issues have plagued Texas this season; it ranks 108th in stuff rate allowed (run stops at or behind the line) and 122nd in pressure rate allowed. Running back injuries and Arch Manning taking forever to throw haven’t helped, obviously, and shuffling the line a bit paid off against Vanderbilt. But it’s a lot to ask for the O-line to suddenly become a strength in November.
Oklahoma (27.0%): Offensive mistakes. Despite their past two games coming against top-10 offenses, the Sooners rank fifth in points allowed per drive and first in success rate allowed. The defense will keep showing up. But the offense has had to master the art of doing just enough to overcome a lack of big plays (102nd in yards per successful play), too many negative plays (84th in percentage of snaps gaining zero or negative yards) and turnovers (12 of them, for 71st).
Utah (25.6%): Untrustworthy explosiveness. In their seven wins, the Utes have been the 1985 Chicago Bears — average score: 46-10 (same as Super Bowl XX) — but in two losses they’ve scored just 31 total points, with below-average efficiency, minimal big-play presence and six turnovers. Even including the wins, quarterback Devon Dampier averages just 10.3 yards per completion. As with other teams here, a lack of easy points will likely be their downfall.
Vanderbilt (25.5%): The defense is fading quickly. While a majority of contenders are less trustworthy on offense, Vandy has few issues in that regard. Just ask Auburn, which was allowing 17.0 points per game in regulation this season but allowed 38 to the Commodores. But after allowing 34 points to Texas and 38 to Auburn, Vanderbilt ranks just 84th in points allowed per drive and 124th in completion rate allowed.
USC (15.8%): Run defense. My line for a while has been that if Lincoln Riley could just craft a top-40 defense, he’d have himself a playoff team. Well, the Trojans are 42nd in defensive SP+. Close. But they’ll probably need to beat Iowa and Oregon to reach the CFP, and both teams have offenses built to punish a terribly passive run defense that ranks 126th in rushing success rate allowed. USC can do the bend-don’t-break thing pretty well, but that’s far too much bending.
Michigan (7.6%): Not enough risk or reward. Michigan runs the ball well, prevents big plays and takes as few risks as possible with freshman quarterback Bryce Underwood. The issue: The Wolverines can’t force the issue very well. They can’t knock opponents off schedule to take advantage of a good pass rush, and among 132 QBR-eligible QBs, Underwood ranks 95th in completion rate (60.9%) despite ranking 86th in air yards per attempt (7.6).
Tier 4b: ACC teams
Someone has to win the ACC, and after both Louisville and Virginia went down Saturday, everything is as blurry as possible. Here are the current ACC title odds, per SP+: Georgia Tech 25.5%, Virginia 17.6%, Duke 17.1%, SMU 15.8%, Pitt 11.3%, Louisville 8.5%, Miami 4.2%. Tech is in Tier 3 thanks to its one-loss status, but there’s a 74.5% chance someone not named the Yellow Jackets will win the conference title.
Miami (15.7%): Not enough big plays. The Canes still have a chance despite two demoralizing losses in the past month, but the offense has underachieved against projections five times in six games, primarily due to a total lack of explosiveness.
They have Georgia’s efficiency but Kentucky’s explosiveness. A lack of easy points will likely be their downfall.
Virginia (14.5%): The offense has run out of juice. Even before Chandler Morris left Saturday’s loss to Wake Forest injured, Virginia had gained just 36 yards in 14 scoreless snaps, furthering a recent downward trend.
First six games: 6.4 yards per play, 46.5% success rate, 3.25 points per drive
Last four games: 5.0 yards per play, 37.0% success rate, 1.37 points per drive
That the Cavaliers reached 8-1 before finally dropping a close game was remarkable. It was also unsustainable. We’ll see if they’re able to rebound in an elimination game at Duke this week.
SMU (11.8%): Alls vs. nothings. Let’s bring that efficiency and explosiveness chart back up for a moment and highlight a different team.
SMU has won five of six thanks to a surging defense and an offense that gets chunk plays from receivers Romello Brinson and Jordan Hudson and back Chris Johnson Jr. But even with some recent improvement, the Mustangs still rank 86th in success rate and 114th in three-and-out rate. That will make beating Louisville, Cal and a potential ACC championship game opponent awfully difficult.
Louisville (8.1%): Negative plays. In Saturday’s 29-26 upset loss to Cal, Louisville ran 69 plays; 29 of them (42.0%) gained zero or negative yardage. The Cardinals turned positive yardage on just four of their last 13 snaps. That raised their season average to 35.0%, which ranks 116th nationally. Running back injuries and unreliable QB and line play are dragging Louisville down.
Pittsburgh (7.8%): Red zone and turnovers. Pitt is on a five-game winning streak since making freshman Mason Heintschel the starting quarterback, and even if the Panthers don’t win the ACC or make the CFP, they’ll decide who will — their last three games are against Notre Dame, Georgia Tech and Miami. Pitt’s defense ranks fourth in three-and-out rate but 112th in red zone TD rate allowed. Meanwhile, even looking only at Heintschel’s starts, the offense ranks 78th in red zone TD rate and 73rd in turnover rate.
Tier (Group of) 5
With Memphis and San Diego State getting more-or-less eliminated in Week 11 – Memphis due to a tight loss to Tulane, SDSU due to a blowout loss at Hawai’i – we’re basically looking at a 1-in-3 playoff chance for James Madison and a 2-in-3 chance for whoever emerges from the American Conference battle royale.
James Madison (34.3%): Turnovers and short fields. JMU ranks third in success rate allowed (31.2%) and eighth in yards allowed per play (4.5), but the Dukes have given up at least 20 points against all four top-60 offenses they’ve faced, in part because of turnovers (including a pair of fumble-return scores) or short fields generated by special teams issues. The Dukes are good at almost everything, but underdogs can’t afford egregious breakdowns in the CFP.
North Texas (28.3%): Run defense. Drew Mestemaker is on pace for about 4,000 passing yards, UNT ranks third nationally in points per drive, and the defense – forever flawed in Denton – ranks a solid 26th in yards allowed per dropback. There’s a lot to like here. One thing to dislike? The Mean Green are 125th in rushing success rate allowed. In their lone loss, to USF, they gave up 306 rushing yards. That feels quite damning.
South Florida (22.4%): Soft pass defense. Like North Texas, USF can score in all sorts of ways, and the Bulls’ run defense creates negative plays and renders opponents one-dimensional. But they can let opponents off the hook. They’re just 73rd in both third-down conversion rate allowed and sack rate, and in two losses their opponents completed 69% of their passes.
Tulane (7.5%): Defensive inefficiency. When Tulane looks good, you see a clear playoff contender. The Green Wave have two power-conference wins on their résumé, and they look the part athletically. But they rank 117th in success rate allowed, they don’t create negative plays and their defense no-showed in two losses, allowing a combined 93 points and 1,071 yards to Ole Miss (forgivable) and UTSA (less so).
This week in SP+
The SP+ rankings have been updated for the week. Let’s take a look at the teams that saw the biggest change in their overall ratings. (Note: We’re looking at ratings, not rankings.)
Moving up
Here are the five teams that saw their ratings rise the most this week:
Hawai’i: up 4.1 adjusted points per game (ranking rose from 90th to 72nd)
Utah State: up 3.3 points (from 95th to 79th)
Akron: up 3.1 points (from 126th to 123rd)
Florida International: up 3.1 points (from 125th to 118th)
Kentucky: up 3.1 points (from 63rd to 52nd)
Hawai’i’s blowout of San Diego State was a lovely highlight for a lovely season out on the islands. The Rainbow Warriors hadn’t won more than six games in a season since 2019 and haven’t finished in the SP+ top 75 since 2010, but they’re currently 7-3 and 72nd. College football is a lot more fun when Hawai’i’s doing mean things to opponents late on Saturday night.
Meanwhile, Kentucky has overachieved against SP+ projections by double digits in three of its last four games and has won two in a row to get to 4-5 and keep bowl hopes alive. Nice second-half improvement from Mark Stoops’ Wildcats.
Moving down
Here are the five teams whose ratings fell the most:
San Diego State: down 4.5 points (ranking fell from 44th to 56th)
Navy: down 4.0 points (from 50th to 63rd)
Florida: down 3.1 points (from 39th to 48th)
Nevada: down 2.8 points (from 123rd to 128th)
BYU: down 2.8 points (from 16th to 22nd)
In my Friday preview, I wrote that if BYU’s Bachmeier was ever going to look like a freshman, it was going to be against a hostile crowd and hostile defense in Lubbock. He didn’t completely implode by “freshman implosion” standards, but he averaged just 4.7 yards per dropback, found no room to run, threw what amounted to a game-clinching interception in the third quarter and lost a late fumble for good measure. Tech was too good, and BYU’s offensive SP+ ranking fell from 25th to 39th.
Who won the Heisman this week?
I am once again awarding the Heisman every single week of the season and doling out weekly points, F1-style (in this case, 10 points for first place, nine for second, and so on). How will this Heisman race play out, and how different will the result be from the actual Heisman voting?
Here is this week’s Heisman top 10:
1. Diego Pavia, Vanderbilt (25-for-33 passing for 377 yards and 3 touchdowns, plus 114 non-sack rushing yards and a TD against Auburn).
2. Emmett Johnson, Nebraska (28 carries for 129 yards and a touchdown, plus 103 receiving yards and 2 TDs against UCLA).
3. Jake Retzlaff, Tulane (16-for-23 for 332 yards and 3 touchdowns, plus 53 non-sack rushing yards and a TD against Memphis).
4. Byrum Brown, USF (14-for-15 for 239 yards and 2 touchdowns, plus 109 non-sack rushing yards and a TD against UTSA).
5. Ashton Daniels, Auburn (31-for-44 for 353 yards and 2 touchdowns, plus 103 non-sack rushing yards and 2 TDs against Vanderbilt).
6. Bryun Parham, UConn (16 tackles, 1.5 TFLs, 1 sack, 1 forced fumble and 1 interception against Duke).
7. Julian Sayin, Ohio State (27-for-33 for 303 yards, 1 TD and 1 INT against Purdue).
8. Isaiah Smith, SMU (nine tackles, four sacks against Boston College).
9. Beau Sparks, Texas State (10 catches for 186 yards and a touchdown, plus a 49-yard TD run against Louisiana).
10. Antwan Raymond, Rutgers (41 carries for 240 yards and a touchdown against Maryland).
Vandy’s defense is running on fumes, and Auburn’s offense showed up for just about the first time all season, but the Commodores’ playoff hopes remain alive because Diego Pavia pulled another Diego Pavia. Vanderbilt trailed by 14 early and nearly blew it at the end of regulation, but Pavia’s third TD pass of the evening, to Cole Spence in overtime, saved the day and put him atop this list.
Honorable mentions:
• Sieh Bangura, Ohio (17 carries for 102 yards and a touchdown, plus 30 receiving yards and a 97-yard kick return TD against Miami of Ohio).
• Jacob De Jesus, Cal (16 catches for 158 yards and a touchdown against Louisville).
• Phillip Dunnam, UCF (four tackles and three interceptions, including a pick-six, against Houston).
• Nate Frazier, Georgia (12 carries for 181 yards and a touchdown against Mississippi State).
• Makai Lemon, USC (five catches for 166 yards and a touchdown against Northwestern).
• Jayden Maiava, USC (24-for-33 for 299 yards, 2 TDs and 1 INT, plus 19 non-sack rushing yards and 1 TD against Northwestern).
• Josh Moten, Southern Miss (six tackles, three interceptions and 1 pass breakup against Arkansas State).
• Mason Posa, Wisconsin (11 tackles, 2.5 sacks, 1 forced fumble, 1 fumble recovery and 1 pass breakup against Washington).
• Jaron-Keawe Sagapolutele, Cal (30-for-47 for 323 yards and 2 touchdowns against Louisville).
• Gunner Stockton, Georgia (18-for-29 for 264 yards and 3 touchdowns, plus 31 non-sack rushing yards against Mississippi State).
Through 11 weeks, here are your points leaders. Where there’s a tie, I’ll use players’ points from the past four weeks as a tiebreaker.
1. Julian Sayin, Ohio State (29 points, 20 in the past four weeks)
2. Ty Simpson, Alabama (29 points, zero in the past four weeks)
3. Taylen Green, Arkansas (27 points)
4. Trinidad Chambliss, Ole Miss (25 points)
5. Diego Pavia, Vanderbilt (24 points)
6. Demond Williams Jr., Washington (21 points)
7. Gunner Stockton, Georgia (19 points, 10 in the past four weeks)
8. Fernando Mendoza, Indiana (19 points, nine in the past four weeks)
9. Luke Altmyer, Illinois (16 points)
10. Jake Retzlaff, Tulane (14 points)
I understand that it’s my own damn fault for bringing stats to the vibes-based Heisman race, but I’m never going to fully understand Heisman odds. Sayin entered the week as the Heisman betting favorite and went 27-for-33 for 303 yards, a touchdown and an interception. His Total QBR for the week was 89.2, he kept his season completion rate above 80% — a ridiculously high number — and his interception happened when the Buckeyes were up 21.
Fernando Mendoza, meanwhile, went just 19-for-30 for 218 yards against a Penn State defense that Sayin just torched. He averaged 6.1 yards per dropback with a 75.0 Total QBR, both his worst numbers since Week 1. He threw a devastating fourth-quarter pick that could have cost the Hoosiers the game. But then he rallied, making a couple of lovely throws on Indiana’s game-winning drive, and receiver Omar Cooper Jr. made maybe the greatest TD catch of the season — or the 2020s? The 21st Century? Ever? — to save his team.
And after all that … Mendoza became the Heisman betting favorite? Cooper’s amazing catch became Mendoza’s Heisman moment because Sayin’s team won too easily? Do I have that right? Mendoza winning the Heisman would be a spectacular story (just add it to Indiana’s list of spectacular stories at this point), but if anything happened Saturday, it should have been Sayin solidifying his lead.
My 10 favorite games of the weekend
1. No. 2 Indiana 27, Penn State 24. Regardless of my confusion toward Heisman odds, this was a brilliant football game. Penn State reminded everyone of its talent, the Nittany Lions’ home crowd came through, and Indiana drove 80 yards in 1:15 for a glorious game-winning TD. Brilliant stuff, with a brilliant in-game win probability chart.
2 and 3. Division II: No. 1 Ferris State 51, Saginaw Valley State 45 (2OT); No. 6 Colorado State-Pueblo 41, Colorado Mines 34 (OT).
Division II brought it Saturday. Ferris State won its first nine games by an average of 54-15, but redshirt freshman Wyatt Bower, Trinidad Chambliss’ successor, looked incredibly freshman-like Saturday, throwing three picks in eight passes and losing two fumbles. With the Bulldogs trailing 24-7 early in the third quarter, backup QB Chase Carter keyed a 31-7 run, but SVSU tied the game on a Mason McKenzie-to-Zarek Zelinski touchdown pass with 1:55 left. FSU missed a 39-yard field goal at the buzzer and couldn’t seal the deal until Taariik Brett’s 12-yard touchdown run in the second OT. If not for the Mendoza-to-Cooper touchdown, this would have easily been the No. 1 game of the week.
Meanwhile, after coming back from 21 points down to beat a top-10 Western Colorado team last week, CSU-Pueblo spotted rival Colorado Mines a 28-6 lead late in the first half, then slowly clawed all the way back. Roman Fuller found Marcellus Honeycutt Jr. for a tying 32-yard touchdown with 56 seconds left, then hit Reggie Retzlaff for the go-ahead score in OT. Peyton Shaw then sealed the ThunderWolves’ win with an interception.
4. Delaware 25, Louisiana Tech 24. The Blue Hens led 16-10 with under four minutes remaining, but Louisiana Tech scored twice in 46 seconds, first on a short TD run, then on a Jacob Fields pick-six, to take a 24-16 lead. Delaware’s Nick Minicucci rebounded with a TD pass to Elijah Sessoms with 34 seconds left, then the Blue Hens recovered an onside kick and set Nate Reed up for a game-winning 51-yard field goal.
1:16
Louisiana Tech Bulldogs vs. Delaware Blue Hens: Full Highlights
Louisiana Tech Bulldogs vs. Delaware Blue Hens: Full Highlights
5. No. 9 Oregon 18, No. 20 Iowa 16. Iowa proved its top-20 bona fides, Dante Moore and Oregon proved their playoff chops and Atticus Sappington nailed a huge field goal. Just a great game in November Iowa weather.
SAPPINGTON CONNECTS FOR THE DUCKS! pic.twitter.com/8QZdcfVMhW
— CBS Sports College Football 🏈 (@CBSSportsCFB) November 8, 2025
6. No. 16 Vanderbilt 45, Auburn 38 (OT). Indiana’s win probability chart was a classic of one genre (blow it, and then save yourself). Vandy’s was a classic in another (rally, then nearly fall apart multiple times).
7 and 8. FCS: No. 2 Montana 29, Eastern Washington 24; No. 1 North Dakota State 15, No. 15 North Dakota 10. Top-ranked teams struggled in FCS as well. NDSU, barely challenged all year, trailed its in-state rival 10-9 heading into the fourth quarter. The Bison finally took their first lead on Cole Payton‘s 8-yard touchdown with 2:22 remaining, but UND drove inside the NDSU 30 in the closing seconds before Anthony Chideme-Alfaro made a lunging interception to seal the win.
0:31
Picked! Anthony Chideme-Alfaro hauls in the interception
Picked! Anthony Chideme-Alfaro hauls in the interception
Of course, we’ve seen game-sealing picks before. Have you ever seen a game-sealing fumbled spike?
0:23
Eastern Washington loses on fumbled spike attempt
Jake Schakel fumbles the spike attempt, and the Grizzlies’ defense recovers it.
Unbeaten Montana took a 29-14 lead early in the third quarter but shifted into cruise control too early, allowing 4-6 EWU to score twice, recover a late onside kick — it was a great week for successful onside kicks, by the way — and drive inside the 10 with eight seconds remaining. But Jake Schakel, who shined in his first career start, let the ball slip out of his hands on a spike, and the Griz survived.
9. UConn 37, Duke 34. There were 12 scores in this game; 10 gave a team the lead, including all six in the second half. Skyler Bell‘s 19-yard touchdown catch gave UConn the advantage with 1:58 remaining, but the game wasn’t iced until Trent Jones II recovered a sack-and-strip of Darian Mensah with 18 seconds left.
10. Sam Houston 21, Oregon State 17. Oregon State has suffered some utterly snake-bitten losses this season, but this one takes the cake. The Beavers led 17-0 midway through the second quarter, but thanks to an interception (which set up a 35-yard touchdown pass), a kick return touchdown to open the second half and a blocked punt return score with 8:29 remaining, SHSU somehow came back to win its first game of the season despite a yardage disadvantage of 474-157. Shocking stuff. And you know what? Good. I ache for Beaver fans this year, but fielding even a bad team is so involved and so difficult, and every team deserves to celebrate at least one win. Now we just need to get 0-9 UMass off the schneid at some point in the next three weeks.
Honorable mention:
• Division II: Chadron State 27, No. 11 Western Colorado 24 (OT).
• FCS: No. 10 Mercer 49, No. 24 Western Carolina 47.
• FCS: Mercyhurst 16, Saint Francis 15.
• Missouri State 21, Liberty 17.
• Ohio 24, Miami (Ohio) 20 (Tuesday).
• Division II: Ouachita Baptist 42, SW Oklahoma State 38.
• Tulane 38, Memphis 32 (Friday).
• FCS: William & Mary 30, Campbell 27 (OT).
• Wisconsin 13, No. 23 Washington 10.
• Division III: No. 14 Wisconsin-Platteville 24, Wisconsin-Stout 23.
One last special shout-out: Army’s 14-13 win over Temple didn’t quite make the list, but Army’s last drive — an epic, 18-play, 9:53 clock killer — deserved to.
The midweek playlist
Ohio at Western Michigan (Tuesday, 8 p.m., ESPN2). One week into our midweek MACtion slate, the MAC title race is as blurry as ever. Ohio’s win over Miami gave the Bobcats the slightest of edges, but it could disappear this week. Current MAC title odds, per SP+: Ohio 22.2%, Toledo 20.2%, Western Michigan 20.1%, Miami 19.2%, Buffalo 16.7%. What a race! The winner of this one should inch ahead in the odds.
Sports
Predicting matchups for the CFP and every bowl game after Week 11’s thrillers
Published
13 hours agoon
November 9, 2025By
admin

-
Kyle Bonagura
Close
Kyle Bonagura
ESPN Staff Writer
- Covers college football.
- Joined ESPN in 2014.
- Attended Washington State University.
-
Mark Schlabach
Close
Mark Schlabach
ESPN Senior Writer
- Senior college football writer
- Author of seven books on college football
- Graduate of the University of Georgia
Nov 9, 2025, 12:45 PM ET
The Big Ten provided the biggest thrills in Week 11, with Indiana and Oregon both narrowly fending off upsets in dramatic fashion.
But Texas Tech delivered the biggest win of the weekend in terms of College Football Playoff implications, handing BYU its first loss of the season and securing its standing as the team to beat in the Big 12.
As with last season’s inaugural 12-team CFP, the five highest-ranked conference champions, plus the next seven highest-ranked teams, will make the field. Unlike last year, the four highest-ranked teams (not necessarily conference champions) will be awarded first-round byes. The other eight teams will meet in first-round games at the campus sites of seeds Nos. 5 through 8.
From there, the quarterfinals and semifinals will be played in what had been the New Year’s Six bowls, with the national championship game scheduled for Jan. 19 at Miami’s Hard Rock Stadium.
All of that is just the tip of the iceberg, though. Apart from the playoff is the 35-game slate of bowl games, beginning with the Cricket Celebration Bowl on Dec. 13.
We’re here for all of it.
ESPN bowl gurus Kyle Bonagura and Mark Schlabach are projecting every postseason matchup, including their breakdowns of how the playoff will play out, and we’ll be back every week of the season until the actual matchups are set.
Jump to a section:
Playoff picks | Quarterfinals
Semis, title game | Bowl season

College Football Playoff
First-round games (at campus sites)
Friday, Dec. 19
8 p.m., ABC, ESPN
Saturday, Dec. 20
Noon, ABC, ESPN
3:30 p.m., TNT
7:30 p.m., TNT
Bonagura: No. 12 North Texas at No. 5 Georgia
Schlabach: No. 12 Tulane at No. 5 Georgia
Bonagura: No. 11 Georgia Tech at No. 6 Texas Tech
Schlabach: No. 11 Pittsburgh at No. 6 Ole Miss
Bonagura: No. 10 BYU at No. 7 Oregon
Schlabach: No. 10 BYU at No. 7 Texas Tech
Bonagura: No. 9 Notre Dame at No. 8 Ole Miss
Schlabach: No. 9 Notre Dame at No. 8 Oregon
First-round breakdown
Bonagura: The most meaningful result of the weekend was Texas Tech’s convincing win against BYU that reestablished the Red Raiders as the favorite in the Big 12 and highlighted the Cougars’ offensive limitations. If BYU wins out — facing TCU, Cincinnati and UCF — to finish 11-1 and loses again to Texas Tech in the conference title game, it would put the Cougars in an interesting position for at-large consideration, potentially pitting them against a fifth SEC team for the final playoff spot.
When the committee debuted its rankings, Memphis was the highest-ranked Group of 5 team but promptly lost to Tulane, which dropped the Tigers to sixth place in the American Conference (there are five one-loss teams). I have North Texas in the playoff spot again this week, but there really isn’t an obvious favorite.
The Sun Belt’s James Madison (8-1) has won seven straight and could benefit from the American chaos, while San Diego State’s chances took a huge hit late Saturday night in Hawai’i, where the Aztecs lost 38-6.
Schlabach: I’ll be honest: I didn’t know what to do with the ACC or the Group of 5 this week after Virginia and Louisville both fell, and Memphis lost to Tulane in the American Conference.
The ACC is an absolute mess with five teams — Georgia Tech, Virginia, Pittsburgh, SMU and Duke — currently having only one loss in conference play. I went with the red-hot Panthers for now, but they’ve got the most difficult road left with a nonconference home game against Notre Dame on Saturday, followed by ACC games at Georgia Tech and home against Miami. Pitt has won five games in a row and is scoring a ton of points, but I’m not sure it can survive that grueling stretch.
I’d loved what Georgia Tech was doing this season, although its 48-36 loss at NC State two weeks ago exposed some serious problems on defense. The Yellow Jackets play at Boston College on Saturday, then host Pittsburgh and play rival Georgia at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta.
Duke, even at 5-4 overall, might have the best path if it can knock off Virginia at home Saturday. The Blue Devils suffered their third nonconference loss this week, falling to UConn 37-34 on the road. After hosting the Cavaliers, they’ll play at North Carolina and against Wake Forest at home.
I went with Tulane as my fifth conference champion, although I seriously considered South Florida, North Texas and James Madison as well.
CFP quarterfinals
Wednesday, Dec. 31
CFP Quarterfinal at the Goodyear Cotton Bowl Classic
AT&T Stadium (Arlington, Texas)
7:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: No. 7 Oregon vs. No. 2 Indiana
Schlabach: No. 5 Georgia vs. No. 4 Alabama
Thursday, Jan. 1
CFP Quarterfinal at the Capital One Orange Bowl
Hard Rock Stadium (Miami Gardens, Florida)
Noon, ESPN
Bonagura: No. 5 Georgia vs. No. 4 Alabama
Schlabach: No. 6 Ole Miss vs. No. 3 Indiana
CFP Quarterfinal at the Rose Bowl Game presented by Prudential
Rose Bowl (Pasadena, California)
4 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: No. 8 Ole Miss vs. No. 1 Ohio State
Schlabach: No. 9 Notre Dame vs. No. 1 Ohio State
CFP Quarterfinal at the Allstate Sugar Bowl
Caesars Superdome (New Orleans)
8 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: No. 6 Texas Tech vs. No. 3 Texas A&M
Schlabach: No. 7 Texas Tech vs. No. 2 Texas A&M
Quarterfinals breakdown
Bonagura: Oregon and Indiana both turned in iconic last-minute drives to win Saturday, keeping both on track. The win was particularly important for Oregon, which doesn’t have the same margin of error as the Hoosiers. At 8-1, the Ducks should be safely in the playoff with two wins in their final three games with Minnesota, USC and Washington left to play. Indiana is ranked No. 2 by the committee, but the most likely scenario — with what’s left to come — is that the Big Ten champion will get the No. 1 seed, and the SEC champion will be seeded second.
It goes against the spirit of the rankings, but I think there is a way to take conference affiliation into account come playoff time. Purely from an entertainment standpoint, I don’t like that these hypothetical quarterfinals arrange rematches with Alabama-Georgia and Indiana-Oregon. It comes with the territory to a certain degree, but it would be much more interesting if conference matchups were avoided to the extent it wouldn’t impact the integrity of the format.
Schlabach: I dinged Indiana one spot in my seedings after it needed a miracle touchdown pass in the closing seconds to beat struggling Penn State 27-24 on the road Saturday. A win is a win, especially in November, but the Nittany Lions have lost six in a row.
I moved Texas A&M up one spot after it picked up another big road victory, winning 38-17 at Missouri. The Aggies won at Notre Dame and LSU earlier this season, and they might have to win once more at rival Texas on Nov. 28 to stay in the hunt for a first-round bye.
Georgia and Alabama would be an entertaining rematch in the Cotton Bowl, and I’m sure Rose Bowl officials would love to see the Fighting Irish and Buckeyes playing in Pasadena on New Year’s Day. There would also be plenty of Lone Star State bragging rights on the line if the Aggies and Red Raiders met up in the Sugar Bowl.
CFP semifinals, national championship game
Thursday, Jan. 8
CFP Semifinal at the Vrbo Fiesta Bowl
State Farm Stadium (Glendale, Arizona)
7:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: No. 4 Alabama vs. No. 1 Ohio State
Schlabach: No. 5 Georgia vs. No. 1 Ohio State
Friday, Jan. 9
CFP Semifinal at the Chick-fil-A Peach Bowl
Mercedes-Benz Stadium (Atlanta)
7:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: No. 3 Texas A&M vs. No. 2 Indiana
Schlabach: No. 3 Indiana vs. No. 2 Texas A&M
Monday, Jan. 19
CFP National Championship
Hard Rock Stadium (Miami Gardens, Florida)
7:45 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: No. 2 Indiana vs. No. 1 Ohio State
Schlabach: No. 2 Texas A&M vs. No. 1 Ohio State
National championship breakdown
Bonagura: Texas A&M looked the part against Missouri, Ohio State put Purdue to bed in the first half and Indiana survived, leaving three undefeated teams. But none of them have been so dominant that it would qualify as a major shock if they don’t march to the title game with ease. This is exactly why a playoff was needed in college football.
Schlabach: Ohio State continues to cruise, routing Purdue 34-10 on the road Saturday. I considered moving Texas A&M to No. 1 because the Buckeyes don’t have much meat on their résumé besides their 14-7 win against Texas in the opener.
Road wins at Washington and Illinois were nice, but the Huskies just lost at struggling Wisconsin, and the Illini have dropped three games. Ohio State still has the best defense in the FBS, and quarterback Julian Sayin is a Heisman Trophy front-runner. The Buckeyes shouldn’t be tested in their next two games against UCLA and Rutgers before closing the regular season at Michigan on Nov. 29.

Complete bowl season schedule
Saturday, Dec. 13
Cricket Celebration Bowl
Mercedes-Benz Stadium (Atlanta)
Noon, ABC
Bonagura: Jackson State vs. South Carolina State
Schlabach: Jackson State vs. Delaware State
LA Bowl
SoFi Stadium (Inglewood, California)
9 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Arizona vs. San Diego State
Schlabach: Washington vs. San Diego State
Tuesday, Dec. 16
IS4S Salute to Veterans Bowl
Cramton Bowl (Montgomery, Alabama)
9 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Louisiana Tech vs. East Carolina
Schlabach: Jacksonville State vs. Troy
Wednesday, Dec. 17
StaffDNA Cure Bowl
Camping World Stadium (Orlando, Florida)
5 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Buffalo vs. Jacksonville State
Schlabach: Buffalo vs. Old Dominion
68 Ventures Bowl
Hancock Whitney Stadium (Mobile, Alabama)
8:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Coastal Carolina vs. Western Michigan
Schlabach: Coastal Carolina vs. Central Michigan
Friday, Dec. 19
Myrtle Beach Bowl
Brooks Stadium (Conway, South Carolina)
Noon, ESPN
Bonagura: UConn vs. Troy
Schlabach: North Texas vs. James Madison
Union Home Mortgage Gasparilla Bowl
Raymond James Stadium (Tampa, Florida)
3:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: South Florida vs. Clemson
Schlabach: UConn vs. Utah State
Monday, Dec. 22
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl
Albertsons Stadium (Boise, Idaho)
2 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Toledo vs. UNLV
Schlabach: Ohio vs. UNLV
Tuesday, Dec. 23
Boca Raton Bowl
Flagler Credit Union Stadium (Boca Raton, Florida)
2 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Southern Miss vs. Florida International
Schlabach: Arkansas State vs. Miami (Ohio)
New Orleans Bowl
Caesars Superdome (New Orleans)
5:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Western Kentucky vs. Old Dominion
Schlabach: Kennesaw State vs. Southern Miss
Scooter’s Coffee Frisco Bowl
Ford Center at The Star (Frisco, Texas)
9 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: UTSA vs. Hawai’i
Schlabach: East Carolina vs. Louisiana Tech
Wednesday, Dec. 24
Sheraton Hawai’i Bowl
Clarence T.C. Ching Athletics Complex (Honolulu)
8 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Boise State vs. California
Schlabach: Hawai’i vs. Memphis
Friday, Dec. 26
GameAbove Sports Bowl
Ford Field (Detroit)
1 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Rutgers vs. Ohio
Schlabach: Rutgers vs. Western Michigan
Rate Bowl
Chase Field (Phoenix)
4:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Baylor vs. Northwestern
Schlabach: TCU vs. Northwestern
SERVPRO First Responder Bowl
Gerald J. Ford Stadium (Dallas)
8 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Temple vs. Utah State
Schlabach: Kansas vs. Boise State
Saturday, Dec. 27
Go Bowling Military Bowl
Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium (Annapolis, Maryland)
11 a.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Duke vs. Tulane
Schlabach: Wake Forest vs. Navy
Bad Boy Mowers Pinstripe Bowl
Yankee Stadium (Bronx, New York)
Noon, ABC
Bonagura: Pittsburgh vs. Minnesota
Schlabach: Louisville vs. Illinois
Wasabi Fenway Bowl
Fenway Park (Boston)
2:15 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: NC State vs. Army
Schlabach: NC State vs. South Florida
Pop-Tarts Bowl
Camping World Stadium (Orlando, Florida)
3:30 p.m., ABC
Bonagura: Miami vs. Houston
Schlabach: Georgia Tech vs. Houston
Snoop Dogg Arizona Bowl
Arizona Stadium (Tucson, Arizona)
4:30 p.m., CW Network
Bonagura: Miami (Ohio) vs. Fresno State
Schlabach: Toledo vs. Fresno State
Isleta New Mexico Bowl
University Stadium (Albuquerque, New Mexico)
5:45 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: New Mexico vs. Washington State
Schlabach: New Mexico vs. Akron
TaxSlayer Gator Bowl
EverBank Stadium (Jacksonville, Florida)
7:30 p.m. ABC
Bonagura: Virginia vs. LSU
Schlabach: Virginia vs. Vanderbilt
Kinder’s Texas Bowl
NRG Stadium (Houston)
9:15 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: TCU vs. Oklahoma
Schlabach: Iowa State vs. Oklahoma
Monday, Dec. 29
JLab Birmingham Bowl
Protective Stadium (Birmingham, Alabama)
2 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Memphis vs. James Madison
Schlabach: Clemson vs. UTSA
Tuesday, Dec. 30
Radiance Technologies Independence Bowl
Independence Stadium (Shreveport, Louisiana)
2 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Kansas vs. Kennesaw State
Schlabach: Baylor vs. Western Kentucky
Music City Bowl
Nissan Stadium (Nashville, Tennessee)
5:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Nebraska vs. Missouri
Schlabach: Minnesota vs. LSU
Valero Alamo Bowl
Alamodome (San Antonio)
9 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Cincinnati vs. USC
Schlabach: Cincinnati vs. USC
Wednesday, Dec. 31
ReliaQuest Bowl
Raymond James Stadium (Tampa, Florida)
Noon, ESPN
Bonagura: Illinois vs. Texas
Schlabach: Iowa vs. Tennessee
Tony the Tiger Sun Bowl
Sun Bowl Stadium (El Paso, Texas)
2 p.m., CBS
Bonagura: Wake Forest vs. Arizona State
Schlabach: Miami vs. California
Cheez-It Citrus Bowl
Camping World Stadium (Orlando, Florida)
3 p.m., ABC
Bonagura: Michigan vs. Vanderbilt
Schlabach: Michigan vs. Texas
SRS Distribution Las Vegas Bowl
Allegiant Stadium (Las Vegas)
3:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Iowa vs. Utah
Schlabach: Nebraska vs. Utah
Friday, Jan. 2
Lockheed Martin Armed Forces Bowl
Amon G. Carter Stadium (Fort Worth, Texas)
1 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Kansas State vs. Navy
Schlabach: Arizona vs. Army
AutoZone Liberty Bowl
Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium (Memphis, Tennessee)
4:30 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Iowa State vs. Kentucky
Schlabach: Kansas State vs. Kentucky
Duke’s Mayo Bowl
Bank of America Stadium (Charlotte, North Carolina)
8 p.m., ESPN
Bonagura: Louisville vs. Tennessee
Schlabach: Duke vs. Missouri
Holiday Bowl
Snapdragon Stadium (San Diego)
8 p.m., Fox
Bonagura: SMU vs. Washington
Schlabach: SMU vs. Arizona State
Trending
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 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
