What’s left for the 2026 recruiting class: Coaching changes, flips to watch and more
More Videos
Published
1 month agoon
By
admin
In the latest update to the 2026 ESPN 300 prospect rankings, only eight members remain uncommitted entering the final month of the college football regular season. Class of 2026 recruits will have their first opportunity to sign with programs during the early signing period from Dec. 3-5. After that, unsigned prospects must wait until national signing day on Feb. 4, 2026.
In any given cycle, the final six weeks before the early signing period tends to produce plenty of drama. This fall, the introduction of revenue share contracts and an unprecedented coaching carousel have only doused the flames, laying the foundation of what could be an action-packed finish to the latest cycle across November/early December and, perhaps, even into early 2026.
With that in mind, here’s a table-setter for the final month-plus of the 2026 recruiting cycle:

How will the coaching carousel impact the 2026 cycle?
As of now, 11 head coaches have been fired across FBS football this fall with eight jobs open in Power 4 leagues. According to Front Office Sports, those 11 schools have committed more than $169 million combined in contract buyouts so far, including two of the largest buyouts in college football history that could be doled out at LSU and Penn State this month.
And still, as questions hover over the coaching situations at Auburn, Florida State, Michigan State and Wisconsin, to name just a few, the 2025 coaching carousel appears far from over.
“I think there’s going to be a lot of coaching attrition that still goes on,” one Big 12 general manager told ESPN. “It’s going to hit the cycle hard. This is going to be a crazy last month.”
Traditionally, an in-season coaching firing is the first salvo in a class collapse, dismantling years of work on the recruiting trail in a single decision. At Penn State, for instance, the Nittany Lions have lost 10 commits from a promising class since the school fired James Franklin on Oct. 12.
However, Florida has managed to avoid even a single decommitment in the wake of Billy Napier’s Oct. 19 departure. At LSU, sources expect a 12th-ranked Tigers recruiting class that includes 10 ESPN 300 pledges, including No. 1 overall Lamar Brown, to hold tight as well, at least for the time being.
Perhaps that’s program-specific; with LSU’s regional presence and the program’s dedication to recruiting the state of Louisiana, its prospects are often committed to more than just a coach. Maybe recruits at places like Florida and LSU are just waiting for the market to play out.
But industry sources point to other factors that could be keeping recruits committed despite this season’s rash of early-fall firings.
In a 2026 cycle that saw top teams fill their recruiting classes earlier than ever before, major programs — especially those with one eye on the January portal window — are short on roster spots. In the first run through college football’s revenue share era, many of those same programs have already allotted the majority of their Class of 2026 budgets, too, meaning prospects who decommit now might find a very different market for their signatures from earlier this year.
“They have to decide: Do I want to stay here and make what I’m making or do I want to jump?” an SEC personnel director said. “At the same time, they may not make that same money if they stay. What if the next guy comes in and says, ‘I don’t think you’re worth that much?'”
Does that mean there won’t be movement over the next month? Of course not. But industry sources expect recruits and programs to be more selective this fall than in year’s past.
“I think you’re going to see a lot of late flips in November,” one agent said. “They’re going to be targeted flips — guys decommitting knowing exactly where they’re going.”
Industry sources also surmise that the coaching carousel could return some juice to the increasingly antiquated February signing day. But the chaos of the coaching carousel could change things in the 2026 class. If high-profile hiring processes stretch into December, uncommitted prospects and those pledged to programs searching for a new coach might hang tight in early December, holding off for the relative certainty and stability of the February signing window.
“No matter what, it’s definitely not ideal,” said one Power 4 quarterback committed to a coach on the hot seat this fall. “It feels like things could change any given day.”
Flip watch
DT Lamar Brown, LSU, No. 1 in ESPN 300: Brown hails from nearby Erwinsville, Louisiana, goes to school on the LSU campus and has stressed the significance of playing at Tiger Stadium during his process. “It’s something not a lot of kids from Baton Rouge get to do, honestly,” he told ESPN in July. Still, LSU had to pull out all the stops during Brown’s June official visit to convince him to stay home over heavy interest from Miami, Texas and Texas A&M.
The Aggies in particular made a significant impression on Brown during his initial recruitment, and the program still considers him its No. 1 target in the 2026 class. For now, sources indicate that Brown’s feelings about LSU are unchanged upon Kelly’s exit. But upheaval with the Tigers could now provide an opening for rival programs to take another swing with Brown up ahead. LSU hasn’t signed a No. 1 commit since 2014.
S Bralan Womack, Auburn, No. 39 in ESPN 300: Womack, the No. 3 safety in 2026, has been the Tigers’ top-ranked pledge since he committed to Auburn over Florida, Ohio State and Texas A&M on Aug. 21. As long as Hugh Freeze remains in charge of the program, sources expect Womack to remain the cornerstone of the Tigers’ incoming class.
However, Freeze’s future is far from certain with Auburn sitting at 4-4 in his third season, and Womack has already publicly shared his frustrations on the program’s on-field performance. Where could Womack land if things change with the Tigers over the next month?
Womack took a surprise visit to LSU for the Tigers’ Week 9 loss to Texas A&M. Colorado emerged as another newcomer in his process with an offer on Oct. 21. It would be no surprise to see August finalists Ohio State and Texas A&M circle back if/when Womack is on the move.
CB Justice Fitzpatrick, Georgia, No. 45 in ESPN 300: The coveted cornerback from South Florida committed to the Bulldogs on June 3, then publicly announced that his recruitment was formally shut down seven days later. Still, at least two prominent programs have continued to pursue Fitzpatrick this fall: Miami and Ohio State.
ESPN’s No. 4 cornerback prospect has taken a pair of visits to see the Hurricanes play this fall, and Fitzpatrick’s family also holds a longstanding connection with Miami coach Mario Cristobal, who recruited Fitzpatrick’s older brother — eventual All-American and NFL All-Pro defender Minkah Fitzpatrick — to Alabama in 2015. Justice Fitzpatrick also has relationships with Ohio State first-year coordinator Matt Patricia and longtime secondary coach Tim Walton.
For now, Fitzpatrick’s Georgia pledge is firm.
OT Kevin Brown, Penn State, No. 79 in ESPN 300: One of the longest-tenured members of the Nittany Lions’ class, Brown has not formally pulled his commitment from Penn State. But following the school’s firing of coach James Franklin, sources tell ESPN that Brown and his family consider his recruitment to be open as the Nittany Lions search for their next coach.
Brown is Pennsylvania’s No. 2 overall recruit and wants to play college football within a five-hour radius of home in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. He’s set to visit West Virginia this week, where his father Tim Brown played under Rich Rodriguez in the early 2000s, and Brown is also expected to get to Ohio State sometime over the next month, perhaps as early as Saturday.
The Buckeyes and Mountaineers should be considered favorites if Brown ultimately signs elsewhere. But the right coaching hire at Penn State could be all it takes to keep him in the program.
OT Micah Smith, UCLA, No. 81 in ESPN 300: Smith landed as the highest-ranked pledge of the DeShaun Foster era when he committed to UCLA in June. Nearly five months later, Foster is gone and Smith remains the lone ESPN 300 commit in the Bruins’ 2026 class.
Since Foster’s September firing, Ohio State, Texas and South Carolina have emerged as the front-runners for Smith, who also visited Ole Miss in September. The Buckeyes should hold an edge as finalists in Smith’s initial process if he elects to go elsewhere.
Programs poised to rise
![]()
Indiana Hoosiers: With the Hoosiers’ ranked No. 2 nationally and coach Curt Cignetti working with a fresh contract extension, Indiana is looking to convert its on-field success into recruiting momentum between now and the early signing period. Specifically, Cignetti & Co. appear ready to pounce on the fallout of Penn State’s firing of Franklin.
Former Nittany Lions wide receiver commit Lavar Keys was on hand for the Hoosiers’ rout of UCLA in Week 9. Sources told ESPN that Indiana now stands as a front-runner alongside Maryland for the three-star pass catcher from Hyattsville, Maryland.
Longtime Penn State pledge Messiah Mickens is another former Franklin recruit who’s interested in the Hoosiers; the nation’s No. 14 running back prospect recently told ESPN that he plans to visit the program. Wide receiver Davion Brown (No. 109 overall) and safety Matt Sieg (No. 162) represent two more Nittany Lions pledges on Indiana’s radar as Cignetti searches for the final additions to a 2026 class that sits 31st in ESPN’s class rankings for the cycle.
Sources told ESPN that the Hoosiers are also targeting late-rising offensive line talent. The program hosted Washington State offensive tackle commit Beckett Schreiber this past Saturday.
![]()
Miami Hurricanes: Miami reaches November firmly in the playoff hunt and holding on to the nation’s 14th-ranked 2026 class. With the Hurricanes still pursuing several high-profile targets, could coach Mario Cristobal vault Miami to a second top-10 recruiting finish in three cycles?
As things stand, the Hurricanes do not have an ESPN 300 defensive lineman committed in the 2026 class. But Miami has continued its efforts with four-star Alabama pledge Nolan Wilson (No. 52 overall), who visited the Hurricanes twice in the first month of the regular season. Developments around LSU defensive tackle pledge Lamar Brown, ESPN’s No. 1 overall prospect in 2026, are worth monitoring with Miami, too. Cristobal and his staff had Brown seriously considering the Hurricanes before he committed to LSU in the summer, and sources expect Miami to check back in with Brown following LSU’s coaching move.
If Miami can’t swing a top 100 defensive tackle flip, three-star UNLV decommit Isaiah Broughton — who returned to Coral Gables last weekend — could be a more realistic option.
Sources continue to mention Syracuse wide receiver commit Calvin Russell (No. 32) and Georgia cornerback pledge Justice Fitzpatrick (No. 45) as significant flip candidates for Miami. Both are expected to be prominently linked with the Hurricanes up to the early signing period.
![]()
Michigan Wolverines: Coach Sherrone Moore and his staff closed stronger than almost any other program in the country in the 2025 cycle. And while the Wolverines’ finish in the 2026 class might not be quite as flashy, Michigan has holes to fill and a deep list of flip targets this fall.
Looking to make another addition or two on the offensive line, the Wolverines offered four-star Duke commit Sean Stover in late September. Michigan hosted ESPN’s No. 179 overall recruit on Oct 18 and is expected to maintain its efforts with Stover in November. Among the Wolverines’ other offensive line flip targets: three-star tackles Charlie Edgeworth (Louisville) and Tommy Fraumann (Miami, Ohio) and Virginia Tech guard pledge Adrian Hamilton.
Michigan’s search for a late-cycle linebacker is set to continue after former Michigan State commit Braylon Hodge picked Oregon over the Wolverines and Texas on Friday. Three-star Georgia pledge Nick Abrams, an early October visitor in Ann Arbor, remains a top target.
Michigan could also make noise atop the 2026 cornerback class ahead of the early singing period. Despite persistent work from the Wolverines, sources view Oregon commit Davon Benjamin (No. 61 overall) is viewed as a difficult flip target. Top 300 C.J. Bronaugh (Florida), Jay Timmons (Florida State) and Jamarion Vincent (Baylor) — all on Michigan’s radar — could present more attainable options. In the wake of Kelly’s departure at LSU, Michigan’s efforts with Tigers cornerback pledge Havon Finney Jr. (No. 69) will be worth keeping an eye on, too.
![]()
Ohio State Buckeyes: As the defending national champions charge toward another CFP berth, coach Ryan Day and Ohio State are still working to bolster the nation’s No. 9 recruiting class, circling late-cycle moves at running back, offensive tackle and in the secondary.
The Buckeyes continue to search for another 2026 running back to pair with four-star in-state commit Favour Akih (No. 169). Their lead target: four-star Wisconsin pledge Amari Latimer. The Badgers’ top-ranked commit in 2026, Latimer visited Ohio State on Oct. 4, then sported a Buckeyes arm sleeve during a game earlier this month. With uncertainty swirling around Wisconsin coach Luke Fickell, links between the cycle’s 20th-ranked running back and Ohio State are intensifying as the Buckeyes remain in touch with Penn State pledge Messiah Mickens (No. 141).
At offensive tackle, Ohio State hosted UCLA pledge Micah Smith (No. 81) and are expected to have Penn State commit Kevin Brown (No. 79) on campus in the near future, as well. After missing out in the summer, the Buckeyes could also get back in the mix for South Carolina pledge Darius Gray (No. 70). Relationships were key to his Gamecocks commitment in August, and sources told ESPN that the program’s decision to fire offensive line coach Lonnie Teasley on Oct. 12 could have cracked the door for a potential late-cycle flip.
Like Miami, the Buckeyes haven’t closed their pursuit of Georgia cornerback pledge Justice Fitzpatrick (No. 45). Other targets at the position include Florida pledge C.J. Bronaugh (No. 245) and Florida State commit Jay Timmons (No. 195), who is set to visit Ohio State in Week 10.
![]()
Texas A&M Aggies: At 8-0, coach Mike Elko and the Aggies are generating as much buzz as any program across the country right now. While sources suggest the program’s work in the 2026 class is mostly finished, Texas A&M is focused on a few remaining targets whose commitments could send its third-ranked recruiting class over the edge over the next month.
While Florida’s 2026 class has held on remarkably well since Billy Napier’s firing on Oct. 19, four-star defensive end Kevin Ford Jr. (No. 158) is considered one of the more flippable prospects currently committed to the Gators. The Aggies were contenders when Ford picked Florida in July. Ford has since visited Texas A&M twice this fall, and the in-state edge rusher could present another intriguing addition to a deep defensive line class. Lamar Brown would, of course, represent a seismic flip if the Aggies can pry him from LSU.
On offense, Texas A&M hasn’t yet pumped the brakes on four-star Houston wide receiver commit Jayden Warren (No. 237). Warren, a 6-foot-2 pass catcher from Iowa Colony, Texas, was on campus for the Aggies’ win over Florida on Oct. 11 and is expected to take another visit with the Aggies later this fall as a candidate to round out a talented Aggies wide receiver class.

Inside the new rankings
New five-star
![]()
Carter Meadows, DE
Michigan commit
New rank: No. 23 (was No. 88). Meadows’ elite length has always stood out, but he ascends to five-star status because he’s now growing into his rangy frame. While still lean, Meadows uses his length and strength to press blockers. He looks like a menacing edge rusher with good bend to get upfield, turn the corner and get after quarterbacks. Meadows has tons of upside with room for more physical growth. He’s also a timely addition: Michigan’s best pass rusher, Derrick Moore, is a senior. — Craig Haubert
New No. 1 quarterback
![]()
Houston commit
New rank: No. 4 (was No. 17). With Faizon Brandon and Dia Bell injured, Henderson is now the top QB following a very productive start to his senior season. Henderson would’ve had an argument even if Brandon and Bell remained healthy because his execution has been exceptional. Through five high school games, Henderson was 132-of-168 (78.6%) for 2,044 yards, 25 touchdowns and three interceptions, plus four more rushing scores. Henderson is a terrific reminder that tape and on-field production trump camp or combine performances. Houston coach Willie Fritz has proved he can get plenty out of current quarterback Conner Weigman’s running ability, and Henderson is much more dynamic in that department. — Tom Luginbill
Reclass to five-star
![]()
LaDamion Guyton, OLB
Texas Tech commit
New rank: No. 13 (was in Class of 2027). Texas Tech is flexing its pass-rushing muscles this season with a top-10 national ranking in team sacks. The Red Raiders’ primary pass rusher, transfer David Bailey, has led the charge, but they already have a promising successor lined up in 2026. A Georgia native, Guyton spurned several southeastern programs to commit to Tech, then reclassified from the 2027 to 2026 class. While he won’t bring Bailey’s experience, Guyton shows burst, power, bend, violent hands and a relentless motor. Those traits could make him the next disruptive force off the edge in Lubbock. — Haubert
Rising prospects and how they fit
![]()
Khary Wilder, DE
Ohio State commit
New rank: No. 73 (was No. 272). Once the ball is snapped, Wilder wreaks havoc. His production has leveled up as a senior, and he’s closing in on 20 tackles for loss and double-digit snacks. Wilder has a good get-off, active hands and maintains his pad level. He’s also adept at finding the ball and reacting. Those traits combined with a high motor gives Ohio State a valuable, versatile piece to deploy in the trenches. He could play the three- or five-technique for defensive line coach Larry Johnson and reminds us of former Buckeye Dre’Mont Jones. — Haubert
![]()
Kelvin Obot, OT
Utah commit
New rank: No. 74 (was No. 292). It’s hard to argue with Utah’s results. Caleb Lomu and Spencer Fano are both ranked signees who developed into multiyear starters and project as first-round NFL picks. Obot could be the next in line at offensive tackle. He’s a big-bodied prospect who still needs to fill out his frame but offers excellent raw tools, highlighted by impressive body quickness and flexibility. — Haubert
![]()
Gabe Hill, DE
Indiana commit
New rank: No. 191 (was No. 263). Of the top five teams in the latest Associated Press Top 25, four signed top-10 recruiting classes in 2025. Indiana is the outlier. Cignetti continues to prove he can identify and maximize talent. Four of IU’s five highest-rated commits are defensive linemen, including Hill, who has added good weight while maintaining mobility and pad level. He’s an active, disruptive presence who fits the profile of the linemen driving Indiana’s defensive success. Only this time, Hill arrives with a better résumé and well-earned national ranking. — Haubert
![]()
Alabama commit
New rank: No. 16 (was No. 23). The 212-pound safety/nickel linebacker hybrid posted a blazing 4.47 laser-timed 40-yard dash, and his speed shows on tape, where he has been everywhere in coverage. His elite zone instincts lead to plenty of pass breakups and interceptions. When lined up in the box, Edwards’ ability as a speed rusher creates havoc in opposing teams’ backfields. Even at his size, he routinely lines up over slot receivers and holds his own. He reminds us of a safety version of Minkah Fitzpatrick who can similarly fit well near the box and also match up in coverage, meaning Edwards should rarely leave the field. This is the kind of player defensive coordinator Kane Wommack loves to turn loose. — Luginbill
![]()
Jalen Lott, ATH
Oregon commit
New rank: No. 55 (was No. 111). Lott rises after a terrific offensive season while still contributing on defense. He has hauled in 49 receptions for 16 touchdowns this fall and is on pace to surpass 1,000 receiving yards by season’s end. His size will ultimately determine whether he projects on defense at the next level, but he profiles as an ideal slot receiver and return man. Oregon loves space players, so don’t be surprised to see the Ducks develop Lott as a utility weapon. — Luginbill
You may like
Sports
Back in NHL, Hart debuts for Vegas after acquittal
Published
3 hours agoon
December 3, 2025By
admin
-
Associated Press
Dec 2, 2025, 10:41 PM ET
LAS VEGAS — Goalie Carter Hart, one of five 2018 Canada world junior hockey players acquitted of sexual assault in July, made his first NHL appearance in nearly two years Tuesday night and received an enthusiastic reaction from Golden Knights fans during pregame introductions.
Hart certainly received the loudest response before Vegas’ home game against Chicago, and if there were any boos, they were difficult to hear.
Some fans also held signs supportive of Hart.
Hart was the first of those five players to agree to an NHL contract. The league ruled those players were eligible to sign deals beginning Oct. 15 and to play starting Dec. 1. Hart signed a two-year, $4 million contract and has been working with the club’s American Hockey League affiliate in Henderson, Nevada.
After he agreed to sign, Hart read a statement to reporters that, in part, said he wanted “to show the community my true character and who I am and what I’m about.”
Hart was asked Monday what steps he has taken to fulfill that pledge.
“There’s been a few things we’ve talked about,” Hart said. “We did a thing there in Henderson helping out the homeless. There’s some things we’ve talked about throughout the season. Whatever I can do to help, I’m happy to help.”
Giving Hart his first start at home could help ease him into what could be a rocky reception around the league. After facing the Blackhawks, Vegas goes on a five-game trip against Eastern Conference teams, including a Dec. 11 stop at Hart’s former Philadelphia team.
He worked in Henderson on getting back into NHL game shape. Hart appeared in three games and went 1-2.
“I’ve worked my [butt] off to get back to this point,” Hart said. “For me, the key is preparation and I’ve done everything I can to be prepared.”
It was a tough start against the Blackhawks. Less than a minute after the Golden Knights scored, Chicago’s Oliver Moore found the back of the net against Hart on the Blackhawks’ second shot on goal.
He gave up a second-period goal when he left the crease to clear the puck. His pass instead went directly to Tyler Bertuzzi, who scored over Hart and defenseman Noah Hanifin.
But Hart made 15 saves through the first two periods and the score was 2-2 entering intermission.
The 27-year-old last played in an NHL game Jan. 20, 2024, for Philadelphia. Hart played six seasons for the Flyers, going 96-93-29 with a .906 save percentage and 2.94 goals-against average.
“The purpose of Henderson was to get him back into live reps,” Golden Knights coach Bruce Cassidy said. “He can practice with us with NHL shooters, but traffic around the net, screens, all that stuff is sometimes hard to replicate, especially when you haven’t played that often. We’re less worried about the results, more getting reps, getting used to that stuff.”
The Golden Knights could use the help in net, especially with starting goalie Adin Hill on injured reserve because of a lower-body injury and his return possibly weeks away. Akira Schmid has received the majority of the work with Hill out and is 9-2-4 with a .896 save percentage and 2.51 GAA.
Vegas had lost four straight games before defeating San Jose 4-3 on Saturday night.
Cassidy said the upcoming schedule works in the Golden Knights’ favor in terms of not overloading the goalies.
“Akira’s played well, too, so we have to keep mindful he has to stay sharp,” Cassidy said. “So I’m sure you’ll see a lot of both goalies, but Carter’s waited a long time to play, so he’s definitely going to get his share of starts.”
Sports
Week 15 Anger Index: The case for Texas and monthlong gripes for Miami, BYU
Published
5 hours agoon
December 3, 2025By
admin

-

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

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

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

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

Bracket
Based on the committee’s fifth ranking, the seeding would be:
First-round byes
No. 1 Ohio State (Big Ten champ)
No. 2 Indiana
No. 3 Georgia (SEC champ)
No. 4 Texas Tech (Big 12 champ)
First-round games
On campus, Dec. 19 and 20
No. 12 Tulane (American champ) at No. 5 Oregon
No. 11 Virginia (ACC champ) at No. 6 Ole Miss
No. 10 Notre Dame at No. 7 Texas A&M
No. 9 Alabama at No. 8 Oklahoma
Quarterfinal games
At the Goodyear Cotton Bowl, Capital One Orange Bowl, Rose Bowl Presented by Prudential and Allstate Sugar Bowl on Dec. 31 and Jan. 1.
No. 12 Tulane/No. 5 Oregon winner vs. No. 4 Texas Tech
No. 11 Virginia/No. 6 Ole Miss winner vs. No. 3 Georgia
No. 10 Notre Dame/No. 7 Texas A&M winner vs. No. 2 Indiana
No. 9 Alabama/No. 8 Oklahoma winner vs. No. 1 Ohio State
Trending
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024
