Sources: Feds eye MLBPA venture over spending
-
Don Van Natta Jr.
Close
Don Van Natta Jr.
ESPN Senior Writer
- Host and co-executive producer of the new ESPN series, “Backstory”
- Member of three Pulitzer Prize-winning teams for national, explanatory and public service journalism
- Author of three books, including New York Times best-selling “First Off the Tee: Presidential Hackers, Duffers, and Cheaters from Taft to Bush”
- 24-year newspaper career at The New York Times and Miami Herald
Federal law officers are investigating a youth baseball company owned by the Major League Baseball Players Association that spent at least $3.9 million while holding few sparsely attended live events for kids, sources familiar with the inquiry told ESPN.
The Florida-based business, Players Way, has generated barely six figures in revenue since its founding in 2019. While the union said it has put $3.9 million into the company, two sources with knowledge of union finances and who have talked with investigators told ESPN that the amount is closer to $10 million.
The former officials said Players Way funds largely paid the six-figure annual salaries of its executives and consultants. They include a handful of former major leaguers, some of whom were simultaneously working other full-time jobs outside the union.
One of the former senior union officials described Players Way finances as a “black box.”
Players Way was cited in an anonymous whistleblower complaint last November that triggered an ongoing criminal investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Brooklyn, the same office that last week brought criminal indictments against two NBA coaches, a current player and nearly two dozen Mafia-connected figures.
The complaint accused MLBPA executive director Tony Clark of self-dealing, misuse of resources and abuse of power at the union. It also alleged nepotism in his dealings with Players Way, which he helped launch with lofty aspirations to transform youth baseball across America. At the time of the complaint, the MLBPA denied all the allegations as “entirely without merit.”
Clark, who has not been charged with any crime, and other union officials have dismissed the whistleblower allegations as “baseless.” He declined to be interviewed for this story. In a written statement to ESPN this week, Clark said he created Players Way “as an oasis for young athletes and families who too often get exploited in today’s billion-dollar ‘youth sports’ machinery.”
Union officials declined to say how Players Way spent millions of dollars. The union told ESPN it has three budgets — one for operations ($27.5 million this year); another for MLB Players Inc., its for-profit licensing firm ($7.1 million this year); and a third players-approved “discretionary” budget for Clark to spend as he sees fit.
The union declined to say how much cash was in the discretionary pot this year, whether Players Way was ever funded from discretionary funds or whether players specifically approved spending by the company.
“Any suggestion that Players Way has not been supported by our elected Player representatives and broader membership is patently false,” Clark said in his statement. “Players Way has been front and center at every annual meeting of the MLBPA Executive Board in recent memory, and our dialogue with Players regarding youth development continues throughout the calendar.”
Federal investigators declined to comment, citing the ongoing inquiry. Union revenues have grown significantly in recent years through the creation of OneTeam Partners, a group-licensing firm the MLBPA co-founded with the National Football League Players Association in 2019.
In May, ESPN reported that investigators from the Justice Department were looking into the unions’ financial dealings with OneTeam, which three years ago had a valuation of nearly $2 billion.
Sources interviewed by ESPN said the investigation widened this summer to include Players Way. Investigators also have asked witnesses about whistleblower allegations of excessive union spending on international and domestic trips for Clark and other senior union executives, the sources said.
One player leader, when asked about the Players Way expenditures, told ESPN, “It doesn’t matter how much we’ve made. Waste is waste.”
“And given the level of frustration we’ve had with [union leadership] about this sort of stuff, it’s going to come up,” the player said. “Whenever Players Way is mentioned, we all just nod along. But I don’t think any of us realized it cost as much as it did.”
ESPN interviewed nearly 30 current and former union officials, lawyers, players and people with knowledge of the federal inquiry, most of whom spoke only on the condition of anonymity.
Multiple former union officials said Players Way has operated without standard accounting practices and with no annual budgets circulated among senior finance officials.
An MLBPA official, in a written statement, acknowledged to ESPN that Players Way did not have its own budget but was operated as “part of the overall org budget.” “But the folks working on it were tracking and projecting expenses the way any department at the PA does,” the official said.
While public union filings show the MLBPA committed a total of only $83,550 to Players Way, nearly all the $3,891,249 the union said Players Way has spent came from Players Inc. Like Players Way, the finances of Players Inc. are not disclosed to the Department of Labor.
The union provided ESPN with an annual breakdown of money it says it spent on Players Way. In 2018, according to the MLBPA, Players Way spent $181,054, a figure that grew annually and peaked in 2024 at $1,127,656. This year, as of Oct. 6, the union said $647,058 has been spent on Players Way.
The sources familiar with the MLBPA’s financials, though, told ESPN the company received far more cash from Players Inc., including more than $2 million over one 18-month period to fund payroll and other activities. At several other times when Players Way needed to cover shortfalls, roughly $1 million of Players Inc. money was transferred to the company, the sources said.
The money spent, the former officials told ESPN, included $1.2 million from 2022 to 2024 provided by Fanatics Inc., an MLBPA licensing partner.
When the MLBPA struck a deal with Fanatics in 2021 for the exclusive license to produce baseball cards, the company agreed to pay the union $400,000 annually from 2022 to 2024 to support the union’s youth baseball initiatives, including Players Way, the sources told ESPN.
“We were and continue to be excited to invest with MLBPA in Players Way as part of our multibillion-dollar long-term partnership,” a Fanatics spokesperson said. “Youth baseball development is critical to the success of the sport, and we have complete confidence that the MLBPA will invest the funds in a way that creates long-term value for all parties involved.”
Both former finance officials said that they raised concerns about the Players Inc. transfers with senior leadership but that the transactions continued. One of the finance officials said Clark personally approved the transfers to Players Way, usually in six-figure chunks. “It was just money going out the door,” the source told ESPN.
Another former official called Players Way a “total waste of money.”
ON ITS WEBSITE, Players Way lists its company headquarters at 13506 Summerport Village Parkway, Suite 226, in Windermere, Florida, about 20 miles west of Orlando. It’s in a strip mall, flanked by a liquor store and a chain hair salon. But the “suite” is not a suite at all. It’s a mailbox at a UPS Store where an employee confirmed to ESPN that Box 226 is registered to Players Way LLC.
The MLBPA partnered with the United States Specialty Sports Association in 2018 to provide an alternative to existing youth baseball organizations that dominate the market. Players Way was officially founded a year later, with Clark saying he wanted to fix what many in baseball see as a broken youth baseball system. His son was involved in travel baseball at the time, and Clark said he believed the sport deserved better than the high costs, long weekends and lack of regard for young pitchers’ arms that existed.
“The goal — informed by players themselves — isn’t to become just another cog in the youth sports machinery, putting profits over players,” Clark said in his statement to ESPN. “It aims higher: to meet players where they are, teach the game the right way, and to foster lifelong lessons creating lifelong fans. Future generations deserve nothing less.”
Standing in a netted indoor practice facility, in front of pitching machines, tees and L-shaped pitching screens, Clark introduced Players Way publicly in June 2020 with a video posted on YouTube. A former official said Clark viewed the initiative as an essential part of his plan to tap retired major leaguers to shape the next generation of baseball players. “Players Way was something he always brought up,” the former official said. “It was very important to Tony. It was not anything anyone paid attention to in how it was operated.”
Inside the MLBPA, employees questioned the company’s purpose and apparent lack of a business plan despite Players Way having “a voracious appetite for cash that seemed to just waste money year after year,” a former employee said.
“We had no events, we had no activities, we are not publicizing, we are not partnering with other youth groups,” one former official said. “There was no clear goal.”
Former union officials interviewed by ESPN said that Players Way appeared to be a landing spot for Clark’s loyalists — and, said one, “Few players knew anything about it.”
The MLBPA’s relationship with USSSA faltered after summer 2023, when two former employees with USSSA filed a federal whistleblower lawsuit alleging that a top association official was running an illegal bookmaking operation. After severing from USSSA, the MLBPA rebooted its marketing effort for Players Way in 2024, including a new YouTube channel that, as of this week, had one subscriber. It features a video of former major league catcher Chris Iannetta that has been viewed about 200 times. The other two videos had a total of 28 views as of this week.
Iannetta is a former MLBPA executive subcommittee member who, along with former USSSA employees D.J. Wabick and Kevin Reynolds, is on the Players Way leadership team, according to union filings. In total, the union said, six employees and contractors work at Players Way.
According to the documents, the MLBPA paid Iannetta $156,000 and Reynolds $167,000 in 2024 as union consultants. Wabick, a former Triple-A outfielder, joined the MLBPA full time as its director of youth baseball and development in December 2024 but was paid $182,623 for his work last year.
While union salaries, including Clark’s $3.4 million in 2024, are made public through annual Labor Department filings, the financial dealings of Players Way and other for-profit companies under the MLB Players Inc. umbrella are opaque. In the complaint filed with the National Labor Relations Board last November, the union whistleblower alleged that one of Clark’s daughters was employed by Players Way, identified in the complaint as “an MLBPA-controlled entity.”
The daughter resigned in March 2024, after union employees critical of Clark raised her employment as an issue, multiple sources said. According to union documents, she worked for five months and was paid $13,300 by the union as a consultant to Players Way.
The complaint against Clark also alleged that he had “arranged for another daughter to be hired at another labor union using his influence.” That daughter has worked as membership services coordinator for the NFL Players Association since October 2022.
The whistleblower also alleged that Clark “improperly hired a family member as an MLBPA real estate agent and paid an unnecessary commission.”
Sources with knowledge of the ongoing federal probe said investigators have inquired about circumstances around the union’s securing of a satellite office in Scottsdale, Arizona, that Clark uses regularly and a new office space in midtown Manhattan.
After ESPN reported about the federal investigation in May, multiple empty offices in the New York office had OneTeam placards affixed.
BY ITS OWN accounting, the union spent more than $3 million on Players Way from its founding in 2019 until November 2024. During that time, the union said, the company held six baseball clinics for kids, four “mental skills webinars” and several “panel discussions,” including one attended by Clark. The events could cost up to $499 to attend for a two-day camp, according to the website.
A union official told ESPN the rollout of Players Way was intentionally slow “because to figure out our rightful position within the industry without fragmenting it and without driving up more costs takes time and thoughtfulness.” Six years later, the return on the investment into Players Way has little to show.
This year, Players Way has hosted a handful of sparsely attended events for teenagers. The events, a mix of camps, competitions, showcases for those aspiring to play in college and a tournament organized with Texas Rangers third baseman Josh Jung, have drawn fewer than 500 attendees in all, according to the company website.
Jung told ESPN that his event, a nine-team tournament last year, would return in 2026 and that he enjoyed the experience of working with Players Way. A union official said no further events supported by individual players are on the schedule, which, according to Players Way’s website, has seven events — with fewer than 25 kids signed up total — scheduled between now and March 21, 2026.
“I’m hoping we can expand it, and I’m hoping that we can get it out early enough,” Jung said. “You want to be able to put it on people’s radar early. And I think that sabotaged us a little bit this year. But also, they kept it pretty small just to make sure that they could run the event correctly.”
In recent months, as former union finance officials answered questions for investigators, MLBPA executives increased the Players Way slate of events and sent out promotional messages about the company’s future to player leaders.
During Labor Day weekend, Clark and Wabick, the leader of Players Way, met in Chicago and hosted a videoconference with other Players Way consultants to discuss strategy, the union told ESPN. On the same September day an ESPN reporter visited the Players Way UPS mailbox in Florida, MLBPA executives sent a lengthy slide deck to players leadership updating them on Players Way.
A former union finance official said he told federal investigators that total company revenues over five years “barely hit six figures.” The company has canceled nearly as many events as it has held. “Players Way was a bad investment,” the former official said. “They just kept throwing money at it.”
A former major league player who worked with Players Way said the executives in charge seemed to do little and were busy working other full-time jobs.
“It was unclear who was in charge, who was running it,” said the former player, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Someone needed to be a CEO, but the people in charge said, ‘I don’t have time.’ But they were all getting paid.”
Reach reporter Don Van Natta Jr. at don.vannatta@espn.com and Jeff Passan at jeffrey.passan@espn.com. ESPN researcher John Mastroberardino contributed to this report.
-
David Hale
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.
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
-
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