How Jessica Campbell’s hockey journey led to her history-making debut with the Kraken
More Videos
Published
1 year agoon
By
admin
-

Ryan S. Clark, NHL reporterOct 30, 2024, 07:00 AM ET
Close- Ryan S. Clark is an NHL reporter for ESPN.
SEATTLE — Growing up as a small-town kid with big dreams of reaching the NHL is a story that’s been told for more than a century — about men.
Most girls never had that dream, because no woman had ever reached those heights. Part of it has to do with the fact there hasn’t been a long history. Canada and the United States created women’s national teams in 1987, while the first women’s world championships was in 1990. The Olympics eventually added a women’s tournament in 1998. There was the American Women’s College Hockey Alliance that started in 1997 that saw women’s collegiate teams compete for a national title, but the NCAA didn’t hold its first tournament until 2001.
Jessica Campbell was born in 1992 — the same year Manon Rheaume made history playing for the Tampa Bay Lightning in an exhibition game.
“I imagined and dreamed of playing in the NHL because there was no professional women’s league as a young girl and I thought I was going to play in the NHL because I was playing with the boys,” Campbell said. “Little did I know what wasn’t possible. But I believed it was possible.”
More than three months have passed since the Seattle Kraken hired Campbell as an assistant coach, and she became the first woman in NHL history to be behind the bench on opening night, Oct. 8. The move came two years after the Kraken’s AHL affiliate, the Coachella Valley Firebirds, hired Campbell as an assistant coach. She was also the first woman behind the bench in that league’s history.
Her success has fueled her ascension. Under former Buffalo Sabres and Pittsburgh Penguins coach Dan Bylsma, Campbell helped the Firebirds reach consecutive Calder Cup finals in their first two seasons of existence, coaching the forwards and running the power play. The Firebirds were third in goals in Campbell’s first season, and led the league in 2023-24.
This was a contrast to what the Kraken had experienced. A playoff appearance in their second season was sandwiched between two campaigns in which a lack of goals became a frequent topic of conversation: The team finished in the bottom four in goals per game in both.
It led to Kraken general manager Ron Francis firing head coach Dave Hakstol and assistant Paul McFarland. The Kraken front office saw what Bylsma and his staff were doing in the AHL and believed they could translate that success and the culture that came with it at the NHL level.
The Kraken’s front office already knew Campbell’s philosophies resonated with veterans and rookies alike. They now believe her teachings can help their roster overcome those offensive deficiencies — and get back into the postseason mix.
Thinking about everything on her plate has the potential to be overwhelming. These are the moments when Campbell stares at a specific tattoo on her right hand.
Finely etched in dark blue ink, the cursive script tattoo that’s 2 inches in length on Campbell’s right hand is subtle while simultaneously commanding attention.
The word is ytimessä. It’s Finnish in origin. When translated into English, it means to be at the heart of something, and Campbell interprets it as achieving what she calls “a flow state,” with the reminder that reaching that destination comes with stops along the way.
Campbell looks at this tattoo daily. It allows her to remember where she’s been, how she’s arrived and where she wants to be in the future.
“It keeps me grounded in who I want to be as a coach, and how I want to show up every day,” Campbell said.
From her beginnings in coaching, to multiple stops in Europe, and back to North America to become the first of what she hopes is more NHL coaches who are women.
There is no precedent for Campbell, because she herself is the precedent.
“When you look at the history of our game and the number of years the NHL has been around, this is awesome,” said Sheldon Kennedy, who worked with Campbell and played eight seasons in the NHL. “I’m not worried about the X’s and the O’s and the game. To me, it’s more about the principle and that she didn’t fluke her way in there. She worked her butt off to get in there. She committed and did what she needed to do, and that’s what’s exciting for me.”
MANY WHO HAVE WORKED with Campbell will immediately and frequently reference how much she cares. She cares about her players, the team and about doing right by everyone.
That’s what stood out to three-time Stanley Cup champion Brent Seabrook.
“I’ve had a lot of great coaches that cared,” said Seabrook, who played his entire 15-year career with the Chicago Blackhawks. “They cared about me as a person and us as a team. I think Jess has those qualities. She cares about her players getting better on an individual basis and her team getting better on a group basis.”
Campbell is all about learning. It’s why she learned from the coaches who supported her and the ones who didn’t throughout her time playing at Cornell, the now-defunct Calgary Inferno, the Canadian women’s national team and the Malmö Redhawks in Sweden.
As a player, Campbell concentrated on improving her weaknesses rather than her strengths. She’d heard how focusing on weaknesses was bizarre from a development standpoint. But she saw it differently in that chipping away those trouble areas would eventually make her an even more complete player.
Toward the end of her career, she worked with a sports psychologist who asked Campbell what she does best, who she is at her best and what makes her special as a player.
Skating was her answer, while admitting that she spent her offseasons working on every aspect of her game but her skating.
“He said, ‘Let me be the first to tell you that if you forget about what makes you special, you’ll get away from being who you are,'” Campbell said. “In this game and in this industry there’s so many special players and talented players, the way you separate yourself is by being more of who you are and expanding of who you are and bringing that to a team.
“That was such a big moment for me and as a coach, I think about that all the time.”
That’s why Campbell asks every player what they do best, who they are at their best and what makes them special, while finding ways to elevate different aspects of their game to be the most complete player possible.
MOVING TO KELOWNA in 2017, she was an assistant coach at what is now known as RINK Academy while also starting her own business as a power skating and skill development coach. Her goal was to eventually have NHL clients.
Campbell began building her client base starting with Columbus Blue Jackets defenseman Damon Severson. They grew up together in Melville, Saskatchewan, a town of around 5,000 people.
Severson, like many active and retired NHL players, has a place in the Okanagan Valley where Campbell was coaching. As buildings began to gradually reopen during the COVID pandemic, Severson reached out to Campbell to see if she could train him.
Campbell agreed — only for Severson to ask if he could bring a friend. That friend was Los Angeles Kings defenseman Joel Edmundson.
Pretty soon, Campbell went from working with just Edmundson and Severson to a group of 20 NHL players who were looking to regain their sharpness before entering either the Edmonton or Toronto bubbles of the 2020 playoffs. The list included Mathew Barzal, Dante Fabbro, Tyson Jost, Brayden and Luke Schenn as well as Edmundson, Severson and Seabrook.
“Luke said to me I think at the very first skate, ‘Do you come up with your own drills? I’ve never gotten these drills and these are awesome,'” Campbell recalled. “I was like, ‘Yeah, they’re all my own drills,’ and I remember the look on his face when he first said that to me. It gave me so much confidence because he was into what I was putting out there.”
Those skates are what led to Seabrook asking Campbell if they could have private sessions as he was recovering from surgeries on both hips and a right shoulder procedure.
“She never let us get away with anything,” Seabrook said. “Even when she was skating with the guys, she was harping on the details and the little things. As a player, I’m always really big into those details. … She was tough on me and the big thing was knee bend and getting down. That is something I had to work on at the gym to get stronger after surgery and then incorporate that on the ice with skating.”
THE NEXT STEP in her ascension didn’t go as smoothly.
Campbell had lived in Kelowna for a few years before she went to Europe and played one last season for Malmö in 2019-20 following a two-year hiatus.
After she retired from playing, becoming a skating and skills coach looked like the next step for Campbell. She had a successful collegiate and pro career that led to her playing for Canada internationally. Not only did she coach at the academy level, but had started a business that allowed her to run skates with NHL players. Plus, her time playing in Europe meant she built relationships with coaches on another continent.
“So I actually asked a few people in North America, ‘Do you think I should pursue [trying to coach] in Sweden?'” Campbell recalled. “I basically got told, ‘Don’t do that. Don’t quit your day job to move. There are many skating coaches and phenomenal skills coaches that are in Sweden specifically. That’s where some of the best coaches come from.’
“I’m like, ‘OK, so you’re telling me you know I’m going to fail?'”
Campbell said what she was told and how she heard it felt like two separate things. It didn’t necessarily make her want to prove people wrong, as much as she wanted to prove to herself that she could become a coach in Europe.
Campbell marketed herself to multiple teams. What set her apart from other coaches was the fact she could bring teachings from North America. There were coaches who heard her elevator pitch and liked what she presented.
“They said, ‘I think what you’re doing is awesome. Your material looks great,'” Campbell said. “These were agents, these were other skills coaches and great people. They said, ‘I hate to say this, but our team would never hire a female. It wouldn’t happen.’ I heard that along the way.
“I guess I just chose to not listen to it. I knew the only way I would get to this level is to do it on my own.”
Campbell’s mission was to focus on the testimonials she received from players rather than dialogue about why she wouldn’t receive an opportunity.
2:53
Jessica Campbell explains her path to making NHL history
Jessica Campbell joins “SportsCenter” to discuss her journey to becoming the first woman assistant coach in the NHL.
Her first job came in 2020-21 when her old club, Malmö, hired her as a skills coach for the men’s team. A year later, she joined the Nürnberg Ice Tigers in Germany.
She initially joined the Ice Tigers as a skills coach, but the team was struggling with its special teams and wanted another perspective. Her suggestions worked, and it led to the Ice Tigers hiring Campbell as an assistant coach for the remainder of the season. Her work played a part in the Ice Tigers reaching the qualifying round of the playoffs.
“It was my ‘aha!’ moment as a coach where I saw what I was doing and the way I was communicating as a fit,” Campbell said. “The guys were going out and capable of making the changes and the tweaks that I was asking them to do.”
Her work with the Ice Tigers also opened a door for Campbell to join the German men’s national team as an assistant coach during the 2022 IIHF men’s world championships. Coaching at the men’s world championships was historic, in that Campbell became the first woman to ever be behind the bench at the tournament.
Being with Germany was foundational because of head coach Toni Söderholm.
Söderholm, who is Finnish, is the person Campbell fondly refers to as “my green light” because he gave her the confidence to fully embrace her coaching role. That was also the job that opened the door for Campbell to join the Firebirds a few months later.
Söderholm worked to create a culture within the national team and there was a word that embodied what he and his staff sought to achieve.
The word was ytimessä.
FACED WITH A DECISION before her historic first NHL game as a Kraken assistant coach, Campbell asked her best friend and former teammate, Brooklyn Langlois, for some advice:
What should she wear?
“I turned to her and asked, ‘Which one should I go with?'” Campbell recalled. “She says, ‘White. That’s the only color a man wouldn’t wear.’ That’s how I ultimately chose the white suit. The blazer that I bought was called, ‘the standout blazer,’ so it all felt perfect.”
Her experience with the German national team at the men’s worlds speaks to why wearing a white suit has so much meaning.
The German Hockey Federation wanted everyone from the equipment managers to the coaching staff to match. From shoes to sweaters down to having their same lapel pin placements.
“It was very traditional and it was a great look, but they also wanted the men wearing ties and I could wear a scarf,” Campbell said. “Ultimately, it kind of looked like I was a flight attendant which is not what I pictured for myself. We laugh about it now because it definitely didn’t reflect my natural fashion style, but I was willing to fill water bottles in that scarf if I had to in order to be part of that team.”
Campbell said she didn’t feel the need to say anything at the time because she wanted to fit in with the team. But it was a different situation with her new club.
0:55
Jessica Campbell reflects on historic night
Kraken assistant coach Jessica Campbell reflects on being the first full-time female assistant coach in NHL history.
Campbell said being on the bench and working with the team felt like any day at work. Or, it did at first.
When she looked into the Climate Pledge Arena stands, specifically during the introductions, that’s when Campbell realized that this was unlike any day of work she or any woman in the history of hockey ever had.
“My family was there. My best friends who are from all over Canada and the U.S. were there and with everybody coming together, it felt like my hockey wedding day in a way,” Campbell said. “Just the energy and the excitement, but that’s what really brought the magnitude of the moment to me.”
Although they work in front of the whole world, being an NHL assistant coach is not a public-facing role. Unlike a head coach, they typically don’t address the media after every game, morning skate and practice. They’ll receive some of the credit when the team wins, while receiving some of the blame when a team loses, while the head coach takes the brunt.
That’s what made opening night different. Those pregame introductions allow assistant coaches — albeit only for seconds — to be in a literal spotlight. Campbell was the first of the Kraken’s assistant coaches to be introduced, and the only person on the staff who received a stronger ovation from the crowd was Bylsma.
“That really hit me in that moment with what was happening, what I’m part of and I just know that I’m part of something so much bigger than just me,” Campbell said. “There were moments throughout the day where I was reminded of that.
“When I got to the arena, just the reception from those around you and seeing the emotions from other people is what really reminds me of what this means to the industry and to the community and to the people. … I’m taking pride knowing that I have to carry this torch for others.”
You may like
Sports
Week 15 Anger Index: The case for Texas and monthlong gripes for Miami, BYU
Published
2 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
2 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
Sports
Vanderbilt flips five-star QB Curtis from Georgia
Published
2 hours agoon
December 3, 2025By
admin

-

Eli LedermanDec 2, 2025, 12:33 PM ET
Close- Eli Lederman covers college football and recruiting for ESPN.com. He joined ESPN in 2024 after covering the University of Oklahoma for Sellout Crowd and the Tulsa World.
Five-star quarterback Jared Curtis, ESPN’s No. 1 pocket passer prospect, has flipped his commitment from Georgia to Vanderbilt, he announced Tuesday night, sealing a seismic move atop the 2026 class less than 24 hours before the start of the early signing period.
Curtis, a senior at Nashville (Tennessee) Christian School, is the No. 5 recruit in the 2026 ESPN 300. Multiple sources told ESPN earlier on Tuesday that Curtis’ intention was to commit to the hometown Commodores during this week’s early signing period before closing his high school career at the Division II-A state championship Thursday night.
Curtis initially shot down reports that he’d made a final decision Tuesday afternoon. According to sources close to his recruitment, he finalized the move Tuesday night and announced his pledge to Vanderbilt following phone calls with each coaching staff. He’ll sign with the Commodores on Wednesday morning as the highest-ranked signee in program history.
“Being here in Nashville and seeing what Vandy has been doing this season has been amazing and over the past few weeks, I felt more and more that I wanna be a part of that, to be close to home, to play in front of family and friends and to be what I love to be, an underdog,” Curtis wrote in a statement posted to social media. “I am excited to be a [Commodore] and excited to be part of building something here at home with Coach [Clark] Lea.”
Curtis’ flip ends a winding recruitment for ESPN’s No. 2 quarterback, who first committed to Georgia in 2024. Per ESPN sources, Vanderbilt escalated its pursuit of Curtis in October, selling the 6-foot-4, 225-pound quarterback on the chance to stay home and the lure of early playing time as a potential day one successor to Heisman Trophy contender Diego Pavia.
That push continued into November after the Commodores hosted Curtis during the program’s 17-10 win over Missouri on Oct. 25. Although Curtis affirmed his commitment to Georgia’s coaching staff multiple times over the past month, per ESPN sources, conversations between Curtis’ camp and Vanderbilt continued into the final weeks of his senior season.
Per sources close to Curtis’ recruitment, Commodores coach Lea’s potential candidacy for multiple job openings across the country remained a sticking point among Curtis’ camp in recent weeks. After Lea agreed to a reported six-year contract extension on Nov. 28, sources told ESPN that Vanderbilt’s efforts with Curtis intensified further, culminating in his flip on Tuesday.
Curtis’ pledge marks the latest victory for the Commodores amid a historic season in which Vanderbilt achieved its highest AP Top 25 ranking since 1937 earlier this fall. He now stands as the cornerstone member of the program’s 19-man recruiting class in 2026, which ranked 50th in ESPN’s class rankings for the cycle prior to his commitment.
Curtis’ signature will hand Vanderbilt its first ESPN 300 addition since cornerback Martel Hight (No. 274) in the 2023 class. The program’s first-ever five-star signee, he’ll soon replace wide receiver Jordan Cunningham (No. 107 in the 2013 ESPN 300) as the Commodores’ highest-ranked recruit in school history. Curtis will also represent Vanderbilt’s first top-10 quarterback signee since Kyle Shurmer arrived as ESPN’s No. 7 pocket passer in the 2015 class.
Curtis rose to status as one of the nation’s top pocket passers as a four-year starter at Nashville Christian. He threw for 7,637 yards and 92 touchdowns across his first three varsity seasons and led Nashville Christian to a Division II-A state championship as a junior in 2024.
Curtis initially committed to Georgia in March 2024 before reopening his process late last fall. He rejoined the Bulldogs’ incoming class on May 5, picking Georgia over Oregon in a tight, two-school recruiting battle, and Curtis remained the program’s top-ranked 2026 pledge until Tuesday, maintaining frequent contact with the school’s coaching staff this fall.
His decommitment leaves Georgia without a quarterback commitment in the nation’s second-ranked recruiting class. First-year Bulldogs starter Gunner Stockton holds another season of eligibility beyond 2025. Behind him, Georgia’s current quarterback depth includes redshirt freshman Ryan Puglisi and class of 2025 signees Ryan Montgomery and Hezekiah Millender. It is not immediately clear whether the Bulldogs will pursue another quarterback in the 2026 class.
Wednesday marks the start of the three-day early signing period for the 2026 class. The recruiting cycle will officially close with national signing day on Feb. 4.
Trending
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024
