The field is set and my initial object was to Alabama remaining in the field as the 9-seed after losing by 21 points yesterday. The field is
- Indiana
- Ohio State
- Georgia
- Texas Tech
- Oregon
- Ole Miss
- Texas A&M
- Oklahoma
- Alabama
- Miami (FL)
- Tulane
- James Madison
I understood it with BYU being left out because the lost to the same team twice in lopsided manner, but listening to the pundits on TV talk, I better understand why even though I don’t agree it.
Georgia avenging their loss to Alabama earlier essentially means, in my opinion, that any losses head-to-head were nullified based on the outcomes and the wins are the only thing that matter. As a result, Alabama’s loss to Georgia last night basically didn’t happen. I don’t agree with that because the games have to matter. I don’t believe you can, in this case, dismiss a game because it neutralized an outcome from before.
Sam Acho of ESPN referred to the unfairness of Alabama not being punished for their championship game loss but BYU did, though I believe this is the difference even though I think it is wrong. BYU’s games mattered, but not all of Alabama’s did here. Because neither of them had notable season ending injuries of criticality the way Jordan Travis, they didn’t have to evaluate “apples and oranges”, though in 2023, with FSU, they had only two games to evaluate FSU, those apples vs. Alabama’s 13 games worth of apples due to the Jordan Travis injury.
I feel terrible for Notre Dame and then shock for hearing they opted out of a bowl game. They don’t have to absorb the penalty of doing so because they don’t have the conference affiliations that Iowa State and Kansas State have so they have the privilege to do so even though I don’t agree with that either.
There are mixed opinions on whether the current format is legitimate because it allows teams from G5 conferences to be in even if they pale in paper comparison to the other teams. I believe that with NIL today, even more playoff expansion is necessary and the bowl games as they are now can serve as NIL payouts to the schools. That’s how I believe NIL can still be fair and allow college football to operate as it does with regulations since there needs to be regulation on NIL to prevent it from getting out of hand. NIL is so top heavy right now, and I believe giving bowl payouts to every school and having a big playoff in my opinion is a good starting pool for an NIL fund.
Expanded playoffs will not be perfect still because the last teams in or first teams out will still have gripes. But every team gets to have postseason development. The coach at Nevada said it well about how we can still develop players today, and having an incentive to play football is key. It isn’t just money but allowing everyone access to that money instead of it being top heavy will help in my opinion. As a result, I don’t agree with opting out of games and I believe everyone can get a share of the pie to keep incentivizing players to play.
I think it stands to reason that the landscape of college football today is more of a pay for play system when it isn’t supposed to be. It instead should be a play-for-pay system, or perform-for-pay system, where you have to play your games / do what’s asked to earn the money that is agreed to. I remember a quarterback who ended up not going to Florida (Jalen Rashada) because the contract details fell through on what was a near $13M deal to go there, and rightfully he isn’t getting any of it because he’s not there. My opinion additionally is, that he has to earn it through his play, or even just the responsibilities of upholding an endorsement deal. I’m OK with players using the money they get as they desire/need though.
I’ll include bowl picks here and update this with more games as we get further along in bowl season.
December 13 (3 games):
Prairie View A&M def. South Carolina State, 34-24 (X)
Washington def. Boise State, 31-17
Navy def. Army, 21-14
December 16 (1 game):
Troy (-2.5) def. Jacksonville State, 30-23 (X)
December 17 (2 games):
Old Dominion def. South Florida (-3.5), 34-27
Louisiana (-3) def. Delaware, 31-28 (X)
December 18 (1 game):
Arkansas State (-1.5) def. Missouri State, 34-28
December 19 (3 games):
Kennesaw State def. Western Michigan (-4), 31-24 (X)
NC State (-5.5) def. Memphis, 35-21
8) Oklahoma def. 9) Alabama (-1.5), 24-17 (X)
December 20 (3 games):
7) Texas A&M (-3.5) def. 10) Miami (FL), 35-31 (X)
6) Ole Miss (-17.5) def. 11) Tulane, 41-14
5) Oregon (-21.5) def. 12) James Madison, 38-14
December 22 (1 game):
Utah State (-3) def. Washington State, 29-24
December 23 (3 games):
Louisville (-7) def. Toledo, 31-21
Western Kentucky (-2.5) def. Southern Miss, 38-24
UNLV (-6.5) def. Ohio, 41-27 (X)
December 24 (1 game):
Hawaii (-1.5) def. California, 30-27
December 26 (3 games):
Northwestern (-10.5) def. Central Michigan, 28-14
Minnesota (-2.5) def. New Mexico, 31-14
UTSA (-6) def. Florida International, 34-27
December 27 (8 games):
Pittsburgh (-10) def. East Carolina, 35-24 (X)
Clemson (-3) def. Penn State, 27-23 (X)
Army (-8.5) def. UConn, 24-20
12) BYU (-4.5) def. 22) Georgia Tech, 34-24
Fresno State (-6) def. Miami (OH), 27-13
25) North Texas (-3) def. San Diego State, 31-24
19) Virginia def. Missouri (-4), 28-24
21) Houston (-3) def. LSU, 21-19
December 29 (1 game):
Georgia Southern (-7) def. Appalachian State, 34-27
December 30 (3 games):
Louisiana Tech (-9.5) def. Coastal Carolina, 32-18
Tennessee (-2.5) def. Illinois, 32-23 (X)
TCU def. 16) USC (-6.5), 30-28
December 31 (5 games):
14) Vanderbilt (-5.5) def. 23) Iowa, 28-26 (X)
Duke (-3) def. Arizona State, 35-20
13) Texas (-7.5) def. 18) Michigan, 26-23
15) Utah (-16.5) def. Nebraska, 37-21
2) Ohio State (-10) def. 10) Miami (FL), 31-17 (X)
January 1 (3 games):
4) Texas Tech def. 5) Oregon (-1.5), 31-28 (X)
1) Indiana (-7) def. 9) Alabama, 30-23
6) Ole Miss def. 3) Georgia (-7), 31-28
January 2 (4 games):
Texas State (-11.5) def. Rice, 38-21
Navy (-7) def. Cincinnati, 31-24
17) Arizona (-3) def. SMU, 34-30 (X)
Mississippi State (-4) def. Wake Forest, 30-27 (X)
January 5 (1 game):
Montana State def. Illinois State, 41-27
January 8 (1 game):
6) Ole Miss def. 10) Miami (-3.5), 30-27 (X)
January 9 (1 game):
1) Indiana (-4) def. 5) Oregon, 26-21
January 19 (1 game):
1) Indiana (-8.5) def. 10) Miami, 34-29
This post will be updated again when the CFP semifinals and championship game matchups are determined.
It’s worth noting that the committee was proven right by their choice to include Alabama in the bracket. Their issues that plagued them in their losses were erased against Oklahoma, and it was the Sooners who proved mistake-prone.
Texas A&M’s season ends with a thud after they fail to score a touchdown in their playoff loss to Miami, though their women’s volleyball team made up for the weekend by clinching a national championship over Kentucky. You wonder what might have been had they beaten Texas in the final week of the regular season.
It’s a nice redemption story for Carson Beck though, as he was the lynchpin for most of the Georgia run to the playoff in 2024 and couldn’t play in the Sugar Bowl due to injury, and now he gets to play in a second playoff game as a starter for Miami after transferring there this past summer. Keep in mind that Miami had to eke out getting in at the gun because of what happened toward the end of the season with BYU being in the middle of the drama.
The title game featuring Indiana and Miami makes for plenty of interesting headlines and personalities. I think for the way Indiana structured their roster, and are playing veterans more than youngsters, that this championship game is more important for them to win than it is for Miami as far as opportunity. Indiana will continue to win the transfer portal for recruiting, but Miami’s roster will be special because of them being home-grown rather than developed from other schools the way Indiana does it. But after googling Curt Cignetti, it’s pretty clear his way works too.
If you like my blog content please subscribe.
College Football Prediction Central with Paul Shen 