The SMU versus Alabama debate for the final at-large bid in the 2025 College football Playoff has understandably stolen the spotlight entering Selection Sunday.There is also important consternation about how the first few teams outside the top four conference champions will be decided. Ultimately, how the commitee interprets those league title game results will have ripple effects throughout the field.
Alabama held that spot in last Tuesday’s penultimate CFP Rankings, and it looked in good shape to maintain that slot after CFP chairman Warde Manuel said the rankings were locked for teams not playing conference championship weekend.
However, there was a doomsday scenario: Clemson pulling off an upset over SMU in the ACC Championship Game with the Mustangs playing well enough to warrant a spot in the field.
Sadly for the Crimson Tide, that’s exactly what happened Saturday night. Clemson freshman kicker Nolan Hauser’s 56-yard walk-off game-winning field goal not only propelled the Tigers into the field as an automatic qualifier but gave SMU a more-than-reasonable chance to receive an at-large bid.
SMU (11-2) has fewer losses than Alabama (9-3) but exists in a similar space as Miami (FL) in that it lacks resume-boosting wins. The Mustangs are 0-2 against top 25 opponents, while Alabama has a 3-1 record against teams, including a win over newly crowned SEC champion Georgia. Furthermore, Alabama’s strength of schedule (18th) is considerably better than that of SMU (75th) as the Tide’s opponents had a combined record of 82-50 while the Mustangs’ were 83-75.
The SMU case? Well, it went undefeated during ACC regular-season play (8-0), and its two losses are nowhere near as bad as Alabama’s 21-point defeat to 6-6 Oklahoma (in which Bama scored 3 points) or its road loss to 6-6 Vanderbilt. SMU’s wins against Louisville and Pittsburgh were notable at the time, too.
If Alabama ranked a spot above Miami in the penultimate CFP Rankings,one could surmise it deserves to hold the same spot when compared head-to-head against SMU given the argument is identical. And that may be exactly what happens!
However, SMU finished as a Power Four conference runner-up in a tightly contested ACC title game it lost 34-31. If the CFP Selection Committee completely dropped SMU out of the field, it would set a dangerous precedent for conference championship games, which are generally major money makers for leagues. It would essentially incentivize teams to not seek out those opportunities so as not to lose and possibly fall all the way out of the playoff field.
Alabama got the benefit of the doubt last season as it received the final spot over undefeated florida State in a decision that still roils the ACC. This time around, the ACC has a better chance of bouncing an SEC team out for the last at-large bid.
How will the top three at-large bids shake out?
The committee doesn’t simply have to decide what to do with ACC championship loser SMU. It also needs to figure out where to put one-loss Notre Dame, SEC runner-up Texas and Big Ten runner-up penn State. the Fighting Irish were No.4 in the penultimate CFP Rankings, while the Longhorns were No. 2 (slated for a first-round bye with an SEC win) and the Nittany lions placed No. 3 as the second Big Ten team behind No. 1 Oregon.
Texas (11-2) lost to Georgia, 24-19, in the first SEC title game to reach overtime, a contest the Longhorns easily could have won. Penn State (11-2) fell to the Ducks in a one-score 45-37 loss. And then you have Notre dame (11-1), which did not play Saturday but in theory could slide up if Texas and Penn State both move down.
Texas’ only two losses are to georgia, giving it the best defeats of the group; though, Penn State’s two losses (Ohio State, Oregon) are in the same neighborhood. Notre Dame has by far the worst loss to Northern Illinois (7-5), a seventh-place MAC team. That it came at home, too, making it the worst loss of any CFP contender.
The ‘Horns are 0-2 against top 25 opponents,a major knock on their resume. The Nittany Lions hold a singular top 25 win (no. 19 Illinois), while the Irish only possess one top 25 win over AAC champion Army West Point (no. 24). Army’s win Friday night over Tulane only strengthens ND’s argument.
just like with Alabama and SMU, it will be interesting to see whether the committee chooses to penalize teams that competed in league title games, especially ones that were extremely close. Notre Dame has been steadily moving up the rankings in recent weeks, and there’s an argument it should jump Texas and Penn State. It almost certainly would in a normal week.
However, in this scenario, it feels more likely that the committee will keep Texas and Penn State ahead of Notre Dame. That’s not an insignificant decision, either, given how the field is shaping up.
If Notre Dame ends up as the No. 7 seed, that sets up a possible quarterfinal against No. 2 georgia in the Sugar Bowl. If Notre Dame instead receives the No. 5 or No.6 seed, it would likely play boise State or Arizona State in a quarterfinal.
The tougher question will be how the committee weighs Texas versus Penn State. The resumes are fairly similar, and both lost marquee conference championship games by single scores. texas was ranked higher than Penn State entering Saturday night, which might end up being the slight edge that puts the ‘Horns in the No. 5 seed.
College Football Playoff projection
The top two seeds of the CFP are all but a formality after Oregon remained undefeated by beating Penn State in the Big Ten Championship Game and Georgia knocked off Texas for the second time this season to win the SEC Championship Game. Boise State (Mountain West) and arizona State (Big 12) will be the other conference champions who receive byes given Clemson (ACC) has three losses.
While there is an argument that the Sun Devils should be the No. 3 seed above the Broncos,ASU was ranked five spots lower in the penultimate CFP Rankings.As such, bowls experts Jerry Palm and Brad crawford both agree the top four seeds — each receiving first-round byes — will shake out as follows:
- Oregon (13-0)
- Georgia (11-2)
- Boise State (12-1)
- Arizona State (11-2)
College Football Playoff expert picks
Here’s how our college football staff would vote in the key spots — choosing teams Nos. 5-7 and the last at-large bid in the field — if they were members of the CFP Selection Committee.
How does the strength of schedule impact a team’s chances of making the College Football Playoff?
Interview Between Time.news Editor and College Football Expert
Editor: Welcome to Time.news, where we dive into the most pressing issues in sports today. With Selection Sunday looming, the debate around who deserves the final at-large bid for the 2025 College Football Playoff is heating up. Today, we’re joined by college football expert Dr.Jamie Harris, who specializes in sports analytics. Jamie, thanks for being here!
Dr. Harris: Thank you for having me! It’s always a thrill to discuss college football, especially during such a pivotal time.
Editor: Let’s jump right in. The discussions have largely centered around SMU and Alabama battling it out for that last at-large spot. What’s your perspective on this rivalry for the final bid?
Dr.Harris: Well, it’s engaging! SMU had a strong season, finishing 11-2 and going undefeated in regular-season play within the ACC. However, while their record is remarkable, they lack those signature wins—specifically against top 25 opponents— which often weighs heavily in the committee’s decision-making.
Editor: Exactly. They’re 0-2 against ranked teams, while Alabama boasts a more powerful resume with a 3-1 record against formidable opponents, including a victory against the SEC champion, Georgia. How much do you think that will play into the committee’s verdict?
Dr. Harris: Tons! The committee realy values strength of schedule. Alabama’s opponents had a combined record of 82-50, while SMU’s was what some would call less impressive at 83-75. That context could make the difference, especially since Alabama also navigated rough patches better than SMU did.
Editor: SMU’s losses, though, were not nearly as damaging as Alabama’s defeats to 6-6 teams. Do you think there’s an argument there that could sway the committee?
Dr. Harris: There’s certainly an argument to be made. SMU’s losses weren’t as catastrophic as Alabama’s,as they came against competitive teams. Plus, they played a tight game in the ACC Championship, narrowly losing to Clemson. If the committee values the competitive spirit shown in their runs, it could tip the scales in their favor.
Editor: Speaking of precedent, if the committee were to completely drop SMU out of the field despite their strong run, what implications do you foresee for college football?
Dr. Harris: It could set a dangerous precedent indeed. Conference championship games are huge revenue generators for conferences and can significantly impact a team’s national ranking. If teams feel they could be penalized for participating and possibly losing,there might be greater reluctance to compete for those titles. This could ultimately undermine the excitement and value of college football playoffs.
Editor: On that note, considering the statistics you shared, how do you think other contenders like Notre Dame and Texas factor into this setup?
Dr. Harris: That’s another layer of complexity. Notre Dame is sitting pretty at number four in the CFP Rankings, and both Texas and Penn State have solid cases as well, but Texas’s recent performance as SEC runner-up adds pressure. Each of these teams has a strong case to secure one of the top at-large bids, but the committee might prioritize the conference champions and their overall strength of schedule, which complicates things further for SMU and Alabama.
Editor: So, with all this in mind, what’s your prediction for how the committee will ultimately decide on these at-large bids?
Dr. Harris: If I had to guess, I think we will see Alabama receive the nod, given their history and the strength of their schedule. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if the committee offers SMU a chance, considering their strong performance in conference play. It wouldn’t shock me if we see some surprising decisions, much like we did last year.
Editor: An interesting perspective! Thank you so much for sharing your insights, Dr. Harris. Fans are definitely on the edge of their seats as we await the committee’s decision this Sunday!
Dr. Harris: My pleasure! It’s always an exhilarating time in college football. Let’s see how it unfolds!