Why the College Football Playoff committee has it right with Notre Dame over Miami

Notre Dame Fighting Irish running back Jeremiyah Love (4) runs the ball against the Syracuse Orange during the first half at Notre Dame Stadium. | Michael Caterina-Imagn Images

The furor spiked last week, oddly, with many suddenly vocally aggrieved that Notre Dame was ahead of Miami in the College Football Playoff rankings, despite the Hurricanes having beaten the Fighting Irish this season.

What was odd was not the outrage itself -- that's the fun of the whole thing, critiquing the committee, questioning the rankings and rationale behind them, etc. And sure, the head-to-head component makes for prime fodder.

What was odd was that Miami had been behind Notre Dame the previous two weeks as well, from the very first CFP rankings, yet it suddenly became a national talking point and a divisive decision.

The reason it wasn't a bigger deal before should be the same reason it isn't now -- these teams have had significantly different seasons since they met in Week 1. Significantly different enough, at least.

New CFP committee chair Hunter Yurachek, the athletic director at Arkansas who had just stepped in as the new face of the committee after former Baylor AD Mack Rhoades stepped down for undisclosed reasons, came under fire for explaining the matter last week (and again this week).

The critics latched on to Yurachek first, saying, "We really compare the losses of those two teams," and then also saying that Notre Dame and Miami hadn't "been in similar comparative pools to date" for the head-to-head result to actually be a differentiator.

This week, with Miami moving up a spot to No. 12 and Notre Dame remaining at No. 9, Yurachek said they were looked at in the same grouping (but not compared head-to-head for one spot where that Week 1 game would be the decisive factor).

While he may have left himself open to dissection with that series of comments, the fact remains the committee has it right and has said enough to explain how it got to that, again, a very correct decision.

Even if many still don't want to hear it.

Miami should be pissed. This Notre Dame crap is ridiculous.

— RJ Young (@RJ_Young) November 26, 2025

Booger McFarland says that when it comes to Miami vs. Notre Dame he doesn’t pay attention to metrics because he can just watch the head-to-head matchup. pic.twitter.com/SDfaJPh1uj

— Grant Speaks (@GrantSpeaks1) November 26, 2025

"They were compared this week, but they're compared in the same pod with Alabama and a one-loss BYU, and the committee still feels that Notre Dame is a complete team, has been consistent throughout the season and deserves to be ranked where they are at No. 9 ahead of Alabama, a really good two-loss team with some great wins, and then a one-loss BYU team, and then Miami falls in accordingly," Yurachek said.

That's the key point here -- Miami is justifiably viewed as less deserving than Alabama and BYU as well, and it isn't going to leapfrog both of them, just for the sake of one game two and a half months ago involving neither the Tide nor the Cougars.

"Those people in that room think Notre Dame is better than Miami. Period." - Heather Dinich pic.twitter.com/iSFVpj8nEt

— Matt Freeman (@mattfreeman05_) November 26, 2025

We could just leave this silly debate here, but why stop now when there's so much more to add? Let's go back to the initial comment that set the debate ablaze: the comparison of the two teams' losses.

Yes, at this point, everyone is fully aware that one of Notre Dame's losses was to Miami -- at the time the No. 10 team in the country (now No. 12), on the road, by a slim 27-24 margin on a field goal in the final minute, in Week 1. The Irish's other loss was 41-40 to Texas A&M (now the No. 3 team nationally and still unbeaten) on a touchdown with 13 seconds left back in Week 2.

Miami's losses came in the last six weeks in a sloppy, turnover-riddled performance against a Louisville team that was unranked at the time and is now again unranked, and to a SMU team that was unranked at the time and really only because of that win over the Hurricanes is now back in the rankings at No. 21.

The committee is absolutely correct that losing to the current No. 3 and No. 12 teams back in early September (one on the road) by a combined four points and then reeling off nine straight lopsided wins is different than losing two of the last six games to a presently unranked team and the current No. 21 team that was unranked at the time.

Sorry, Miami fans (and bandwagon critics), that's also pretty straightforward and sensible.

Why isn't No. 8 Oklahoma ranked behind No. 16 Texas, which dominated the Sooners head-to-head? Why isn't No. 15 Michigan ranked behind No. 17 USC, which won convincingly over the Wolverines head-to-head? Because the rest of the season happened as well. In those cases, Texas and USC picked up one more loss than Oklahoma and Michigan.

In this case, the win-loss records may be the same for Notre Dame and Miami but little else is.

Momentum and late-season performance have always been weighted in setting the playoff field. And it would be hard to have much more momentum than an Irish team that found its stride as first-year starting QB CJ Carr settled in after those first two tough tests out of the gate, with the team winning these last nine games by an average margin of 29.8 points with no game closer than 10. That included wins over ranked USC (34-24), Pittsburgh (a 37-15 demolition), and an unranked but now 8-2 Navy team (49-10).

Miami's best win since Week 1 was ... two weeks later over South Florida (49-12)? The Hurricanes responded from the loss to SMU with lopsided wins over Syracuse and NC State, but they were up 9 late in the fourth quarter on 3-win Virginia Tech last week before a touchdown in the final minute helped the style points a little. (While Notre Dame was up 49-0 at halftime vs. Syracuse on the way to a 70-7 win).

The Hurricanes go on the road to No. 22 Pittsburgh this week. It will be interesting to see how their result against the Panthers compares to the one-sided, uncompetitive game Pitt had vs. Notre Dame.

But not interesting enough to change anything one way or another -- because, again, when one team has clearly had a better season than the other, then one isolated data point isn't enough to offset all the others.