The Canes have been here before, most recently in 2000. They beat FSU, but FSU went to the title game that year.
Notre Dame is also sympathetic. In 1993, Notre Dame beat FSU, but FSU was given the shot at undefeated Nebraska in a de facto National Title game, which they won.
The reaction to each of these injustices was reformation. They rolled out new systems (The Bowl Alliance, The Bowl Coalition, The Bowl Championship Series). They then recalculated formulas. But eventually, they went to a committee and codified the importance of head-to-head. It was the only way to ensure that head-to-head results took precedence among comparable teams.
The Previous Holders Of The Crown
The 2023 Florida State Seminoles went 13-0. They had their best season in years and were headed to the playoffs.
But in a Week 12 blowout victory over North Alabama, QB Jordan Travis got injured.
FSU went on to win the last 2 games at rival Florida and against 14th ranked Louisville in the ACC Championship Game.
They literally did everything asked of them.
When the playoff bracket was announced, however, they were left out.
Why? Well, in parallel to the latest reformation in college football, money infected the sport, and in particular, a corrupt relationship between the SEC and ESPN developed. ESPN invested billions of dollars in the SEC being the “best” and used their giant megaphone to make sure everyone knew it. And they had results to back that argument up. From 2006-2012, the SEC won 7 National Titles in a row. By the time 2023 rolled around, the SEC had won 4 consecutive National Championships again and ESPN’s family of networks had become their de facto propaganda arm.
It was in that cauldron that FSU’s 2023 found themselves burning.
As ESPN and the College Football Playoff Committee would tell the story, Jordan Travis got injured, FSU was clearly not a Top 4 team anymore, and while unfair, they were justifiably left out of the playoffs.
The problem with that is that it is a load of complete crap.

- In Week 12, Jordan Travis got injured. FSU was then ranked behind Washington.
- In Week 13, they proved they could beat Florida without him, and moved to 4th with Ohio State losing to Michigan.
- In the final standings, they somehow tumbled ended up 5th despite beating 14th ranked Louisville
What happened? It wasn’t the injury to Jordan Travis. It was SEC money.
The previous week, the 4 teams in were Georgia, Michigan, Washington, and Florida State. All 4 undefeated. Then Alabama upset Georgia. So what, just swap Georgia and Alabama, and you’re good to go?
Except they couldn’t. Why?
Because head-to-head was so sacrosanct that they would not dare put Alabama in and leave a Texas team that beat them out (Texas was in the Big 12 at the time).
The correct, merit-based seeding was Michigan, Washington, FSU, Texas. But they could not leave out the SEC. Too much money. Merit be damned. But just as important was head-to-head. So Florida State was sacrificed to the altar of Greg Sankey. You can’t put Alabama in front of Texas (head-to-head is too important!) and you can’t leave out the SEC (even if they deserve to be left out), so Florida State has got to go.
That’s why, absurdly and insanely, and still unjustifiable to this day, the 7th ranked team was ranked 3rd the following week for beating the 18th ranked team while the 4th ranked team was ranked 5th for beating the 14th ranked team with the justification being that a player that was injured for weeks at that point was still injured.
Between Money and Merit, Money Is King
College football was always a convoluted mess. Opinion polls determined champions for a majority of its history. Over the years, the sport evolved from a regional sport into a national sport. And with it, focus shifted more and more to a meritocracy. A national sport needed a proper National Champion.
The 4-team CFP playoff (which has now been expanded to 12-teams) was a step towards reinforcing that meritocracy.
But something happened in parallel. Money drove conference expansion and consolidation. When the BCS first rolled out in the late 90s, there were 6 major conferences: the ACC, Big East, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, and SEC. First the Big East died and years later the Pac 10 followed it. The Big 10 and SEC emerged as bloated money machines, with TV partners in tow.
As College Football strived towards a goal of meritocracy it became harder and harder to compare teams as even teams in the same conference played radically different schedules.
So the committee came up with metrics and convoluted reasons to rank teams a certain way. But in reality, it all flows back to money. The Big 10, the SEC, and Notre Dame get the benefit of the doubt. Even when teams like Oregon and Ole Miss don’t play a tough schedule, they’re fine. The Big 12 and the ACC are second-class citizens.
It’s why, before a single ball is kicked, regardless of result, you can go ahead and allot 8 spots (at least) to the SEC, Big 12, and ND. Those are automatic. You might not know the specific teams, but there is no result that will convince the committee otherwise. They come in with that bias, the propaganda money machine reinforces that bias, and there is no evidence allowed in. The logic for the chosen teams is reverse engineered starting from a place of making sure those 2 conferences and Notre Dame are taken care of. If the playoffs were to start today, the teams would be 5 SEC, 3 B1G, ND, 1 ACC, 1 Big 12, 1 Group of 5. Just as intended.
The system is not just inherently flawed, its inherently unfair by design. The humans were initially introduced to prevent on field results from being ignored. They’re now in place to make sure the money goes where it is supposed to, and then they’ll figure out how to justify it.
The Burden of Proof
With 1 week left in the regular season, there are several teams vying for a few playoff spots. You can make arguments for or against several of them. The subjectivity of analysis will always lend itself to these variances. And with the disjointed nature of current scheduling, direct comparisons are almost impossible to make.
ALMOST.
That’s what makes this Miami-Notre Dame situation so bizarre. On paper, this is the easiest decision. 2 teams with the same record, one beat the other, the team that won should be ahead, right? Head-to-head is sacrosanct, right? It’s so important that you’re 2 years removed from punting FSU out of the playoffs to avoid applying head-to-head to Alabama and Texas and leaving the SEC out in the cold.
The committee is choosing to ignore it anyway. Just to contextualize how bizarre this is, everywhere else in the ranking discussion, it’s a given that head-to-head trumps everything else.

https://x.com/tmj6810/status/1993490978507047126?s=20
Georgia is also ahead of Ole Miss and Oklahoma is ahead of Alabama on head-to-head right now. No one would ever consider swapping those teams, because that would ignore the on field results. And to ignore head-to-head would be inconsistent with the selection committee’s protocol:

While there is no definitive way that Strength of Schedule is calculated, Notre Dame’s schedule is stronger than Miami’s (After Miami plays Pitt and Notre Dame plays Stanford, that gap will close). According to ESPN, Notre Dame has the 12th Strength of Record while Miami has the 15th.
https://x.com/WillManso/status/1993487197576872396

And in terms of common opponents, there will be FOUR by the end of the season. Yes, by some fluke with the ACC-ND scheduling agreement, ND happened to hit 4 of the same ACC teams as Miami. That makes the comparison even easier for the committee.
But wait, there’s more. So if ND played Miami, and 4 common opponents, what are the 7 games that they played where they proved that head-to-head should not be the decider? They played Texas A&M, and lost. They beat USC, Navy, and Boise State. Those are good teams and good wins. Nothing spectacular, but relevant. And the other games? They played the 3 winless in conference P4 teams (BC, Purdue, and Arkansas).
That is the resume. And it’s not a bad resume.
But it’s also nowhere near enough to warrant overriding who won the actual game when these 2 teams played. If that logic is good enough for literally every other instance in the rankings, it’s good enough here. The arguments against it are generally circular and look ridiculous when applied elsewhere.
- Imagine BYU being ranked ahead of Texas Tech because BYU has a better loss.
- Imagine Alabama being ranked ahead of Oklahoma because we *know* who would win if they played again.
Any attempt to explain it quickly falls apart because it requires us to pretend that these 2 teams didn’t play. It also requires that we place the burden of proof on Miami to prove that the head-to-head should count. That is completely backwards. Notre Dame should have to prove why the head-to-head should not count. And nothing in their resume says it should not.
If Louisville is so bad, why couldn’t Notre Dame do what Louisville did and win at Miami? The reason the on field results matter, the reason head-to-head is a tiebreaker in every sport, is because it is inarguable. That is the case in every other sport, and it is here now. All signs will redirect back to “Notre Dame played Miami and lost to Miami.”
Instead, the Selection Committee, Notre Dame, and ESPN would have you believe that Miami needs to do something extraordinary to get in front of Notre Dame. Beating them is not enough. They started this process by ranking Miami too low (18) and then repeatedly have moved the goal posts for what Miami has to do to “move up” (a phrase that should not exist because they are supposed to re-rank teams weekly). In the last 2 weeks they went from head-to-head matters if Miami and ND are in the same group to never mind, we’re going off vibes.
And yet by repeatedly shifting the goal posts the Selection Committee has managed to distract from the central question. Why does Miami have to do anything to prove they’re better than Notre Dame? THEY BEAT THEM ON THE FIELD.
Notre Dame should have to prove why the head-to-head should be ignored, and losses to Miami and Texas A&M, and wins over USC, Navy, Boise State, 4 common opponents with Miami (3 at this time, they’ll each play the 4th this weekend), and 3 p4 bottom feeders who have combined to win zero conference games is not even close.
“Trust me bro, I know they’re better” is an absurd standard.
If the rankings were reversed, it would be non-controversial. “Miami is in front cause they played and Miami won.”
As Andy Staples said, “they played a game, their resumes are very similar, and you’re taking the team that lost and putting it ahead of the team that won, which doesn’t make sense.”
If Miami loses to Pitt (which is certainly possible, Pitt is a good team), then the conversation becomes moot. And that might be where it ends up, with Miami falling flat on its face in Pittsburgh on Saturday. But it’s important to contextualize why this conversation becomes moot. If Miami were to lose to Pitt, it would mean:
- Notre Dame has a better record than Miami
- Notre Dame has a dominant win over a team that beat Miami
That will invalidate the head-to-head, and rightly so. That’s what it looks like when head-to-head is overridden by other factors.
But if the Canes win, they will:
- Have the same record
- Have won the Head-to-Head
- Have 4 common opponents that both teams went 4-0 against
And they will almost certainly be behind Notre Dame based on what people *know* would hypothetically happen if these teams were to play again instead of what actually happened when they did play. As Brad Pitt (playing Billy Beane) said in Moneyball, “You don’t have a crystal ball…’When I know, I know, and when it comes to your son, I know.’ And you don’t. You don’t.”
That’s the beauty of sport. When we think we know, we often don’t. The results on the field rule the day. Or at least that used to be the case.
Vishnu Parasuraman is a show host and writer for @FiveReasonsSports. He covers the Miami Hurricanes Football for @SixthRingCanes Miami Hurricanes Basketball for @buckets_canes , and Miami Hurricanes Baseball for @CanesOnDeck as part of the @5ReasonsCanes Network. You can follow him on twitter @vrp2003