COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYOFF MEDIA CONFERENCE

November 3, 2026

Hunter Yurachek

CFP Media Conference

THE MODERATOR: Thank you, everybody, for joining us on this Tuesday evening here with the chair of the CFP Selection Committee, Hunter Yurachek, and the CFP Executive Director Rich Clark. The format of today's call is going to be a brief opening statement from Hunter followed by Q&A.

HUNTER YURACHEK: Good evening, and thanks for joining us. I want to take a few moments to share some overall thoughts on the college football season to date, our process and the rankings before we jump into your Q&A. This obviously has been an exciting time of year, and what a remarkable and unpredictable football season it's been so far.

With that said, a reminder that we're not quite 70 percent into the season as we speak. There's still a lot of football to be played. Looking forward to this weekend, and we've got seven match-ups versus top-25 teams, so I think we can expect that these rankings will change significantly over the next few weeks.

But before we get into the notes before the rankings, I wanted to commend the members of the committee for their preparation and work so far. There was great discussion over the past day and a half.

We've got an experienced group in the room. We've got 10 returning committee members out of 13, six ADs, four former coaches, two All-Americans, a Super Bowl champ and a pro football Hall of Famer and a longtime college football writer in that committee room. We are equipped as a committee with some of the most sophisticated data and analytic tools in sports. The data informs the discussion and the group's experience drives the decisions. This was not an easy assignment by any means, but this group is truly up to it.

As far as the rankings go, I wanted to call out a few items and reminders. The Selection Committee evaluates teams on a comprehensive body of work, not by any single metric, and rankings are determined by comparing the full profiles of both teams. Wins against teams that the committee thinks highly of are rewarded. The parity this season has created a lot more teams with these types of wins. The parity we have seen is obviously great for college football but has made for an unpredictable year so far, and exciting games every week, and we expect that trend to continue over the next several weeks.

We are also not over-penalizing teams or losses that the committee thinks highly of, and these call-outs will provide additional context to our rankings.

Regarding those rankings, Miami is the CFP No. 1 for the first time in their program history. They have been impressive on both sides of the ball in both a dynamic offense especially across all skill positions. Utah at No. 3 is the highest ranking that program has ever achieved, as with Kentucky at No. 6.

The committee felt that Alabama at 5, Kentucky at 6 and Texas at 7 was the appropriate order for those three teams. There was great discussion throughout all of our sessions as it relates to their losses, and as we speak today, a loss to Alabama or Tennessee or Georgia is not on the same level as an unranked team, for example.

Regarding the wins, those three teams have several wins against teams the committee thinks highly of. Alabama has wins over Kentucky, South Carolina and Mississippi State when they were at full strength earlier this year. Kentucky has wins over South Carolina and LSU, and Texas has wins over Ohio State, Tennessee and Ole Miss, three teams in our top 13.

In regards to Notre Dame, to date an impressive 7-1 record, although their wins don't stack up against other teams we have higher in the rankings, as they currently own one win against a team with a .500 record or better. Notre Dame has faced one opponent in the top 25 so far; that was BYU on the road, and they did not win that game.

Regarding UCLA, the team is off to an excellent start, although their schedule isn't as strong as other comparable teams at this point in the season, and we believed 8 was the appropriate position for UCLA.

Boise State this week is the highest ranked G6 team at No. 25.

Overall we had a productive two days and we're extremely excited for the slate of games this weekend. It should be an incredible Saturday for college football.

With that, I will take questions.

Q. Hunter, could you expound a little bit on Miami, beyond obviously the undefeated record? What puts them atop the rankings this week?

HUNTER YURACHEK: First of all, you watch Miami play, and you watch them play especially on the offensive side of the ball, and they have a dynamic playmaker at quarterback and at wide receiver. They've got a really strong running game. They're really strong up front defensively, and they've won the games that they're supposed to win.

They've got a great opportunity this weekend to go on the road to play a Notre Dame team that's ranked 11th in our poll this week, and they can solidify their position at No. 1 obviously with a win in that game on Saturday.

Q. Hunter, you already mentioned the difference between Alabama and Kentucky and the SEC teams. I'm wondering the difference why you had Alabama ranked higher than an undefeated UCLA or these one-loss teams like BYU and Notre Dame.

HUNTER YURACHEK: It really came down to the quality of teams that Alabama has played and the quality of their wins. They've got a win on the road against the team we had ranked sixth. They've got a win versus South Carolina, a team we have ranked 21st. They have a win at Mississippi State when Mississippi State was at 4-0 at full strength with that dynamic quarterback that Mississippi State had earlier in the year, and Alabama has had seven of their eight games against teams that have a .500 record or better, and I think that's what's separated them from an undefeated UCLA or a one-loss team in BYU.

Q. Looking at the rankings, I guess I would ask the weightedness of the head-to-heads. Obviously it looks like you have to measure that up against won-loss record, and I also noted you said something about not penalizing teams for losses as much as in the past. I think we've seen more of a lean on the won-loss record. Can you expound on those things as well as how the conferences have fared against one another in non-conference play in the power levels?

HUNTER YURACHEK: Yeah, I'm sorry, can you repeat the first part of your question?

Q. I was asking about the importance of head-to-head and how you've weighted a lot of this.

HUNTER YURACHEK: Yeah, the head-to-head is weighted in the case of where we have Alabama and Kentucky, where they were they were a comparative part of our ranking process, and obviously Alabama has a win at Kentucky, but there's some other head-to-head things that exist within our rankings, and you can take -- for example, you've got Florida that beat an Ole Miss team. Florida is currently 24th and Ole Miss is 10th. The head-to-head match-up between those teams is not going to come into play. You've got South Carolina at 21 and Tennessee at 13. Again, that head-to-head match-up where South Carolina beat Tennessee is not going to come into play, just like the head-to-head match-up between Tennessee and Alabama is not going to come into play at this point because of where those teams were reviewed in the ranking process.

Q. As far as how the power conference teams played against one another and non-conference action, was that factored in?

HUNTER YURACHEK: Absolutely. That's a datapoint, the A4-versus-A4 games that we look at. This is another datapoint. I know the SEC is 10-2 in those games, but we didn't take those collectively as a conference; we took them individually team by team.

Q. Going back towards the top of the rankings with Miami 1 and then Georgia and Utah 3, what was the discussion like in the room when looking at the top teams, that top pod, and how close did it seem like the teams were to each other in this first ranking?

HUNTER YURACHEK: Yeah, I mean, I will tell you that I think the committee was really unanimous in that Miami was the No. 1 team in the country. After that, I think there was great debate in ranking everybody from 2 through 25. It's not that Miami was a definitive easy choice, but that may have been the easiest decision that the committee had to make. There's some really good college football teams throughout this top 25 from Miami, Georgia and Utah, so great discussion, especially at the top there because you want to make sure you get that right.

Q. Just wondering, does the committee view Ohio State at all as a different team with Luke Fahey at quarterback than it did with Julian Sayin, and how did that factor into the evaluation of them, especially without a return date for Sayin?

HUNTER YURACHEK: We don't look at them as a different team per se. We evaluated the game that they had, and they've only got one datapoint with Sayin at quarterback, and that was this past weekend at Southern Cal.

I think we evaluated their defense probably a little bit stronger than we evaluated their offense. Their offense, I think, had 450 plus yards. They stalled some when they got deep into USC territory and had to kick four field goals, didn't get into the end zone until the fourth quarter.

But their defense gave up some explosive plays. The fact that their offense wasn't more efficient against a USC defense, it had not been very good to this point in the season was a little bit surprising to us as a committee, but we can't put that all on a freshman quarterback.

Again, you're considering the entire body of work by Ohio State, not just one game, and we only had one game to evaluate them currently without Julian in the lineup.

Q. Just to clarify, the committee, I guess as part of the protocol, you can factor in injury. Is this not a significant factor at the moment?

HUNTER YURACHEK: I'm sorry, I didn't hear your question.

Q. The protocol outlines that you are allowed to factor in injuries. I guess then to clarify, is the injury to Julian not a significant factor in their ranking at the moment?

HUNTER YURACHEK: Yeah, we've got more games to evaluate at Ohio State whether Julian comes back or not. I'm not sure that's been disclosed, but Ohio State has got four more games on their schedule to play and for us to evaluate with or without Julian Sayin at quarterback.

Q. I was just wanting to get what the committee's evaluation is of Texas Tech being at No. 15.

HUNTER YURACHEK: I think that the committee thinks highly of Texas Tech, and you look at when they went on the road a couple of weeks ago, didn't play well against Cincinnati, and give Cincinnati a lot of credit for that. That's followed up with what Utah went to Cincinnati and did this past week.

I think Texas Tech is a really good football team. That's why we have them ranked 15th. They've got a quality win most recently against Arizona, another quality win against Houston. They had that one blip against a Cincinnati team that's unranked and a team that a fellow conference member went on the road at Cincinnati and took care of business.

Q. I wanted to ask, again, about Ohio State. You were talking about the defense giving up explosive plays this weekend, but they hadn't given up a play of 40 yards or longer the rest of the season, and then the overall wins against two other of your ranked teams including an Indiana team. How do you justify speaking about this weekend's game versus the entire body of work for the Buckeyes if you're not looking at the quarterback situation?

HUNTER YURACHEK: Yeah, and we are looking at the entire body of work. The game at Southern Cal is one of those datapoints that we have to evaluate them on. It's a Southern Cal team that the week prior had lost on the road at Wisconsin and did look good doing so and had not been very good defensively to this point in the season. Ohio State, they're not being penalized for having a quarterback that's out. They're being evaluated as a team with another quarterback in the lineup for them.

Q. You mentioned the Mississippi State win for Alabama as one of the quality wins. Considering Mississippi State will be without its quarterback the rest of the season, is that essentially locked in as a quality win then for Alabama?

HUNTER YURACHEK: It is from the eyes of the committee, and I think that's where the committee can take the human element in. Mississippi State from a computer aspect will fall some, but the human element and the discussion that we have in the room, we recall the team that Mississippi State was back in September and early October before their quarterback was injured. They were 4-0. They had gone on the road and really dismantled a Minnesota team and looked very good doing so. I think maybe Gameday had gone to that. It was a big game to play Alabama at home, and Alabama went in there and really took care of business and dominated that game.

The committee, I think, will always view that as a quality game regardless of what the computer may say about the strength of that game.

Q. I wanted to ask about Wake Forest. You mentioned that Miami is the unanimous No. 1 and that teams hitting their stride right now would be looked on favorably. They've won four games by an average of 39 points a game. I'm curious about where they fell in the discussions to land at 16.

HUNTER YURACHEK: The committee has a great deal of respect for Wake Forest, and all of us on the committee have watched several of their games. We watched the game they played at home against Miami earlier in the year. They are playing very well right now, had a big win against Virginia 51-7.

I think Wake Forest has a really good path in front of them as you look ahead at their schedule with some games as a committee that we believe they should win moving forward. Wake Forest is a team that I think we all should keep an eye on.

Q. You mentioned on the broadcast on ESPN that Notre Dame lacks a signature win. I'm wondering comparatively what about Indiana's resume has them at No. 4, and which games are viewed as their signature win or wins?

HUNTER YURACHEK: Yeah, I think comparatively Indiana has five, six games against teams that are .500 and above, and they're 5-1 in those games. Notre Dame has two games against teams that are .500 and above. They've won one of those games and lost the other one of those games. I think Notre Dame's overall body of work is against a strength of schedule that's not as strong as Indiana's. Again, Notre Dame has a great opportunity in front of them at home against the No. 1 team in our CFP ranking this weekend to get that signature win.

Q. I want to ask about your stance on Arizona and Boise State.

HUNTER YURACHEK: As far as the committee's stance on those two teams? Obviously they're ranked in our top 25. There's only 25 teams ranked out of 138, so the committee thinks very highly of both of those teams. Arizona is 6-2, but they've lost to Texas Tech and BYU, two teams that are ranked in our top 25. Boise State was impressive earlier in the season on the road against an Oregon team at the time that was at full strength. Boise State has got quality wins against Memphis on the road at Fresno State, on the road at Western Michigan, both teams that have winning records, and they found a way to win at game at home this past weekend when their starting quarterback went down.

I think the fact that we have them at 25 and Oregon at 22 shows that the committee has a great deal of respect for those two teams as well.

Q. I wanted to follow up with Wake Forest. You mentioned with Notre Dame a little bit earlier, I believe, that one of the reasons you had them so low was the lack of playing against teams that were .500 and only one game against a top-25 team. What separated Wake and Notre Dame by about five spots, given their schedule and who they've played has been pretty much about the same?

HUNTER YURACHEK: Yeah, I think that separation happens by those of us in the room watching games and watching Notre Dame play, watching Wake Forest play and comparing the two teams. I think the committee feels that Notre Dame is a better team than Wake Forest at this point.

Q. Hunter, I wanted to ask about maybe another point that we've seen officiating be an issue in some certain games this year, most notably inside your Top 5, Alabama-Georgia. There was certainly a missed pass interference call in that game. How often do you guys bring that up when dealing with these resumes?

HUNTER YURACHEK: Yeah, I think what we see throughout college football is there's a balance of human error and calls that are missed throughout the course of college football games, and I think teams are benefactors of calls and teams are on the wrong side of those missed calls as well, so I think it balances out. Rarely do we discuss those unless it just was outwardly egregious.

Q. With the new analytic and how high Alabama is in the first ranking, how likely is it potentially that we could see a three-loss team make the final rankings?

HUNTER YURACHEK: There's a number of football games still left to be played. I can't look into a crystal ball and tell you that at the end of this in four weeks, five weeks when we put out our final ranking where three-loss teams will be, but you talk about Alabama specifically, Alabama and LSU play, currently they both have two losses. After this weekend one of the two of them is going to have three losses, and they're both within our top 14 right now.

There's still a lot of football to be played and a lot of changes with this ranking moving forward.

Q. I have a question about what the difference is between UCLA and Utah resume-wise with both of them having one ranked win and no losses yet and why there's such a big difference between where they're ranked.

HUNTER YURACHEK: It's a great question. We had great discussion about that within our room. I think the committee has watched both of those teams play, UCLA and Utah. When you look at their strength of schedule, their resumes, they're almost identical with the number of teams above .500 that they've played. Both of them have a win against a ranked team, Utah against Houston, UCLA against Oregon.

We really like what Utah shows us when we watch them play. They're very balanced offensively. They've got a dynamic quarterback in Dampier that runs that offense. He's a runner. He's a dynamic passer. They have a running game. They have receivers. And then they're really good on defense.

So I think as we looked at those two teams and evaluated them while watching their games, felt like Utah was above UCLA and just a better team when we watch them play.

Q. Hunter, just kind of following up on the evaluation of Texas Tech, I was curious with LSU being ahead of Texas Tech in the rankings with zero ranked wins while Texas Tech has two ranked wins, I'm curious why Texas Tech was slotted into the position that they were in.

HUNTER YURACHEK: I think you'll have to really lean on the loss that they had at Cincinnati two weeks ago for that reason. LSU has a loss against Kentucky, who's ranked 6 in our poll and a loss to Ole Miss who's ranked 10th in our poll, and LSU has looked good, and the games that they have won, they have dominated those games against some really stiff competition within the SEC, and then that season-opening win that they had against Clemson.

Q. I understand the pod concept. I'm curious, you said Miami was clear-cut No. 1. It certainly makes sense. When you were evaluating Georgia, what teams were in the same pod? Is it fair to assume that's Georgia, Utah, Indiana, one-loss and zero-loss teams, and if you could break down how those three losses compared.

HUNTER YURACHEK: It would be fair to say that those teams that were in that top four were in a pod together. They would have been joined by two other teams comparatively, not necessarily Alabama and Kentucky. Then you look at you've got two of those teams that are undefeated in that league, and then you've got Georgia with that one loss at home against Auburn, but they've got a really good win on the road against Alabama.

THE MODERATOR: Thank you to all the members of the media who joined us this evening. Thank you to Hunter for your time.