Already a subscriber? Log in.
INTRODUCTORY OFFER
Score premium sports coverage with The  Athletic
original price:   $2.00sale price:   $0.50/week
Billed as $2 every 4 weeks for your first year,
then $6 thereafter. Cancel anytime.
Want access to all of The New York Times? Learn more.
Offer for The Athletic subscription; current subscribers not eligible. Subscription excludes print edition. Subscription also excludes digital access to New York Times news content, Games, Cooking or Wirecutter. Your payment method will automatically be charged in advance the introductory rate of $2.00 every 4 weeks for 1 year, and after 1 year the standard rate of $6.00 every 4 weeks. Your subscription will continue until you cancel. For subscribers in the U.S., cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. For international subscribers, see our Terms of Service for further information. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.

College Football Playoff 2024 projections: What are Alabama’s chances after Vandy upset?

College Football Playoff 2024 projections: What are Alabama’s chances after Vandy upset?
By Austin Mock and The Athletic Staff
Oct 8, 2024

392

Last updated October 8, 2024 at 1:37 AM

Most likely bracket

These are the teams that have the best odds of making the new 12-team College Football Playoff, according to our model. The top four seeds go to the highest-ranked conference champions, with a fifth conference champion making the bracket too.

8
Alabama
9
Ole Miss
5
Oregon
12
Boise State
7
Georgia
10
Notre Dame
6
Penn State
11
Clemson
1
Ohio State
4
Utah
2
Texas
3
Miami (FL)
Teams on the bubble
Tennessee
Indiana
Texas A&M
Kansas State
Iowa State

Team-by-team projections

How teams stack up in the race for automatic bids, first-round home games and staying on the right side of the bubble.

RK.TEAMCONF.POINTS FORPOINTS AGAINSTDIFF.PROJ. MoV (AVG.)PROJ. RECORDMAKE PLAYOFFWIN CONF.HOME PLAYOFF GAMEWIN CHAMP.
#
1
Ohio State 5–0		B1G41.913.9
+28.0
+28.0
11–1
96%
41%
46%
21%
#
2
Texas 5–0		SEC41.316.0
+25.3
+25.3
11–1
91%
38%
41%
15%
#
3
Miami (FL) 6–0		ACC39.618.6
+21.0
+21.0
11–1
89%
50%
22%
7%
#
4
Oregon 5–0		B1G40.117.5
+22.6
+22.6
10–2
88%
26%
45%
7%
#
5
Penn State 5–0		B1G36.214.0
+22.2
+22.2
10–2
87%
25%
47%
9%
T
6
Georgia 4–1		SEC43.113.7
+29.4
+29.4
9–3
83%
17%
45%
17%
T
6
Alabama 4–1		SEC39.816.4
+23.4
+23.4
10–2
83%
13%
49%
11%
#
8
Ole Miss 5–1		SEC41.319.7
+21.6
+21.6
9–3
59%
8%
27%
4%
#
9
Notre Dame 4–1		Ind.30.916.5
+14.4
+14.4
9–3
53%
—
31%
<1%
#
10
Clemson 4–1		ACC33.218.0
+15.2
+15.2
10–2
48%
34%
4%
2%
T
11
Tennessee 4–1		SEC34.915.4
+19.5
+19.5
9–3
40%
6%
14%
2%
T
11
Indiana 6–0		B1G35.422.4
+13.0
+13.0
10–2
40%
5%
9%
<1%
#
13
Boise State 4–1		MWC29.023.6
+5.4
+5.4
9–3
34%
47%
<1%
<1%
#
14
Texas A&M 5–1		SEC33.116.8
+16.3
+16.3
9–3
33%
12%
5%
<1%
#
15
Utah 4–1		Big 1228.915.0
+13.9
+13.9
9–3
32%
24%
<1%
<1%
#
16
Kansas State 4–1		Big 1233.019.5
+13.5
+13.5
9–3
27%
18%
2%
<1%
#
17
Iowa State 5–0		Big 1229.820.5
+9.3
+9.3
9–3
26%
16%
2%
<1%
#
18
Tulane 4–2		AAC27.121.7
+5.4
+5.4
9–3
20%
33%
<1%
<1%
#
19
UNLV 4–1		MWC28.726.2
+2.5
+2.5
9–3
18%
30%
<1%
<1%
T
20
West Virginia 3–2		Big 1235.326.5
+8.8
+8.8
7–5
17%
17%
<1%
<1%
T
20
USC 3–2		B1G37.020.6
+16.4
+16.4
8–4
17%
<1%
5%
<1%
T
22
SMU 5–1		ACC31.723.6
+8.1
+8.1
9–3
13%
7%
<1%
<1%
T
22
Navy 5–0		AAC27.025.0
+2.0
+2.0
9–3
13%
28%
<1%
<1%
T
24
LSU 4–1		SEC38.723.6
+15.1
+15.1
8–4
11%
3%
1%
<1%
T
24
Pittsburgh 5–0		ACC31.724.8
+6.9
+6.9
8–4
11%
2%
1%
<1%
#
26
Army 5–0		AAC27.627.6
+0.0
+0.0
10–2
10%
35%
<1%
<1%
T
27
Texas Tech 5–1		Big 1227.424.3
+3.1
+3.1
8–4
6%
6%
<1%
<1%
T
27
Louisville 3–2		ACC32.919.5
+13.4
+13.4
7–5
6%
3%
<1%
<1%
#
29
BYU 5–0		Big 1226.022.6
+3.4
+3.4
8–4
5%
4%
<1%
<1%
T
30
Oklahoma 4–1		SEC29.217.4
+11.8
+11.8
7–5
4%
<1%
<1%
<1%
T
30
Iowa 3–2		B1G26.615.4
+11.2
+11.2
8–4
4%
2%
<1%
<1%
T
32
Colorado 4–1		Big 1228.224.7
+3.5
+3.5
7–5
3%
3%
<1%
<1%
T
32
UCF 3–2		Big 1234.227.3
+6.9
+6.9
7–5
3%
3%
<1%
<1%
T
32
Arizona 3–2		Big 1231.125.1
+6.0
+6.0
7–5
3%
3%
<1%
<1%
T
32
Missouri 4–1		SEC35.119.9
+15.2
+15.2
8–4
3%
2%
<1%
<1%
T
36
Nebraska 5–1		B1G29.419.4
+10.0
+10.0
8–4
2%
<1%
<1%
<1%
T
36
Arizona State 4–1		Big 1233.126.7
+6.4
+6.4
7–5
2%
2%
<1%
<1%
T
36
TCU 3–3		Big 1232.824.2
+8.6
+8.6
6–6
2%
2%
<1%
<1%
T
36
Rutgers 4–1		B1G27.621.9
+5.7
+5.7
8–4
2%
<1%
<1%
<1%
T
36
Georgia Tech 4–2		ACC37.124.6
+12.5
+12.5
7–5
2%
<1%
<1%
<1%
T
36
Michigan 4–2		B1G27.615.6
+12.0
+12.0
7–5
2%
<1%
<1%
<1%
T
42
Illinois 4–1		B1G28.624.3
+4.3
+4.3
7–5
1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
T
42
Fresno State 3–2		MWC26.227.2
-1.0
-1.0
8–4
1%
11%
<1%
<1%
T
42
Virginia Tech 3–3		ACC27.720.5
+7.2
+7.2
6–6
1%
1%
<1%
<1%
T
42
Toledo 4–1		MAC23.027.0
-4.0
-4.0
9–3
1%
33%
<1%
<1%
T
46
Arkansas 4–2		SEC30.121.1
+9.0
+9.0
7–5
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
T
46
Virginia 4–1		ACC28.824.0
+4.8
+4.8
6–6
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
T
46
California 3–2		ACC28.022.9
+5.1
+5.1
7–5
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
T
46
Coastal Carolina 4–1		SBC25.831.4
-5.6
-5.6
8–4
<1%
15%
<1%
<1%

Methodology

We create an offensive and defensive projection for every college football team using various metrics, such as Expected Points Added and Success Rate. These projections estimate how many points each team would be expected to score and allow in a game against an average opponent at a neutral site. We then assign a probability of how likely a team is to win a given game by adjusting for opponent and location. Taking into account each team’s current record and remaining schedule, we use these game-by-game projections to simulate the rest of the season 100,000 times.

We also created an algorithm to predict which 12 teams the College Football Playoff committee would choose. It’s inherently difficult to model the choices of a committee of 12 people, but we’ve created two quantitative metrics that reflect 10 years of data on the committee's decision making process: Strength of Resume and Strength of Record.

Credits

Reporting: Austin Mock | Editing: Matt Brown, Jill Thaw, Eric Single

Design and Development: Ryan Best, Laura Pelton, David Haye, Elliot Jordan, Oliver Viehweger | Editing: Skye Gould, Marc Mazzoni, Amy Cavenaile

Illustration: Dan Goldfarb

More College Football
What we learned about the College Football Playoff race after the season’s wildest week yet
Ralph Russo
Mandel’s Final Thoughts: In zany day of upsets, Vanderbilt-Alabama stands above the rest
Stewart Mandel
No. 1 Alabama upset by Vanderbilt: Are the Tide in Playoff trouble after historic loss?
Kennington Smith III and Joe Rexrode
Tennessee’s high-flying offense — and Playoff hopes — grounded in loss to Arkansas
David Ubben
College Football Playoff Bubble Watch: Could Georgia be tripped up by brutal schedule?
David Ubben