Joel Klatt says he’d pick Notre Dame over most College Football Playoff bubble teams in a one-on-one matchup, yet he worries about the Fighting Irish sneaking into the field ahead of Alabama and Miami. This piece looks at why Klatt feels that way, what it means for the CFP picture, and how comparisons between resumes, style of play, and committee priorities could shape the final field.
Klatt’s starting point is simple and blunt: in a straight head-to-head showdown, Notre Dame can hang with a lot of bubble teams. That belief rests on the Irish’s balance on offense and defense and the way they handle pressure games against top opponents. Those traits make them a matchup nightmare for teams that rely on one dimension of their game.
Still, Klatt is uneasy about the idea of Notre Dame sliding into the playoff at the expense of programs like Alabama and Miami. His hesitation is rooted in roster depth and the gauntlet those teams endure in the SEC and ACC, which often forces a higher degree of resilience. The committee tends to reward strength of schedule and conference competition, which is why comparisons matter so much.
Evaluating teams for the CFP is never just about talent on paper. The committee examines how teams finish the season, who they beat late, and whether they prove themselves against elite competition. Notre Dame has flashes of dominance, but skeptics point to a couple of shaky moments that could hurt them when the committee stacks resumes side by side with Alabama and Miami.
Alabama’s brand has earned it a kind of built-in trust, thanks to sustained success under high-pressure expectations. Miami, meanwhile, boasts explosive playmakers and a growing body of wins that feel impressive in context. Both programs bring different strengths: Alabama’s consistent championship-level preparation and Miami’s high-ceiling playmaking, making them hard to dismiss even if Notre Dame looks sharp on a given day.
Matchups matter. Notre Dame’s style forces physical battles in the trenches and tests defensive discipline, which can neutralize extreme offensive trends. But if the committee leans toward measurable resume power and recent wins in harder conferences, those traits might not be enough to vault the Irish over teams with more gaudy credentials. That tension is exactly what Klatt is flagging.
The playoff conversation also reflects broader questions about how to weigh head-to-head hypotheticals versus the season-long grind. A single matchup can expose matchups and strategies, but it does not erase three months of scheduling choices and conference dynamics. Committee members often value a season’s narrative and consistent dominance along with peak performance.
What Klatt lays out is a call for clarity in the selection process as much as it is a scouting opinion. He supports Notre Dame’s ability to win one-on-one, but he wants the committee to honor the full picture when comparing the Irish to Alabama and Miami. With rankings and public debate heating up, the final decisions will come down to how the committee balances head-to-head potential with the full breadth of each team’s body of work.
