The Toyota Tacoma remains an enduring force in the American automotive landscape. The midsize truck is simple, versatile and off-road capable. It’s reasonably sized by truck standards. And it comes off as effortlessly cool, while its competitors put in a lot of effort. And resale values for the Tacoma escalate beyond all reason.

I should show off my nuanced, professional car journalist nous, shit on conventional wisdom, and espouse the unheralded virtues of the new Ford Ranger or something. But that would be hypocritical. I’m depressingly conventional. I’ve come close to becoming a basic Tacoma bro. The main thing holding me back is fuel economy. Even downsizing the powertrain and adding a hybrid only bumped the Tacoma’s efficiency to 23 mpg combined — hard to justify in 2025.

My dream would be an electric Tacoma, with the charm of the current version and much less guilt. And it appears I’m not the only one who has that dream. A recent survey showed the mere idea of an electric Toyota Tacoma was more popular than any current electric truck on the market.

Will Toyota build that electric truck? It’s unclear. But here’s what we know so far.

Toyota did say it would build an electric pickup truck

So, Toyota building an electric pickup is not — entirely — wishcasting. In its press release for the bZ4X concept in April 2021, Toyota mentioned that “hybrid and BEV powertrains” were headed to the Toyota pickup lineup “in the near future.” Toyota brought hybrids with new generations of Tundra and Tacoma. But we are now stretching the bounds of “in the near future” for the BEV powertrains.

Toyota has not followed up on that since. The most substantive comment from Toyota came from then North America EVP Jack Hollis in March 2024, who confirmed to reporters that Toyota was evaluating BEV and PHEV options for the Tundra and Tacoma.

Toyota has shown us viable electric pickup concepts

Toyota’s electric Hilux — built in Thailand for Asian markets — won’t come to America. But Toyota has shown us two viable electric truck concepts that could.

One concept was an electric Tacoma. In December 2021, Toyota unveiled a buffet of EV concepts to preview its BEV future. Nestled in the back corner was the Pickup EV, which looked at the time like an electric Tacoma. Those suspicions were confirmed when Toyota revealed the fourth-generation Tacoma, which looked just like it.

Toyota followed that up in October 2023 with the EPU concept that debuted at the Japan Mobility Show. It was a unibody pickup. At 199.6 inches in length, it was close in size to the Ford Maverick. And though it was revealed in Japan, the EPU concept was left-hand drive and had gauge readouts in mph and ºF.

Rumblings corroborate Toyota working on an electric pickup for North America

Spy photographers appeared to catch Toyota benchmarking the Rivian R1T pickup. Another report claimed Toyota was benchmarking the F-150 Lightning, GMC Hummer EV and Tesla Cybertruck. This would align with Toyota's exploration of BEV options for the Tacoma and Tundra pickups.

A report from Japan also said Toyota’s electric Land Cruiser Mini would be delayed, as the company was prioritizing preparing its powertrain for an electric Tacoma in North America.

But the consensus has swung away from EVs

A few years ago, EV conversion looked like it was experiencing exponential growth. Media outlets framed Toyota’s EV reticence as a miscalculation and borderline climate denialism. But times have changed. The EV growth curve now looks like a linear slog. Toyota’s competitors are ratcheting back their EV plans, and Toyota's focus on hybrids now looks much more prescient.

With the Trump administration poised to eliminate EV tax credits and scale back emissions standards, the climate for EVs—at least non-Tesla EVs—may become less auspicious over the next few years.

There’s no competitive incentive for Toyota to electrify the Tacoma

The electric truck market has cooled. Ford F-150 Lightning demand once looked overwhelming. But after price hikes, Ford is selling fewer of them than first anticipated. Ram is delaying and scaling back its plans for the Ram 1500 REV. Tesla may be running out of jackasses to buy the Cybertruck.

The electric Tacoma competitor is non-existent. Rivian is launching its smaller R2 platform without a truck variant. Nissan’s electric Frontier successor has been pushed back until 2030 — if it ever materializes. Toyota is the only midsize truck competitor even offering a hybrid in America.

How much would an electric Toyota Tacoma cost?

Toyota’s determiner for bringing an EV pickup to America would be the cost balance. Toyota must be able to offer the electric truck at a price point where it would be profitable and sell-able. It’s hard to see Toyota squaring that circle right now.

The gas Tacoma isn’t a cheap truck. Yes, the base MSRP is $31,950. But a basic Double Cab 4x4 SR5 build jumps to $40,490 and nearly $42,000 with the destination and handling. The hybrid motor costs a premium on top of that. The base TRD Sport i-Force Max starts at $46,320 and is almost $48,000 with destination and handling.

If we extrapolate from there, a Tacoma PHEV would likely start in the $50,000s. A Tacoma EV would cost even more, potentially approaching the $69,900 starting MSRP for the Rivian R1T. Also note that the Extended Range F-150 Lightning begins at $67,995. Are there some Toyota nuts who would buy that? Absolutely. Enough of them to make building the truck worthwhile? Probably not.

An electric Toyota truck may also not have traditional Toyota resale value. One justification for paying a steep upfront price for a Tacoma, Tundra or 4Runner is the value it will still have after 100,000 miles. We don’t know how much an electric Toyota truck would depreciate, but we know that batteries degrade over time and used EVs tend to plummet in value.

When will Toyota build an electric Tacoma for America?

Toyota has not said if (since 2021) or when it would offer an electric truck for America. If we presume Toyota’s most direct route to an electric truck would be EV powertrains for the Tundra and Tacoma, the earliest natural opportunity would be a 2026 refresh for the Tundra. Pickup Truck and SUV Talk suggests that Toyota will focus on more minor changes — not too surprising with a costly recall on the current engine. A refresh on the Tacoma is still a few years away.

Toyota is nothing if not deliberate. So don’t expect a rush to an electric truck or, alternatively, a colossal overreaction to Trump-era policies that may outlast his presidency.

We can confidently say that Toyota needs improved battery tech to make an EV truck work from a cost and performance perspective. Toyota is working on new EV battery tech that may arrive later this decade. I would bet that some form of North American truck will be in the plans once that tech is in place.

Toyota could pursue another route and launch a unibody EV pickup based on the EPU concept. However, a hybrid Ford Maverick fighter that could match up on price would make more sense. And Toyota reportedly has that exact truck coming for South America in 2027.

Don't read too much into the final's disappointing TV viewership. Its 22.1 million average viewers — the third lowest of the playoff era — may have been the product of an apparent blowout (and other things happening on January 20th). But it seems clear the new format did not engender any newfound excitement. The most common casual fan reaction I heard was some variation of "What round is it? They are still playing? When does it end?"

The powers that be will tweak the CFB Playoff further. And I'm here to propose a paradoxical solution for a tournament that seemed too much; it needs to expand. The best option for the CFB Playoff is to move to 14 teams. Here's why.

The CFB Playoff only has two options available

We can debate the optimal playoff format until the planet's impending heat death. But we're stuck with the present iteration and its multi-billion-dollar TV contract until after the 2031 season. That contract contains provisions for either 12-team or 14-team formats — even if retracting to 8 may seem sensible after 2024.

A 14-team playoff would work like the 12-team one. It adds two teams and two additional games to the first round. Instead of receiving bye weeks, the No. 3 and No. 4 seeds would play first-round home games against the No. 13 and No. 14 seeds. Other rounds would proceed as before.

The current 12-team CFB Playoff has a clear structural flaw.

The 12-team playoff requires the top four seeds to be conference champions. 2024 realignment siloed most national competitors into two conferences. Notre Dame can't win a conference. In most years, 8 or 9 of the Top 10 teams will only be eligible for two of the top four seeds.

Finding two more conference champions for the top four seeds distorts the seeding. In 2024, the committee went to No. 9 Boise State for the No. 3 seed and No. 12 Arizona State for the No. 4 seed. That creates a scenario where the No. 5 and No. 6 teams earn an easier route to the semifinal than the No. 1 and No. 2 teams that beat them.

Oregon beat Penn State in the Big Ten title game. Penn State ended up as the No. 6 seed. The Nittany Lions played SMU at home and Boise State on a neutral site to get to the semifinal. Oregon did get a bye week to the quarterfinal. But they then had to meet No. 8 seed Ohio State as an underdog on a neutral field.

The same thing happened in the SEC. Georgia beat Texas for the SEC championship. Texas ended up as the No. 5 seed. They opened at home against the lowest-ranked team in the bracket, ACC champ and No. 16 Clemson. They played ASU in the quarterfinal. The Longhorns were about a two-touchdown favorite in both games. Georgia? They began at a neutral site against the No. 7 seed, a Top 5-ranked Notre Dame.

A 14-team playoff resolves that flaw

In a 12-team format, the committee struggles to find four worthy conference champions without distorting the bracket. In a 14-team playoff, they only need to find two. Here's what a 14-team playoff would have looked like in 2024.

• 1 Oregon - Bye

• 2 Georgia - Bye

• 3 Texas vs. 14 Clemson

• 4 Penn State vs. 13 Miami

• 5 Notre Dame vs. 12 Arizona State

• 6 Ohio State vs. 11 Alabama

• 7 Tennessee vs. 10 SMU

• 8 Indiana vs. 9 Boise State

In this playoff, the regular season mattered. B1G champ Oregon receives a first-round bye and the Indiana/Boise State winner to reach the semifinal. Penn State must host Miami and would play Notre Dame. SEC champ Oregon receives a first-round bye and the Tennessee/SMU winner. Texas still plays Clemson in the first round as the No. 3 seed, but the Longhorns must play the Ohio State/Alabama winner in round two.

This format should work out smoothly in most seasons. Notre Dame could only be eligible for a No. 3 seed because they won't join a conference. There may be a situation where the two clear best teams are in one conference, and one ends up as the No. 3 seed. But the seedings would be, by and large, fair.

A 14-team playoff resolves the conference champion problem easily

The conference championship requirement is an obvious problem. It's one the powers that be will discuss and could address — though doing so for next year would require unanimous approval and be unlikely. We're not dealing with a rational collective of decision-makers but self-interested folks horse-trading and coming up with terrible ideas. The fewer decisions TPTB have to make, the better.

Expanding to 14 alleviates the need for discussion about the conference champion requirement. And it does that with a move that every conference should want. The B1G and SEC will want more access for their teams. The Big 12 and ACC will want additional slots. Other conferences will want broader access. Everybody wins if the playoff expands to 14 — or at least has a higher probability of winning.

And one more tweak that could make the playoff better remains in play

Bowl involvement is still up for negotiation in the long term. Per ESPN, the CFB Playoff has not yet signed agreements with the bowls beyond 2026. So there's a chance the second-round games could be moved to home sites. That would make the playoff better and fairer. Bowls could enter the mix at the semifinal level with the Rose and Sugar (or that could rotate as it did during the four-team playoff).

A home game for the No. 1 and No. 2 seeds in the second round increases their advantage, thus making the regular season matter more. It would reduce travel demands on teams and fans. And the bowls added little to the overall spectacle beyond an awkward trophy presentation. The Rose Bowl teams didn’t even go to Disneyland.

Shedding bowl games would also allow the second round to happen earlier in December. The semifinals could then be played on New Year's Day. The final would be the week after that. December could be college football's March Madness — better than trying to insert itself into gaps in the NFL Playoffs schedule in January.

Critics might suggest that there would be too many games in cold weather in the north. I suggest the SEC resolve that by being less mid.

How will the college football playoff change?

We have a track record of how conference commissioners handle things. Expect short-sightedness, self-interested parties and overly elaborate compromises to avoid tough decisions. I don't think any substantive changes will happen for the 2025 season. Unanimous approval is an impossible threshold. All it takes is one commissioner to "want to see more data."

I think the CFB Playoff will expand to 14 teams. It solves the main issue with the current format. It's hard to game out a rationale where any conference wouldn't want that. But I worry it will come with cockamamie requirements like guaranteed numbers of conference bids. That could move us even further away from a fair seeding.

It's hard to see the CFB Playoff abandoning the "New Year's Six" bowls or lessening their involvement. But one can hope.

Questioning the number of teams obscures a serious flaw with the current playoff: the seeding. Conferences made the regular season matter by ensuring first-round byes would only go to conference champions, and five conference champions would make the tournament. But doing so distorts the seeding and, paradoxically, makes the regular season matter less.

Contrary to intentions, the CFB playoff creates a scenario where losing the Big Ten or SEC championship game may be the optimal route to a national title.

Conference realignment upset the playoff’s formula

TPTB designed the CFB Playoff with the “Power Five” era in mind. The B1G, SEC, ACC, Big 12 and Pac 12 would produce a champion. Three to four of those champions would be worthy national title contenders in a given year. Those teams would get the bye weeks. In 2023, the four byes would have gone to Michigan (B1G champ), Washington (Pac 12 champ), Texas (Big 12 champ) and either Florida State (ACC champ) or Alabama (SEC champ).

Conference realignment upended that apple cart. The SEC decapitated the Big 12, swiping Texas and Oklahoma. The Big Ten lopped the top off the Pac 12, claiming USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington. The national powers are now concentrated in two conferences and are only eligible to take two conference champion bids, which creates a problem.

In the final 2024 CFP rankings, seven of the top eight teams were Big Ten and SEC teams. The eighth was Notre Dame, ineligible for a bye week because the Fighting Irish are not in a conference. This forced the committee to cast far further down the rankings to get four eligible conference champions for bye weeks and a fifth champion to earn an auto bid.

The 2024 CFB Playoff bracket is unfair to the top teams

No. 1 Oregon ran through the Big Ten undefeated to earn the No. 1 seed. No. 2 Georgia beat Texas in the national title game to earn the No. 2 seed. Finding the No. 3 and No. 4 seeds got tougher. The committee had to jump over teams ranked 3-8 to get to No. 9 Boise State for the No. 3 seed in the bracket. The No. 4 seed went to the Big 12 champion, No. 12 Arizona State. Those moves distorted the bracket.

Two teams that should have been first-round road teams earned byes. The rightful top four teams shuffled down the bracket. No. 3 Texas became the No. 5 seed. No. 4 Penn State dropped to the No. 6 seed. No. 5 Notre Dame became the No. 7 seed. No. 6 Ohio State ended up as the No. 8 team.

This shuffle disadvantaged the teams that won the Big Ten and SEC championship games. Let’s compare the winners and losers and their respective routes to the semifinals.

As the No. 5 seed, Texas received a first-round home game against the worst team in the bracket, No. 16 Clemson, which earned the No. 12 seed as the fifth-best conference champion. Texas winning set up a quarterfinal matchup with the No. 5 seed, No. 12 Arizona State. The Longhorns can reach the CFB Playoff semifinal without facing a team as less than a 13.5-point favorite. Georgia earned a bye week for winning the SEC. But their No. 7 seed opponent is No. 5 Notre Dame. The Dawgs are favored by less than a field goal.

What about the Big Ten? Penn State lost, which bumped them down to the No. 6 seed. That set up a first-round matchup with an overmatched No. 11 SMU at home. The Nittany Lions are an 11-point favorite against the No. 3 seed, No. 9 Boise State, on a neutral site. Oregon earned the No. 1 overall seed. Their reward, after a bye week, is facing Ohio State in the Rose Bowl. The Ducks are 2.5-point underdogs.

The Big Ten and SEC champions did get a first-round bye. But they ended up with a more challenging route to the semifinal than the teams that lost the title games. And that won’t be a one-time thing.

The conference champion requirement will create a similar distortion every year

Let’s look back at 2023. For the hypothetical’s sake, presume the current conference realignment. Michigan beats Washington in the Big 12 title game to earn the No. 1 seed. Texas beats Alabama in the SEC title game to earn the No. 2 seed. No. 5 Florida State, weakened by a QB injury, earns the No. 3 seed. Finding the No. 4 seed means jumping to No. 14 Arizona, a team that otherwise would not have made the playoffs. The bracket looks like this…

• 1 Michigan (8 Ohio State vs. 9 Oregon)

• 2 Texas (7 Georgia vs. 10. Missouri)

• 3 Florida State (6 Alabama vs. 11 Penn State)

• 4 Arizona (5 Washington vs. 12 Liberty)

Washington earns a very winnable first-round home game against No. 23 Liberty, the fifth-highest conference champion. Presuming a win there, they will meet No. 14 Arizona on a neutral site. Washington likely will reach the semifinal without playing a team that should have been in the playoff. Michigan’s prize for winning? A rematch with Ohio State or facing Oregon on a neutral site.

Alabama loses the SEC title game, earning a winnable home game against No. 11 Penn State and setting up a home date with a weakened FSU team at a neutral site. The Tide will likely end up in the semifinal without a serious test. SEC champion Texas will face a probable grudge match against Georgia on a neutral site.

Again, the committee needing to fish down the rankings for a conference champion meant that winning the two major conferences set up a more arduous route to the semifinal.

Does the bye week provide an advantage? If so, how much?

The 12-team CFB Playoff is a gauntlet. The first-round bye provides what seems like an obvious advantage: only needing to win three games instead of four. But is it enough to offset the advantage from an easier first and second-round matchup?

The NFL Playoff’s bye week confers a far greater advantage. No. 1 seeds in each conference don’t just get the week off. They earn home-field advantage for the following two games. They are also guaranteed to face the weakest second-round opponent. Still, the bye week does not seem to offer an overwhelming advantage. In four years with the current playoff format, No. 1 seeds have reached the Super Bowl four times and won the Super Bowl once.

College bye week teams only get the freshness advantage. And is it an advantage? Oregon will have had 25 days of rest between games, while Ohio State will have had 11. Does that benefit the Ducks, who have had extra time to heal from injuries? Or does it help the Buckeyes, battle-hardened and in tournament mode, against an Oregon team shaking off the rust?

What should the CFB Playoff do? Eliminate all conference championship requirements

TPTB wanted to ensure the regular season mattered. The best way to do that is by seeding the CFB Playoff fairly. Fair seeding ensures that losses have consequences and the regular season matters.

Here’s what the 2024 bracket would have looked like if CFB had just seeded the 12-team playoff with its 12 top teams. No conference championship requirement for the byes. No automatic bids for five conference champions.

• 1 Oregon (8 Indiana vs. 9 Boise State)

• 2 Georgia (7 Tennessee vs. 10 SMU)

• 3 Texas (6 Ohio State vs. 11 Alabama)

• 4 Penn State (5 Notre Dame vs. 12 Arizona State)

This bracket is much fairer without restricting the bye week to conference champions. It rewards Oregon for the No. 1 seed with a draw of Indiana or Boise State (and I’d predict that game would have been better than any we saw in the real-life first round). Penn State gets the 50/50 second-round draw with Notre Dame.

Georgia beating Texas dropped the Longhorns to No. 3 in the Playoff. But that one position could be crucial. It’s the difference between playing Tennessee/SMU winner or Ohio State in a level game on a neutral site.

Boise State and Arizona State still reach the tournament deservedly, but in positions that reflect their relative ranking. The only real sacrifice is that winning the ACC championship didn’t bump a 3-loss Clemson team that couldn’t finish in the Top 12 on merit into the field. That’s a price worth paying to get a fairly structured playoff.

Ohio State put everything into beating Michigan in 2024. The Buckeyes assembled even more of a Death Star roster than usual. NFL-ready players returned. Boosters outspent everyone in the transfer portal — often on players the Buckeyes didn’t even need. Ohio State brought in America’s highest-paid assistant staff to coach them. It mattered not. Michigan didn’t even need an improbable torpedo shot to an exhaust port to get that W.

This is now Day’s fourth-straight loss to Michigan, the second-straight at home in the Horseshoe. The only member of Ohio State’s vaunted, five-star-laden 2021 recruiting class to beat Michigan is current Texas Longhorns QB Quinn Ewers. The Buckeyes have now scored just 84 points since Day infamously promised to “hang 100” on Michigan after a spat with Jim Harbaugh in 2020.

Day looks broken. His insecurity resounds through his voice and emanates from his pores into his unnaturally black beard. He’s John Cooper, and both sides of the rivalry know it. This can’t go on. But it appears like it’s going to. Ohio State AD Ross Bjork said he “absolutely” expects Ryan Day to be back for 2025. And — as much as another Michigan loss and the laughter from Ann Arbor stings — that may be Ohio State’s only option.

The Buckeyes remain among the national title favorites

In past years, Michigan’s win would have ended Ohio State’s season. 10-2 would earn them a trip to the Cotton Bowl or something while other schools attended to serious business. Buckeye players would be declaring for the draft or fast-walking to the transfer portal. But this year we have a 12-team playoff, which may help Ryan Day stay in Columbus.

Ohio State coughed up a chance at a No. 1 seed. But they remain very much in it to win it — as high as the third favorite to win the title, depending on the sportsbook. The Buckeyes have to beat Tennessee at home as a 7-point favorite instead of having a bye week. But if they win, Ohio State will be right where it would have been as a No. 1 seed: preparing to face Oregon in a Rose Bowl rematch.

The Buckeyes could not fire Ryan Day before the playoff, with a national championship still in play. It’s hard to see Ohio State dropping Day after an encouraging showing during the playoff. An abject first-round loss to the Vols at home may be the only result that puts a firing in play.

Firing Ryan Day would get very expensive

Ryan Day has a $37 million contract buyout. That alone does not save him — Bjork notably fired Jimbo Fisher with a $76 million buyout at Texas A&M — but it’s enough to think long and hard about. And that’s only the start of what firing Day would cost. Ohio State’s assistant staff earns more than $11 million annually, including two $2 million-plus-per-year coordinators on multiple-year deals. Most of them would need to be bought out.

Then, of course, Ohio State would have to hire a new staff. Elite (or even very good) head coaches don’t come cheap. Everyone has money. Alabama needed an 8-year, $87 million contract with a $70 million buyout to pry Kalen DeBoer from a good situation in Washington. The Buckeyes would likely need to meet or exceed that to land their desired coach. That coach would potentially need to spend even more than the current $11 million to bring in a top-notch staff.

Buyouts would be offset by Ohio State coaches getting new jobs. But firing Ryan Day would still cost tens of millions, which could be spent trying to push the team over the Michigan hump.

And a coaching change could mean a roster apocalypse

NCAA rules create a 30-day player transfer window following a head coaching change. Firing Ryan Day would mean a 30-day open season for other schools to poach Ohio State’s players and recruits. The money could get crazy. And recruiting nationally means fewer Ohio “born and bread” types like Jack Sawyer who will stay come what may.

Alabama’s transition from Nick Saban to Kalen DeBoer last offseason went about as seamlessly as major coaching changes get. The roster attrition was devastating. Alabama lost more than 25 players to the transfer portal. Ohio State swiped Alabama’s best player (Caleb Downs), starting center and five-star quarterback recruit.

Firing Day could spark an exodus to the transfer portal. Or it could see Ohio State’s next coach in a similar position to Sherrone Moore last offseason, paying big money just to keep guys around and not get better.

A new coach would have to be better than Ryan Day

The optics are brutal. But outside of The Game, Ohio State has performed outstandingly under Day. He has a 66-10 overall record. He’s 45-1 in the Big Ten against teams not named Michigan. Day’s worst finish in a final AP or Coaches poll is 10th. He has sent three QBs and four wide receivers to the first round of the NFL Draft since arriving on campus.

Day’s track record would be a historic run at any other school. It’s in the ballpark on par with what Tressel and Meyer achieved through their first six seasons — except for a national title and beating Michigan regularly.

One could attribute Ryan Day’s current vibes almost entirely to college kicking. If Ohio State makes the field goal to beat Georgia in the playoff in 2022, Day likely wins his first national title in the final over TCU. Ohio State missed two field goals against Michigan that could have won The Game. No one is talking about Day getting fired if he won either of those games.

Other coaches have started slow in their rivalries before going on to dominance. Dabo Swinney started 1-5 against South Carolina before reeling off his run of six-straight ACC titles and two national championships. Jim Harbaugh lost five-straight to Ohio State before winning. Though both Swinney and Harbaugh had to build their programs into national competitors; Ryan Day inherited one. And neither coach had a spell like that with a C.J. Stroud-caliber QB.

And it’s not clear who that new Ohio State head coach would be

Ross Bjork replaced longtime AD Gene Smith. His first major task was to hire a men’s basketball coach. Bjork ended up promoting assistant Jake Diebler over hiring an up-and-comer like Dusty May. The early returns aren’t promising. Even if OSU had a rockstar athletic director, the Venn diagram of coaches who could be available and would out-perform Day is slim, if it even exists.

Mike Vrabel would be the message board fever dream. Former Buckeye. Former Buckeye assistant. Well-regarded former NFL coach. Only 49. He would, if nothing else, re-instill the toughness Ohio State has perceived to lack against Michigan. Vrabel would be the closest thing Ohio State could do to Michigan hiring Jim Harbaugh. The trouble would be that Vrabel would have to want a college job. He may have his pick of NFL jobs this offseason.

Would Ohio State go back to Urban Meyer? Setting aside the scandals, Meyer is among the best to ever coach. And he, notably, never lost to Michigan as Ohio State head coach. But Meyer is in his 60s now. He’s been out of college football for six seasons. It’s hard to see hiring him now being the same coup it was 13 years ago when he took a brief recharge after his run at Florida.

Ohio State’s first choice among current college coaches would probably be OSU alum Marcus Freeman. He did walk back comments that rankled Columbus. But he also has Notre Dame poised for a playoff run and just signed a significant extension. And he also has two home losses to MAC teams. Dan Lanning is beating and out-recruiting Ohio State at Oregon. Does Ohio State pull the ripcord for someone like Iowa State coach Matt Campbell, currently 2-6 for his career against Iowa?

So…Ryan Day comes back in 2025, then?

Probably. Ryan Day may not have the mettle to overturn the rivalry paradigm. We all may be able to see and feel that. But like with John Cooper, the Buckeyes may be too excruciatingly close to reboot. The thing about Cooper winning just twice in 13 years against Michigan was that he lasted thirteen years.

Maybe Ohio State fans get an inside straight draw. Day’s departure is pre-ordained. Vrabel is bound for Columbus regardless of what happens. And Michigan fans start stocking up on anti-acid meds and CBD gummies. It would not be the first time. But the Buckeyes making a decent showing in the playoff and that being enough to keep Day around for 2025 feels like the most plausible outcome.