Lead: On Jan. 1, 2026 at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, No. 1 Indiana overwhelmed No. 9 Alabama, 38-3, to advance to a College Football Playoff semifinal matchup with No. 5 Oregon at the Peach Bowl on Jan. 9. The Hoosiers, led by Heisman winner Fernando Mendoza, controlled the game on both sides of the ball and improved to 14-0, the best single-season mark in program history. Alabama, meanwhile, suffered its heaviest defeat in a quarter-century and saw starting quarterback Ty Simpson exit in the third quarter. Indiana’s win also guaranteed the Big Ten a spot in the national title picture for a third straight season.
Key Takeaways
- Final score: Indiana 38, Alabama 3 — a 35-point margin tied for the sixth-largest in Rose Bowl history.
- Indiana improved to 14-0, marking the most wins in a single season in program history and a 14-game winning streak (longest active in FBS).
- Fernando Mendoza: 14-of-16 passing for 192 yards and three touchdowns; first Heisman winner to reach CFP semifinals since 2021.
- Indiana rushed for 215 yards, exceeding Alabama’s total offense of 193 yards for the game.
- Curt Cignetti reached 25 wins in his first two seasons at Indiana (25-2), becoming just the second FBS coach to hit that mark early at a program.
- Alabama’s 35-point loss is its largest bowl defeat in program history and the worst overall loss since 1998.
- Indiana will meet Oregon in the Peach Bowl on Jan. 9, a rematch of a Week 7 road win (Indiana 30-20 at Eugene).
Background
The 2025 season produced a new narrative in college football: Indiana emerged as a top-ranked, balanced team under Curt Cignetti. After upgrading the roster and adding transfer quarterback Fernando Mendoza from Cal, the Hoosiers went undefeated through the regular season and claimed a top seed and a first-round bye in the expanded 12-team College Football Playoff. Historically, teams receiving byes in the inaugural 12-team format had struggled in quarterfinals (0-6 entering the game), a trend Indiana sought to reverse.
Alabama entered Pasadena under coach Kalen DeBoer, following a high-profile transition from the Nick Saban era. The Crimson Tide reached the CFP after a 2025 slate that included personnel shifts and periods of inconsistency. Ty Simpson had been Alabama’s primary starter throughout the year, but the matchup with Indiana posed schematic and physical challenges—particularly against a Hoosier defense that finished the regular season among the national leaders in yards and points allowed.
Beyond the field, the game carried conference and historical implications. A Big Ten team had won the national title in both 2023 (Michigan) and 2024 (Ohio State) under the 12-team CFP; Indiana’s victory ensured the conference would again be represented in the CFP’s late rounds. For Alabama, the loss extended a championship drought to five seasons following a dominant stretch under Saban.
Main Event
From the opening drives, Indiana established control. A 16-play, 84-yard march produced a 31-yard field goal early in the second quarter, and defensive stops pinned Alabama deep and forced punts. Indiana’s tempo and situational discipline repeatedly put Alabama on its heels; the Hoosiers converted a second-quarter turnover sequence into a touchdown that widened the margin.
The turning point came when Alabama elected to go for it on fourth-and-1 deep in its own territory in the second quarter. The gamble failed, handing Indiana excellent field position and momentum; Mendoza struck for a 21-yard touchdown to Charlie Becker soon after. Indiana built a 17-0 halftime lead while holding Alabama to limited yardage and few third-down conversions.
In the third quarter, Ty Simpson took a hard blow on a play that produced a fumble and was later replaced by backup Austin Mack after appearing to favor his lower back. Simpson finished 12-of-16 for 67 yards before exiting. Indiana continued to extend the lead—mixing efficient passing from Mendoza (three TDs, two incompletions) with a steady ground attack that totaled 215 yards—while Alabama never found offensive traction.
Late in the game Indiana added scores to reach 38 points; Alabama managed a 28-yard field goal in the third quarter when backup Mack led a short scoring drive. The final margin, 35 points, registered among the largest blowouts in Rose Bowl history and represented a program-low result for Alabama in the modern era.
Analysis & Implications
Strategically, Indiana’s game plan neutralized Alabama’s strengths. The Hoosiers mixed pressuring rush packages with disciplined coverage, forcing Alabama into a one-dimensional afternoon. Mendoza’s accuracy (14-of-16) allowed IU to convert high-leverage opportunities; completing more touchdown passes (3) than incompletions (2) underlines the offensive efficiency the coaching staff engineered.
For Alabama, the defeat exposed issues in run blocking, third-down efficiency and in-game adaptability. The unsuccessful fourth-down gamble in its own territory was costly both on the scoreboard and in momentum; it led directly to Indiana points and shifted the game’s tone. The benching of Simpson—related to a lower-back blow and a fumble—complicated attempts to rally, although the injury’s precise severity has not been fully disclosed.
On a program level, Indiana’s rout reshapes expectations: a top-seeded Hoosier team that can win convincingly on a major stage now faces Oregon with clear confidence. The matchup with the Ducks will test whether Indiana can replicate this level of complementary football against a high-tempo offense that has since retooled after its Week 7 loss. If Indiana sustains the defensive discipline and Mendoza’s efficiency, the Hoosiers present a credible national title threat.
Comparison & Data
| Statistic | Indiana | Alabama |
|---|---|---|
| Final Score | 38 | 3 |
| Total Offense (yards) | — | 193 (total) |
| Rushing Yards | 215 | — |
| Passing (comp/att) | Fernando Mendoza 14/16, 192 yds, 3 TD | Ty Simpson 12/16, 67 yds (left 3Q) |
| Season Record | 14-0 | (season record carried into bowl) |
The numbers show a stark gulf in approach and production: Indiana’s ground game (215 rushing yards) outpaced Alabama’s entire offensive output (193 total yards). Mendoza’s near-perfect passing line kept drives alive and limited Alabama’s ability to pressure. These figures underscore why the Rose Bowl’s scoreboard never tightened.
Reactions & Quotes
Coaches and analysts framed the win and loss succinctly, focusing on execution and context.
“You probably know more about the mystique than they do,”
Curt Cignetti, Indiana head coach
That remark, made before the game and revisited after, captured Cignetti’s dismissal of narrative and emphasis on tape study and preparation.
“We made a risky call that didn’t work and it changed the game,”
Kalen DeBoer, Alabama head coach (paraphrased)
DeBoer acknowledged the sequence that handed Indiana momentum and called attention to corrective priorities in Alabama’s preparation for upcoming off-season evaluations.
“Our defense set the tone and the offense finished drives cleanly,”
College football analyst (postgame)
Commentators noted Indiana’s complementary play as the defining characteristic—defense creating opportunities, offense converting them efficiently.
Unconfirmed
- Severity and projected recovery timeline for Ty Simpson’s lower-back injury have not been publicly confirmed by Alabama’s medical staff.
- Any internal lineup or scheme changes Alabama will make for the offseason and next year’s recruiting cycle are still speculative pending official decisions.
Bottom Line
Indiana’s 38-3 victory at the Rose Bowl is both a statement and a bridge: it affirms the Hoosiers’ seeding and style while propelling them into a high-stakes semifinal against Oregon. The performance highlighted a complete team effort—efficient passing from Mendoza, a powerful rushing attack and a stifling defense—that will force opponents to prepare differently.
For Alabama, the loss is a reset moment. The scale of the defeat invites scrutiny of game management, play-calling and health status at quarterback heading into the offseason. The wider implications include continued Big Ten prominence in the CFP and a reminder that program transitions (coaching or personnel) can produce uneven results in the short term.