ESPN College Football

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany met with myself and several others reporters Wednesday after the league's annual athletics communications directors meetings at league headquarters. He touched on several key topics, including the Ed O'Bannon antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA, the future College Football Playoff selection committee and the Big Ten's future bowl lineup.

Here's a recap:

• Delany said the NCAA won't settle in the O'Bannon case and fully expects the case to take years to resolve as it goes through the court system. "There should be no compromise on this," he said, adding that by the time the case is resolved, most of the current conference commissioners and university presidents won't be in their positions.
• He reiterated the Big Ten's support to increase the value of an athletic scholarship to the full cost of education, which he originally proposed in May 2011. The Big Ten remains supportive of Federal Pell Grants and other grants to help student-athletes in need. Delany noted that other leagues haven't been as keen to increase the value of athletic scholarships. "The Big Ten is very active in trying to get more to the needy athlete, make sure they get the Pell Grant, make sure they get the things that they can't get," Delany said. "But once you cross that line where you’re negotiating with players in a few sports, it changes."
• Delany clarified his well-publicized remarks to SI.com that the Big Ten presidents would rather go to a Division III model than a pay-for-play one, if the O'Bannon plaintiffs win their case.. "We don’t want to go to Division III, we want to [stay with] Division I," he said. "We want plenty of scholarships for women, plenty of scholarships for men." He later added, "You think they’re going to force the Ivy League to pay their players?"
• Asked about the money a player like Heisman Trophy winner Johnny Manziel brings to an institution through jersey sales, Delany replied, "Texas A&M is a core institution. It goes back 130 years. If Johnny Manziel was playing Arena Football, what’s the uniform worth? … You could have gone down that road with Wilt Chamberlain."
• Delany said the top priority in forming the College Football Playoff selection committee is to find people with "football savvy" and a true national perspective, whether they're current athletic directors, former coaches, former media members or others. Although every FBS conference will be represented on the committee, "You can’t be a congressman," Delany said. "You can't come from this part of the country to take care of that. We don't need that. We have to be aware of that, but the way you’re aware of that is finding great football people. You earn through the due diligence and the assessment and the transparency to explain why you did what you did."
• I asked Delany about Wisconsin athletic director and former coach Barry Alvarez, who told ESPN.com earlier this spring that if asked, he'll serve on the selection committee. "Alvarez qualifies not as an AD," Delany said. "His football background is strong. If you get a core group of football who are football smart, football savvy, great integrity, and there’s some national distribution. If you don't get that, you're not there. I don't care what else you do."
• In Delany's view, it will be harder to put together the football committee than the men's basketball tournament selection committee. One reason is the longer period for debate after the selections are made. "You’re going to have close to a month, so that's going to make it hard," Delany said. "It's a bigger decision and a longer time for scrutiny. That's why they have to do such a good job of getting the core group together."
• Delany said the Big Ten's new bowl lineup, beginning in the 2014 season, could have "a lot" of new games. The Big Ten could share tie-ins with other leagues and should have more say in which teams go where. Delany hopes to have a full lineup in place for approval by the league's presidents in early June. I'll have more on the bowls Thursday.
• The Big Ten is in the early stages of finding a location for its East Coast office. The office could be included in the existing office of one of the league's television partners. New York is the most likely destination for the office, Delany said.

BuckeyeNation

Austin Ward writes: Doran Grant used the spring to solidify his starting spot at cornerback opposite Bradley Roby.

Brad Bournival writes : Jabrill Peppers, the nation’s No. 1 cornerback, has OSU on his list, but the Buckeyes might be trailing Michigan and Stanford.

Bournival writes : These are the top five 2014 athletes on OSU’s recruiting board.

NittanyNation

Josh Moyer writes: The high school coach of four-star receiver commit Chris Godwin says he has “not coached a finer football player in 25 years.”

WolverineNation

Phil Murphy writes: Denard Robinson went from backup quarterback to unforgettable figure at Michigan.

Mailbag: Chantel Jennings tackles questions regarding Michigan’s place in the football recruiting universe, how it will fare in the trenches in 2013, and whether it can land the nation’s No. 1 cornerback.

We've got a whole bunch of spring wrap up stuff coming on Friday. So to make room, my normal Thursday mailbag is running a day earlier, while Adam will have his Friday mailbag on Thursday. Set your calendars accordingly.

Now let's get to some rare hump day emails:

Adam from Gilbert, Ariz., writes: (Brian, I'm not totally convinced the East is all that much better than the West. Ohio State vs Wisconsin. Michigan vs Nebraska. Penn State vs Northwestern. Michigan State vs Iowa. Rutgers vs Purdue. Maryland vs Minnesota. Indiana vs Illinois. Those would be my matchups from 1-to-7, and I would have the West winning four of them on a neutral field. I think a lot of the games would be very close...what do you think?

Brian Bennett: That's an interesting way of looking at it. I think it all comes down to whether you think Northwestern has staying power and if Iowa can get back on its feet. If so, the West has a chance to be as good as the East. But if those things don't happen, and Michigan State remains highly competitive -- along with Penn State bouncing back from sanctions -- then I still think the balance of power tips toward the East. And remember: the competitive balance issue doesn't really involve the bottom- to mid-tier teams as much as it does those at the top.

---

Dave from Omaha, Neb., writes: Am I missing something as to why Penn State keeps being called a power house? I guess I wouldn't put them in the top 5 in the league... Just wondering as why they are even considered a factor in the unbalanced equation of divisions, like at all. Three B1G championships in 20 years? I just don't get it!

Brian Bennett: While Penn State might not have reached the heights many expected when it originally joined the Big Ten, it's hard to deny the tradition and history the Nittany Lions bring. They are a true "brand-name" program with all the resources, including a 100,000-seat stadium. You could even say Penn State underachieved in Joe Paterno's final years as coach, and that Bill O'Brien could awaken a sleeping giant. Of course, it all depends on how the program weathers the harsh NCAA sanctions. If the Lions take a step back because of depth problems, they might not factor into the competitive balance argument. But I suspect Penn State will not be down for long, because football is just too important there.

---

Hazmatt from St. Louis writes: As a Spartan fan, should I be happy about the perceived "parity-based" scheduling (and even more so, should Wildcats fans from the West)? I realize we're in the tougher division, but if UMich, OSU, and PSU are playing more games against Wisc., Neb., and Iowa, that could act as an equalizer. It certainly still won't be easy, but it seems to make the CCG more attainable.

Brian Bennett: It remains to be seen how exactly the crossover schedules will work out, but I found it very interesting that Michigan State athletic director Mark Hollis fought for, and apparently won, the right to play Northwestern and Minnesota a lot and get exposure in Chicago and Minneapolis. (It was the least the Big Ten could do for the Spartans after denying them a spot in the West). If so, that could help Michigan State, although with three crossover games, it could still play Nebraska or Wisconsin, too. Having Ohio State and Michigan potentially play more difficult crossover games would provide some small equalization, but ultimately you're going to have to do well in division play to get to the championship game.

---

Jeff from East Lansing writes: I hear reference to MSU having a nationally elite defense all the time. Do you feel that this is actually the case or is it more of a result of the schedule? Much like a schedule can play a major role in a final record, it can also effect stats. The B10 was a very poor passing conference and MSU loves to blitz. Loading the box works great on running teams. The B10 rankings in passing was horrible: OSU 105th, Iowa 102nd, Mich 97th, Wisconsin 115 th, Neb 90th, NU 110 th, Minn 109th. The only decent passing B10 team was Indiana and they were 17th and put up 27 on MSU. No other team that they faced were in the top 50 in passing. So my question is with teams like OSU, Mich, Neb, etc all becoming more balanced and improving in the passing game, can MSU defense keep up with a high ranking defense or will the change in offenses that they face and a balanced attack create problems?

Brian Bennett: I don't think you can say Michigan State's defensive success is based in large part on the schedule. Pat Narduzzi's crew has been consistently excellent for a couple of years now. Besides, if that were the case, don't we have to re-evaluate all those venerated SEC defenses, since that league isn't exactly loaded with high-caliber passing teams? When you play in the Big Ten, you have to be ready for ground-and-pound teams like Wisconsin and Iowa, spreads like Ohio State, Northwestern, Nebraska and Indiana and pro-styles like Penn State and (now) Michigan. Even if the league passing attacks haven't been great lately, that's a lot for a defensive coordinator to deal with. And I'll add this: Any team with a really good passing game that can put athletes in space is going to stress most defenses, even elite ones.

---

A.J. from Madison writes: I'm very curious about how strength of schedule will be looked at for the College Football Playoff selection, and I think this will ultimately determine whether 9 games will be good for the Big Ten or not. If the schedule is just lazily looked at as non-conference strength and conference strength, or rather, just the prestige of the conference, then obviously the B1G loses with respect to the playoff by adding a 9th game. However, if each game is looked at individually, then I think it could be a good thing. For example, look at Nebraska's schedule last year. If it's just lazily looked at as "the Big Ten is weak", it's not the same as examining it closely (Legends division plus OSU, Wisc, PSU). I hope that when the selection committee examines SoS, they do it carefully with a look at the schedule as a whole.

Brian Bennett: Much remains to be determined with the selection committee and their criteria. But in every step along the way, conference leaders have said strength of schedule should be a priority. The men's basketball tournament selection committee might be a good example here. That committee has consistently rewarded teams that have played strong schedules, especially in the nonconference games that teams can control. That's why it's smart for Big Ten teams to upgrade their out-of-league schedules in preparation for the playoff. The way most people judge a conference's strength is how its teams fare in nonconference games. Big Ten teams need to not only play strong teams in the nonconference, they need to win their fair share of those games.

---

Kevin from Augusta, Ga., writes: Why doesn't College Football expand to 13 or 14 regular season games? It solves most of your scheduling issues. We can still schedule marquee non-conference matchups, which I feel like will go away a little bit with the Big Ten going to 9 conference games. If we go to 14 games, then the B1G could go to 10 conference games. We get more college football, which everybody wants. School's make more money as they can schedule more home games and we're preparing these kids for the NFL grind. There might be a few more injuries, but that's not a good reason to not to play more football in my mind. If we start the season a week or two early, then there should be no issues with college finals. I feel like anyway you break it down, it's win-win.

Brian Bennett: Adding more games to the schedule is a tough sell, given all the information that has come out about concussions and their long-term effects. College presidents are also pretty strongly against lengthening the season much more. Of course, those principals could go out the window in a hurry if schools determine the only way to keep supporting their athletic departments is to add more football games. The revenue from the College Football Playoff should stem that tide for at least a while. I could see a day when there are 13 regular season games; after all, we went from 11 to 12 not long ago. But a 13-game schedule, plus a championship game and possibly two playoff games, would mean that some teams would play 16 times in that scenario. That seems like an awful lot for college athletes.

---

This Guy from Los Angeles writes: I just wanted to commend you on the appropriate use of the term "gantlet" in your article 'Winners and losers in Big Ten realignment.' I often see people opt for the vernacular "gauntlet," even though that refers to a glove worn with medieval armor. Well, that's enough nerding out of me.

Brian Bennett: Looks like someone has thrown down the grammar gauntlet.

Since news of the Big Ten division realignment first broke, some Nebraska fans have fretted that they are entering a new Big 12 North.

The comparisons at first glance seem valid. Michigan and Ohio State seemed poised to dominate the league from the Big Ten West the way Texas and Oklahoma did in the Big 12 South for several years. Meanwhile, Nebraska is the headliner in the other, seemingly weaker division -- again.

But does the comparison really have any legitimacy? Let's examine some history.

The Big 12 staged a conference championship game from 1996 until 2010. During that time, the South won the title games 11 times to just four by the North. Four of those wins by the South, however, were decided by three points or fewer.

The real issue for the North was the alleged lack of depth at the top. Nebraska appeared in the championship game six times in 15 years, joining Colorado (four), Kansas State (three) and Missouri (two). However, Texas and Oklahoma gobbled up 13 of the 15 championship game spots for the South.

Just how bad was the rest of the North outside of Nebraska? Here are the records during that span for the other teams in the division, and their bowl bids:

Kansas State: 120-67 (.642 winning pct), 11 bowls, 2 BCS appearances
Missouri: 104-79 (.568), nine bowls
Colorado: 93-90 (508), nine bowls, 1 BCS appearance*
Kansas: 78-97 (.446), five bowls, 1 BCS appearance
Iowa State: 70-109 (.391), six bowls

Totals: 465-442 (.513), 40 bowls, four BCS appearances

*Colorado's 1997 wins were vacated by the NCAA.

Let's see how that compares with the Big Ten West by examining the teams' records during that same time for Nebraska's future division:

Wisconsin: 134-58 (.698), 14 bowls, 3 BCS appearances
Iowa: 108-76 (.587), 11 bowls, 2 BCS appearances
Purdue: 99-85 (.538), 10 bowls, 1 BCS appearance
Northwestern: 88-94 (.484), seven bowls
Minnesota: 85-97 (.467), nine bowls
Illinois: 64-111 (.366), four bowls, 2 BCS appearances


Totals: 578-521 (.526), 55 bowls, five BCS appearances

There are some similarities here, but the new Big Ten West ranks better in winning percentage, bowl appearances (nine per team, compared to eight per team for the Big 12 South) and BCS bids. Wisconsin trumps Kansas State as the most consistent winner, especially since the Wildcats' success has been so heavily dependent on one man (Bill Snyder). Missouri and Iowa and Purdue and Colorado have very similar résumés, although Colorado fell on some hard times toward the end, and it took a while for Missouri to really get going. Illinois is comparable to Kansas in that it has had a couple of banner seasons and a lot of bad ones.

The problem with the Big 12 North wasn't a lack of good teams, as Kansas State, Missouri, Kansas and Colorado all had their moments. It was a lack of consistency by most everyone outside of Nebraska and, to a lesser extent, Kansas State. The same will likely be true in the Big Ten West. While Wisconsin and Nebraska should field good teams year in and year out, it will be up to Purdue, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern and Minnesota to remain consistently competitive and not fluctuate wildly from year to year. If, say, Iowa can return to getting into the annual mix for BCS bowls, or if Northwestern can build off last year's 10-win season, then the West will be more than just Nebraska and Wisconsin.

Then, even if Michigan and Ohio State turn the Big Ten East into a new Big 12 South, the West won't have to suffer those Big 12 North comparisons.

Even before the Big Ten announced its new East-West division alignment, the complaints were rolling in from Sparta (read: East Lansing, Mich.). The angst only increased when the divisions became official.

No Big Ten fan base has more outrage about the new divisions than Michigan State's. Spartans supporters wanted to be in the West, away from the Michigan-Ohio State-Penn State triumvirate. They wanted to be in Chicago as much as possible, an area athletic director Mark Hollis has talked about often as a major concentration for MSU fans and alums.

Put us in the West, they said, keep the annual crossover with Michigan and achieve competitive balance. It's so simple!

But the Big Ten brass thought otherwise, assigning divisions based primarily on geography. Michigan State, located in the Eastern portion of the league, joined the three traditional powers -- along with Indiana, Rutgers and Maryland -- in the East division.

To some Spartans fans, the division assignment is the Big Ten's latest dig at their program. Who can forget the great BCS screw job of 2010, where Ohio State, a team we learned later had knowingly violated NCAA rules, went to the Sugar Bowl ahead of a Michigan State squad that had beaten Rose Bowl participant Wisconsin. The following year, a Spartans team that came yards away from a Big Ten championship once again missed a BCS bowl, while its top rival Michigan -- a team Michigan State had defeated earlier that season -- went to the Sugar Bowl.

There's also the general feeling among a portion of MSU fans that the Big Ten always favors Michigan and Ohio State in key decisions.

From my inbox:

Max from Grosse Point, Mich: I just finished reading your interview with Jim Delany and couldn't believe it. His bias for the "protected" schools is clearly evident and disgusting. Do you think it is time for the other schools to band together and remove him?From a MSU fans seat it is obvious that there is not a level playing field in the Big Ten. Waiting until after the Bowl season to force osu to forfeit cost us a Rose Bowl trip. Phantom whistles again vs osu cost us a touchdown and the game last year. Blocking too "hard" vs Nebraska cost us another touchdown and game. It goes on and on.Is there any hope?

David from Henderson, Nev.: I was 26 years old when I made my first (and only) trip to the Rose Bowl to watch the Spartans play. If someone had told me then that MSU wouldn't be back to play in Pasadeener (as JoePa pronounced it) in the next 25 years I would have thought they were crazy. Now after seeing the official realignment, it certainly appears that a return trip will be even more difficult than ever. What are the odds that I will be able to watch MSU play in the Rose Bowl sometime in the NEXT 25 years?

I understand Max's and David's frustration. And there are others who feel similarly. Tuesday afternoon, I caught the end of "The Drive with Jack Ebling," a popular radio show in Lansing, Mich. The word "panic" was used quite a few times to describe the current state of Spartan Nation.

Panic if you'd like, Spartan fans. Complain about the Big Ten's bias against your school. Shout to the heavens about all the perks Ohio State and Michigan seem to get. It's your right to do so.

Or you can embrace the challenge of the East division. Because there's no better platform for Michigan State to find out exactly where its program stands right now.

Michigan State is enjoying its most successful stretch in years under coach Mark Dantonio. The Spartans have a team-record six consecutive bowl appearances under Dantonio. They recorded back-to-back 11-win seasons for the first time in team history in 2010 and 2011, claimed a share of the Big Ten title for the first time in 20 years in 2010, and won the inaugural Legends Division championship the following year.

Many non-MSU fans irked by the potential imbalance of the divisions mention "four power programs" in the East, including Michigan State alongside Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State. Whether that's true or not is up for debate -- some argue Michigan State is a superior program to Wisconsin, which is simply false -- but no one would be making that case five years ago. It's a testament to Dantonio and what he has done in East Lansing.

So embrace the difficulty of the East. Don't run away from the tougher road to Indianapolis.

"You have to take risk in order to have great opportunities," Hollis told Ebling's show on WVFN radio Tuesday. "There's a couple ways you look at things, half-full or half empty. I applaud fans' persepctive and I'm glad many of them express how they feel. At the same time, I always say you are who you walk with. You are who you play against.

"I very much want to be in a conglomerate of the best of the best."

Hollis has the right approach. Whether or not he pushed to get Michigan State in the West Division -- and I'm told he did -- he recognizes what having success in the East can do for a program still fighting for national respect in some circles.

Despite Michigan State's recent run of consistency, some can't get past the fact it began as Michigan sunk to historic lows under Rich Rodriguez. There's a belief that as Brady Hoke makes Michigan into Michigan again -- through recruiting and on-field performance -- Michigan State's program will backslide.

Michigan State can beat Michigan every year in the East. It can also take on Ohio State and Penn State every year. Time to panic? No. Time to perform? Absolutely.

"Michigan and Ohio State have historically been great foes against Michigan State," Hollis told the radio show. "They will continue to be. Those are the ballgames you want to see take place in Spartan Stadium. I'm ready to face it head-on."

Asked about the concern of some Spartans fans, Hollis said, "I understand how some could come to that conclusion, but I think as you walk through it and as you look at the opportunities Michigan State's going to have, you get pretty darn excited about what our future is going to look like."

He's excited. Michigan State fans should be, too.

We've been taking a look at which Big Ten teams will be contenders and which will be pretenders in the 2013 season. Our series does not include Ohio State, Michigan or Nebraska -- three teams that, in our view, have earned the "contender" label entering the fall. For every other league team, we'll make a case for why they're contenders and pretenders and provide our final verdict.

Next up: the Indiana Hoosiers.

Why they're contenders: OK, so Indiana has won two conference games in the past two years combined. But don't overlook the Hoosiers in 2013. Unlike several other Big Ten teams we could name, they have one big thing going for them: they can really pass the ball. IU led the conference in passing yards last season, and that happened despite the loss of starting quarterback Tre Roberson in Week 2 to a leg injury. Roberson is back, along with Cameron Coffman and Nate Sudfeld, as Kevin Wilson arguably has the deepest quarterback group in the Big Ten. The receiving corps is also among the very best in the league, with Cody Latimer, Kofi Hughes and Shane Wynn all posing threats to score every time the ball is thrown their way. After playing several true freshmen the past two years, Wilson now has a more veteran team, with 10 starters back on offense and nine on defense. This is a team that scored 49 points on Ohio State and pushed Michigan State to the brink; now, it's a year older. If that defense can just get to a mediocre or better level, Indiana could make some serious noise in the Leaders Division.

Why they're pretenders: Yes, the Hoosiers can move the ball and score. But can they stop anybody? This is a team that gave up 52 points to Ohio State, 62 to Wisconsin and 56 to Purdue last year. A strong recruiting class should help bolster the ranks, but good luck trying to win in the Big Ten with true freshmen on defense. Indiana didn't lose much in the way of seniors, but two of them were very valuable in defensive tackles Adam Replogle and Larry Black Jr., whose departure left a hole on the defensive line. The Big Ten remains a league where you win by running the ball and stopping the run, and the Hoosiers haven't been very good at either of those things the past two seasons. Then there's the schedule, which sees Wilson's team opening conference play by hosting Penn State before going to Michigan State and Michigan. Later in the year, Indiana has to play at both Wisconsin and Ohio State in back-to-back weeks. The Hoosiers would be bucking a lot of history by winning in those venues.

Verdict: We like Indiana to be much improved this year and contend for a bowl game. We also think the Hoosiers can pull off a few surprises in Big Ten play with that explosive offense. But there are just too many questions marks still on defense, and the schedule is a little too tough. Indiana is a pretender, albeit one with promise.

May Day, May Day.

• Bill O'Brien stays honest with his players, especially his quarterbacks. Penn State will work to get Christian Hackenberg up to speed quickly. O'Brien revealed Tuesday that Zach Zwinak injured his wrist in the spring game, while offensive lineman Anthony Stanko left the team.
• Mark Hollis pushed for more trips to Chicago for Michigan State in the future. William Gholston reflects on his career as a Spartan. MSU is off to a strong start in recruiting.
• Urban Meyer sees some drawbacks with the new playoff system. The Buckeyes will remain a attractive draw for primetime.
• A snapshot of Iowa's recruiting efforts. Even with the nine-game schedule, the Hawkeyes will continue to play Iowa State every year.
• The latest Michigan commit has a high ceiling -- and a highly sought-after teammate, too. Six Wolverines who earned more playing time by their spring practice performance.
• Fred Glass has led the Indiana athletic department out of some nightmarish circumstances (subscription required).
• The demise of football would be catastrophic for Nebraska.
• Athlon asks if Michigan is the Legends Division favorite.
• Many student tickets are going unused at Wisconsin.
• The Illibuck game was a casualty of Big Ten realignment.
• Northwestern should be wary of opening at Cal.
• A Chicago defensive lineman talks about his commitment to Minnesota.
• It was a mixed year in Purdue athletics.
• Is college football ready for an openly gay player?

Purdue running back Akeem Hunt talks about his goal of becoming the team's No. 1 back and learning the new offense under coordinator John Shoop.

Shortly after the Big Ten revealed its new divisions for the 2014 season, I weighed in on the winners and the losers of the league's new setup. Now it's your turn.

In the second of our two polls on the topic, we're asking you which team, teams or, in one case, league-wide document was the biggest loser of the realignment.

Here are the candidates ...

Michigan State: Placing the Spartans in the East kept the Big Ten from needing a protected crossover for their annual game with Michigan, but it also greatly increases the number of obstacles between Michigan State and the Rose Bowl. The Spartans now have to deal with Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State in their own division every year, whereas the West would have presented a clearer path to Indianapolis and kept a budding rivalry with Wisconsin going.

Indiana: The Hoosiers already face their fair share of challenges in just getting to a bowl every year. Now they'll have to play Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Michigan State every year. Indiana's all-time record against those four: 36-179-7. Meanwhile, Purdue got to move over to the West, where there's a little more breathing room.

Little Brown Jug/Illibuck: The division alignment saved almost every meaningful rivalry, but these two longtime series bit the dust. The jug game between Minnesota and Michigan dates back to 1903 and that trophy has one of the coolest backstories around. The Illibuck turtle -- presented to the winner of the Illinois-Ohio State game -- is the second oldest trophy in the Big Ten.

Nebraska fans: Huskers fans had grown tired of the Big 12 North and enjoyed the idea of moving to the Big Ten where they could play Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State on a regular basis. Some fans aren't thrilled with the Big Ten West competition, which includes the likes of Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern and Iowa, while many of the most attractive brand-name league programs are in the other division. Nebraska will still play those teams as crossover opponents, but the opportunities to see them come into Lincoln will be shortened.

The Big Ten made big news Sunday by announcing its new division alignment for the 2014 season, as well as a move to nine conference games beginning in 2016. We covered all the news here and here and here, but several components of the moves merit further analysis.

During the next few days we'll be breaking down the divisions and the new conference schedule model, their impact now and in the future, as the College Football Playoff is just a year away. These aren't exactly Take Twos, but they're similar, as we'll both be sharing our thoughts on these big-ticket items.

Today's topic is: How will the nine-game conference schedule affect the Big Ten's chances of getting into the College Football Playoff?

Brian Bennett

First and foremost, the Big Ten needs to play better. Period. The league likely would not have put a team into the four-team playoff in any of the past five seasons had the system been in place (though Ohio State would have made it last year if not for probation).

Yet a nine-game conference schedule, along with the Big Ten's commitment to not play FCS teams and add at least one respectable BCS opponent in the nonconference slate, will make the prospects of reaching the final four more difficult. Any Big Ten champion will likely have to go 13-0 or 12-1 to gain any realistic consideration, and that will mean navigating a challenging course of nine league games plus the conference championship game, not to mention any tough out-of-league contests.

There's a reason the SEC and ACC are sticking to only eight conference games, and the Pac-12 is mulling a scale back from nine to eight. It's a lot easier to buy yourself a guaranteed win than risk playing a conference opponent that knows you inside and out. Still, I applaud the Big Ten for raising the bar. The conference really needs to prove itself in key interleague play more than anything, whether that's games such as Michigan State playing Oregon, Wisconsin facing Alabama, Ohio State taking on Texas or Nebraska going up against Oklahoma. Win those, and a conference loss won't sign the death warrant on playoff hopes.

Running the table with a nine-game schedule is not impossible. Oregon did it in Pac-12 in 2010 on its way to the BCS title game. Would Ohio State have lost if it played another Big Ten game last year? Doubtful, since the Buckeyes had already beaten Nebraska, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan State and Penn State. A nine-game schedule rewards greatness, and a Big Ten team that goes undefeated in the league would have a great shot at the playoff even with a nonconference setback.

The nine-game schedule absolutely adds to the degree of difficulty for the Big Ten when it comes to the playoff. But the league hasn't exactly been racking up national championships over the past few decades, anyway. This is still the right move for a variety of reasons, and the best teams will show themselves to be deserving.

Adam Rittenberg

Although I love disagreeing with Mr. Bennett, he's spot on with his analysis here. The Big Ten's push for the College Football Playoff still has more to do with building enough depth at the top than how many league games it plays. As I've written for years, the Big Ten simply doesn't have enough programs that are equipped to compete for national titles year in and year out. Pinning your hopes on Ohio State to skate through a favorable schedule in a weak league every year isn't a sustainable formula for improving the conference.

Ultimately, the Big Ten wants to reach a point where a team doesn't have to run the table to make the playoff. The league should strive to create a reputation in which a one-loss Big Ten team that played a competitive nonconference schedule deserves consideration for the playoff. That's why I like the league-wide initiative to beef up the pre-conference slate. We're already seeing results from programs such as Wisconsin, which used to be averse to anything resembling a challenge in early September, as well as Ohio State and Michigan State. As Bennett points out, the Big Ten needs to start winning more of the major non-league tests.

So yes, a nine-game schedule creates a tougher path to the playoff, particularly for the teams in the loaded East Division. I liked the Big Ten's plan to keep an eight-game league schedule and add the Pac-12 partnership, but when that went kaput, a move to nine games seemed inevitable. There are too many good reasons to play each other more often -- TV, fan-friendly games, rivalries -- in an expanded conference.

It would be a major surprise if a Big Ten team that went 13-0 -- including 10 league wins -- is left out of the playoff. Running the table certainly becomes tougher, but the league's macro goal remains the same: to build greater depth at the top and create a reputation more like the SEC's, in which you don't need to be perfect to be one of the nation's top four teams. Remember, league champions should in some cases have priority in terms of playoff access. The Big Ten champion gains greater credibility, even with one loss, if it gets through a nine-game conference schedule rather than an eight-gamer.

More B1G Debate

• Division balance

Your questions, my answers ...

Dave from Nashville writes: Am I the only one that thinks this "parity-based scheduling" (Jim) Delany mentioned is a terrible idea for the B1G? The B1G is already suffering from image problems, and the goal seems to be to put teams in the college football playoff to win NCs. And now the B1G is going to purposefully make their 'top' teams (i.e. the ones most likely to succeed on a high level) beat each other up in the conference schedulewhile giving mid/low tier teams a pass? Isn't that going to reduce the odds that one of the power programs makes it to the college football playoff or high level bowl games, and also increases the oddsa mid-tier B1G team sneaks into a high level bowl game with an artificially inflated record to which they are probably outmatched? If it happens by luck, then so be it; that kind of thing ends up evening out over the years. But to artificially create a situation where your headline, and most powerful, programs are more likely to have losses that would knock them out of the college football playoff? That's absurd. You don't see the SEC making sure Bama, LSU, A&M all play UF, UGA, and Scar all the time. Sounds like another win for the SEC. And don't give me 'strength of schedule' stuff. I'll believe an undefeated OSU, UM, PSU or UNL will get left out of the playoff on basis of an easy schedule when I see it. Is it all for some notion of having 'better' games?

Adam Rittenberg: Dave, I totally hear you, and you make some good points about the potential problems with parity-based scheduling. The Big Ten has to keep the College Football Playoff in mind with all of its division/scheduling moves, as the continued drought without a national championship hurts the league's rep more than anything else. That said, this sport remains all about television and providing the most attractive matchups to your television providers. The Big Ten wants to create as much attention for both divisions as possible and recognizes that having Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State all in the East creates the potential for the West to be overlooked. While having Nebraska play OSU/PSU/Michigan more often than not might not help the Big Ten's quest for a crystal football, it's a major win for TV and for the league's immediate brand (ratings, interest levels, etc.). The SEC has an advantage in that more of its teams have the ability to contend for a championship in a given year. For years, I've written about the Big Ten's lack of true national title contenders. Therefore, the league has to be mindful not only of the playoff but of featuring its best product as much as possible. That's the idea behind this.

---

K from Iowa writes: I think one of the "quiet" winners in the B1G's division realignment is Iowa. Hawkeye fans are known to travel and out of all 14 schools, they are the most centrally located in terms of its proximity to each of its six West Division rivals. Purdue is Iowa's farthest West opponent at about 330 miles. No other B1G school's farthest divisional opponent is that close--e.g., at 750 miles, Rutgers is more than twice as far from Indiana. Because Iowa produces so little homegrown talent, the Hawkeyes have always been forced to recruit other states so I don't know that the lack of exposure in the East Division's states will hurt them as much as their West opponents' proximity to Iowa City and the Hawkeyes' increased visibility in the West Division's states may help them.

Adam Rittenberg: K, I agree on all of your points except the last one. It definitely benefits Iowa and its fans to play annual games against Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern and Illinois. Although the Purdue series was mocked when it became a protected crossover, it's not a bad game for the Hawkeyes to play and for Iowa fans to attend. The proximity component definitely is a win for Iowa, along with having a seemingly easier path to the Big Ten championship. As far as recruiting, it'll be interesting to see if the West Division teams are hurt by having a smaller presence in the East Coast. Iowa has had past success recruiting states like Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland and Connecticut. The staff has ties to those areas, and they could be fertile for the program. So that could be a potential (not guaranteed) drawback to being in the West.

---

Jeff from Madison, Wis., writes: Hey Adam, I'm just curious what you think the league might do if the new division alignment proves to be competitively unbalanced? Also, I think the fact that a Big Ten Championship game exists can help to mitigate one division's power. As Wisconsin proved this season, it only takes one really good game to win the championship and punch your ticket to the Rose Bowl.

Adam Rittenberg: Jeff, that's absolutely right, and a few championship game wins by the West could obscure a fairly obvious imbalance during the regular season. As commissioner Delany pointed out both in interviews with myself and with the Big Ten Network, it ultimately comes down to that one game. I don't think the Big Ten wants to keep shuffling its divisions every few seasons, so unless there's further expansion, which seems less likely at this very moment, I'd anticipate the league letting things play out for at least five years if not 10. It would be a surprise to see the league react dramatically to 2-3 seasons of lopsided results and make a change.

---

Kevin from Grand Rapids, Mich., writes: "The ABC/ESPN prime-time slate features most of the Big Ten teams projected to contend for a championship -- except one. Nebraska". Uh, hello, am I to assume by this that Michigan State is not projected to contend for the championship?

Adam Rittenberg: Kevin, that's a mistake on my part. Michigan State is in the mix to contend for a championship, primarily because of its defense. The Spartans have more question marks than the other title contenders because the offense is so unsettled coming off of a very poor showing in 2012. But Michigan State doesn't need its offense to be Oregon or Texas A&M. An average offense combined with a nationally elite defense -- which I fully expect from the Spartans -- could get MSU to a Legends Division title.

---

Ed from Las Vegas writes: In response to the article "Big Ten's worst NFL draft? It's possible" the story sights the B1G's diminished reputation and underwhelming talent as the primary reasons for a poor draft showing. I disagree. NFL teams don't like players from spread offenses. Those offenses don't translate well to the pro game and thus makes evaluating players from those spread schools difficult. Also, spread offenses are adept at isolating defensive players again making it difficult to evaluate a player and possibly retarding a defensive player's development leaving them under-prepared for the NFL. Please, disagree. I have a slew of supporting arguments, but think I'm getting too wordy.

Adam Rittenberg: Ed, although the rise in run-based spread offenses around the Big Ten could be linked to the league's decreased output of NFL quarterbacks, I don't think it can explain the gradual drop in elite talent. Look at programs like Oregon, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, West Virginia and the Florida teams that Urban Meyer coached. They don't have trouble producing NFL talent despite running primarily a spread offense. Plenty of wide receivers from spread offenses make it to the NFL -- but few from the Big Ten. Plenty of cornerbacks who face spread offenses on a regular basis end up as high NFL draft picks -- but few from the Big Ten. It's also important to note that one of the Big Ten's most successful NFL quarterbacks, former Purdue star Drew Brees, played in a spread system with the Boilermakers. I just don't think you can chalk up the drop in draftees to the popularity of the spread around the Big Ten. It's too simplistic.

---

Ry from Greensburg, Pa., writes: How does ABC/ESPN consider 5 PM a prime-time game? Prime-time on the East Coast is between 7 and 9 PM. A 5 PM kickoff is only good for the fans that drive home after the game and the bars that will see a jubilant or depressed crowd. I am not a fan of these games and I would rather see a 3:30 PM kickoff than a 5 PM kickoff. I just do not understand how 5 PM is a "cool" time for a marquee match-up. I think 5 PM should be for games that are to "hold you over" for the big time games... ie: when the 3:30 PM game is at halftime, one can watch the 5 PM game and when the 3:30 PM game ends, one can watch the end of the 5 PM game until the 7:30 PM or 8 PM games start. It is an awkward time and I am not sure how it is a "Prime-Time" reward time slot.

Adam Rittenberg: Ry, maybe it's the former newspaper beat writer in me (late deadlines are torture), but I disagree about the 5 p.m. kickoffs. I'm not sure exactly when a game becomes prime time in the eyes of TV, but 5 p.m. is usually the start of the prime-time window. I wouldn't have had any issue with the Michigan-Penn State game kicking off at 8 p.m., but I still think the game has a big-time feel to it at 5 p.m. Sometimes 8 p.m. kickoffs can get lost in the shuffle depending on what's happening around the country, but a 5 p.m. game is staggered enough that it will get its own little window, especially in the second half before the 8 p.m. games really get going. The Big Ten has been so set in its ways in terms of start times -- noon ET, 3:30 p.m. ET, 8 p.m. ET -- not just for the regular season but for bowl games. Shaking it up with a 5 p.m. start is fine in my book, and I don't think it's a demotion. Also, it seems a lot easier for more fans (older folks, folks with families) to get to a 5 p.m. game in a fairly remote location like State College than an 8 p.m. game, when they'll be returning home at a very late hour.

---

Andrew from Omaha writes: Even with limited game experience, I had no doubt a team would take a mid-to-late round chance on a dude with a 69.0 yds/carry average. Jack Hoffman's absence from the draft was shocking. Any word on a free agent deal for the playmaker?

Adam Rittenberg: I agree wholeheartedly, Andrew, although Jack did get a face-to-face with one of the Chiefs -- the Commander-in-chief, that is -- two days after the draft. The kid had a pretty good month, I'd say. And when the 2027 draft rolls around, I'll expect to hear his name called.

ANN ARBOR, Mich. -- Two words attach themselves to Michigan defensive end Frank Clark.

The first is potential. Clark has plenty. Wolverines All-American left tackle Taylor Lewan saw it throughout spring practice, when he faced Clark on a daily basis. Michigan coach Brady Hoke and defensive coordinator Greg Mattison also see what the 6-foot-2, 277-pound Cleveland native could be this season for the Wolverines defense.

"He's so athletic, it's unmatched in my opinion," Lewan told ESPN.com. "He has so much potential to do so many things here, which would be awesome. But a person told me once that potential means you haven’t done anything yet. Frank has the opportunity this year to really come out and blossom."

The value of that opportunity isn't lost on Clark because he nearly threw it away last summer. He pleaded guilty in September to second-degree home invasion after admitting to stealing a laptop computer from a student's room in his dormitory. The offense took place June 14 -- Clark's 19th birthday.

Clark was suspended for Michigan's season-opening loss to Alabama before returning to the field.

"I had to mature after last year," Clark said. "My coaches, as much as they've done for me, giving me another opportunity to play here at this great school, another opportunity to further my education despite everything I went through last year, there's nothing more I could have asked for."

The lesson for Clark?

"I’ve got to stay out the way, I can't get into any more trouble, I can't do what I did," he said.

Although Clark missed only one game, he paid "heavy consequences" for his mistake, according to Hoke, inside the walls of Schembechler Hall. Hoke saw changes in Clark, especially after the season and when Michigan got into spring ball.

"Growing up as a young man, you really see an accountability to his teammates from Frank," Hoke said.

There's that second word, accountability. Clark always has had potential to be a star, but only recently has he embraced the need to be accountable and the responsibility he now carries for the Wolverines' defense.

Just a true junior, Clark is one of Michigan's most experienced defensive linemen along with Quinton Washington and Jibreel Black. He has appeared in 23 games, starting four last season, and quietly recorded nine tackles for loss, two sacks, a forced fumble, a fumble recovery and three pass breakups in 2012.

When Michigan lost All-Big Ten linebacker Jake Ryan to a torn ACL in March, the big question around the program was who would step into a featured role for a defense that, aside from Ryan, lacked star power last season. Clark's name came up a lot.

"Playing last year and having a bigger role than my freshman year, it forced me to change my mindset," Clark said. "I've got a new set of goals. I've got things I know I've got to help my team out with a little bit more. I've got to be more of an impact player on the defense. I've got to help bring the defense together in the absence of one of our leaders, Jake Ryan.

"Whether it's working harder in the weight room or working harder on the field, I'm doing whatever I can do to help motivate the guys under me: Mario [Ojemudia], Taco [Charlton], the whole defensive line."

Thanks to Lewan, Clark had no trouble keeping track of his progress this spring. They went at it during team drills in workouts, and challenged each other in the weight room, even if they were in different lifting groups.

They competed to see who could do the heaviest set of squats, the top bench-press total and the most pull-ups. Clark didn't win each time, but his victories boosted his confidence.

"I say it to myself, I say it to my family and my friends back home," Clark said. "When you're going against the best offensive lineman in the nation -- and that's how I feel about Taylor -- there's nothing else in the world that can challenge you more. He's an All-American. He's somewhere I want to be, somewhere all my life that I dream to be.

"If I can put myself in that position, live up to expectations of what many people see me as, I know how much I can help my team out."

Mattison has made the pass rush a major priority after Michigan finished eighth in the Big Ten and 78th nationally in sacks last season with 22. The Wolverines lose end Craig Roh (four sacks) to graduation and Ryan (4.5 sacks) for at least the start of the season.

There's a bigger burden on players like Clark, Black, Ojemudia and Taco Charlton, a 6-6, 265-pound man-child who enrolled early and went through spring drills.

"He's grown up," Mattison said of Clark. "He's understanding that he has a responsibility to this defense because he is a veteran and he's played quite a bit of football, so his best performance is the only thing that's acceptable."

Mattison tells Clark that "potential is nothing." Those who live up to it separate themselves.

After last summer, Clark is ready to take that step.

"You can't make the same mistake twice," he said. "That's in life and on the field."

You see your favorite Big Ten teams' uniforms and practice gear, but you probably don't often give much thought to where they originated.

But that's become a big issues for several Big Ten teams and their apparel provider, adidas. ESPN.com's Kristi Dosh reports that multiple schools across the country are cutting ties or questioning their deals with adidas because of concern over workers' rights in Indonesia. Those schools include Michigan, Penn State and Wisconsin, along with future Big Ten school Rutgers. Nebraska and Indiana are also outfitted by adidas.

Dosh writes:

"The issue revolves around the closure of PT Kizone, a factory in Indonesia with which adidas, along with Nike and the Dallas Cowboys, had contracts for the manufacture of goods. According to a report produced by the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC), violations at PT Kizone began in September 2010 when it failed to make mandatory terminal compensation payments to employees who left the factory. In December 2010, the factory failed to make regularly scheduled payments to current employees. The owner of the factory then fled Indonesia in January 2011. Thereafter, the buying agent, Green Textile, ran the factory and paid workers through March 2011. In April 2011, PT Kizone was declared bankrupt and closed.

"The WRC, United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) and other worker rights advocacy groups claimed adidas was refusing to pay $1.8 million in legally mandated severance owed to the 2,800 workers of PT Kizone. Total severance and other pay due under Indonesian law to the workers, who had no advance notice of the factory’s closure, totaled $3.3 million. Both Nike and the Dallas Cowboys contributed partial severance, but for nearly two years, adidas has maintained it does not owe any of the monies."

The story says Wisconsin has sued adidas and that Penn State has suspended its contract with the apparel giant. Rutgers has already terminated its deal with adidas.

But the big one here is Michigan, which according to the story, has the largest college sports contract with adidas, worth more than $60 million. Michigan president Mary Sue Coleman has been requesting frequent updates from adidas on the Indonesia situation. It would be huge news if the Wolverines, one of the most iconic brands in college sports, suddenly became a free agent for apparel rights. (Of course, some would argue that adidas deserved to be fired for this monstrosity, or this, or this.

Anyway, it's an interesting story, and one that might get you thinking a little more about where your favorite teams' uniforms originate.

It's time to dive back into our series examining whether Big Ten teams will be contenders or pretenders in the 2013 season. The series does not include Ohio State, Michigan or Nebraska -- three teams that, in our view, have earned the "contender" label entering the fall. For each team, we'll make a case for why they're contenders and pretenders and provide our final verdict.

Next up: Minnesota.

Why they're contenders: Jerry Kill's previous teams have taken off in his third year as head coach. Southern Illinois, which went 1-10 his first year, finished 10-2 in Year 3. At Northern Illinois, Kill guided the Huskies to a 10-3 mark in his third season. Are the Gophers about to make a similar leap? They made it to a bowl game last season, and though they stumbled down the stretch of the regular season, they bounced back with a strong showing in the Meineke Car Care Bowl loss to Texas Tech. In that game, Minnesota showed off a power-run game that should be the offensive philosophy going forward. The team has gotten better in the trenches since Kill took over, and should have an experienced offensive line and two good running backs (Donnell Kirkwood and Rodrick Williams) to pound the rock. Quarterback Philip Nelson showed flashes of brilliance as a true freshman and should be better for it as a sophomore, with Mitch Leidner pushing him. Ra'Shede Hageman looks like one of the top defensive linemen in the Big Ten, and the back end of the defense is in good hands with safety Brock Vereen and cornerback Derrick Wells. Kill should finally have more depth and better overall athleticism to work with. The preconference schedule is very soft and ought to have the Gophers off to a confidence-building 4-0 start. This could be your Big Ten sleeper team in 2013.

Why they're pretenders: Minnesota is improving, no doubt. But the rebuilding project needs more time before the Gophers are ready to play with the big boys in the Big Ten. Nelson is precocious, but he's still just a true sophomore with a half-season's worth of experience, and the Gophers' weapons at wide receiver are suspect. Minnesota still needs to develop a downfield passing game, something it lacked most of last season. There are also major questions at linebacker, though junior college transfer Damien Wilson should help, and the defense must make up for the loss of top pass-rusher D.L. Wilhite from a year ago. While the overall depth is getting better, a few key injuries would still be devastating. But the biggest thing separating Minnesota from contender status is probably the depth in the Legends Division. Michigan, Nebraska and Northwestern will all be Top 25 teams to start the season, and Michigan State should be improved. The Gophers play at both Michigan schools and at Northwestern, and must play Penn State and Wisconsin -- the latter of which they haven't beaten since 2004 -- from the other division. The gap is closing between Minnesota and the top teams in the league, but it's still there.

Verdict: Pretender. Minnesota should get back to a bowl, especially with four nonconference wins all but gift-wrapped for them. But while the Gophers could surprise a few teams in the league, asking them to climb over all the other Legends powers is too much at this point.

Spring, is that really you? Nah, just teasin'.

• An excellent statistical breakdown of the new Big Ten divisions. The Big Ten is gradually phasing out games against FCS teams. BTN's Gerry DiNardo isn't a huge fan of the new division setup. Tom Dienhart weighs in on the new divisions.
• November night games could work well in the Big Ten, Tom Shatel writes.
• Check out the new College Football Playoff logo.
• Surprise, surprise, LSU's athletic director would rather play Wisconsin at a "neutral" site in Texas than Lambeau Field. Gary Andersen's first Big Ten road test as Wisconsin's coach comes in prime time against his friend and former boss Urban Meyer.
• Ohio State will host two night games in a season for the first time in team history. The Buckeyes trip to Northwestern has become more than a trap game.
• It's a challenging time for former Penn State QB Steven Bench and his family as Bench looks for a new home. Another former Lions QB, Matt McGloin, is expected to sign a free-agent deal today. Michael Mauti talks about heading to the Minnesota Vikings.
• Nebraska's low NFL draft total stems from development issues, Sam McKewon writes. Huskers DT Baker Steinkuhler received an invitation to Houston Texans' minicamp.
• Purdue athletic director Morgan Burke is working hard on future football schedules. The Boilers are excited to welcome Notre Dame to "The Furnace" this fall.
• The West division is a good spot for Minnesota. An update on the Gophers' NFL free-agent signings.
• Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon is still apprehensive about the College Football Playoff. The Wolverines snagged one Paramus (N.J.) Catholic recruit and hope to add another.
• Northwestern hopes to add a second home night game (Syracuse) this season. Wildcats recruit Godwin Igwebuike hits the stage (the theater, that is).
• Pat Harty plays point/counterpoint with Iowa coming out of the spring game.
• Kevin Wilson and other Indiana coaches hit the road for a Tailgate Tour.