Big Ten: Michigan Wolverines
BuckeyeNation
Austin Ward writes
: Here are the player power rankings after spring practice.
Brad Bournival writes
: Dante Booker, a four-star LB out of Akron, joins the 2014 Buckeyes class, picking OSU over a surging Notre Dame.
Bournival writes
: Here are the top five uncommitted CB targets who have OSU offers.
NittanyNation
Josh Moyer writes
: Here are the player power rankings after spring practice.
Moyer writes
: Here are the top 10 defensive players the Nittany Lions will face this season.
WolverineNation
Michael Rothstein writes
: Here are the player power rankings after spring practice.
WolverineNation roundtable:
: The staff tackles questions about the No. 21 jersey, recruiting surprises and whom to follow on Twitter.
Austin Ward writes
Brad Bournival writes
Bournival writes
NittanyNation
Josh Moyer writes
Moyer writes
WolverineNation
Michael Rothstein writes
WolverineNation roundtable:
Good job filling up the mailbag during a slow time in college football. Let's do the question-and-answer session.
Andy from Lincoln, Neb., writes: Do you think the Big Ten's weak crossover schedule in 2014 could potentially prevent a one-loss team, such as Michigan, Wisconsin, or Nebraska, from being a part of the four-team College Football Playoff? I could see Michigan losing to Ohio State in 2014, not making the Big Ten championship and being left out of the CFP. Another possible scenario is an undefeated Wisconsin or Nebraska team losing in the Big Ten championship and being out of the CFP. Thoughts?
Brian Bennett: The crossover schedule won't help, but the biggest hindrance to a one-loss, non-Big Ten champion making the playoff next year is the perception that the league is not that strong. The Big Ten will need to perform well this year and win some big nonconference games in 2014 to have any chance of putting two teams in the four-team playoff, which still seems like a long shot. Some 2014 out-of-league games like Michigan-Notre Dame, Ohio State-Virginia Tech and Nebraska-Miami could bolster the league's case. Wisconsin's 2014 non-league slate -- highlighted by Washington State and USF -- will leave the Badgers little room for error.
Rob NitLion from Morristown, N.J. writes: You "asked" (rhetorically) the wrong question in your recent blog post. The question is NOT "what do the Detroit Lions know about college football/bowl games" but "What is the draw for B1G fans to want to travel to Detroit in the winter...or in any season for that matter?" Is this really a destination that B1G fan bases want to travel to to see two mediocre teams face off in the post season? If my Nittany Lions finish 6-6 and make a bowl game (not for the next couple of years), do you really think I want to see them face a 6-6 ACC team (alright maybe Pitt) in any place other than a warm, sunny distination with other attractions to see as well as a football game? Can anyone say Detroit is a "winter destination" unless it's the SuperBowl?
Brian Bennett: First off, Rob, let's get the joke right. I asked, what do the Lions know about postseason football, a little jab at that organization's utter lack of playoff success. As for Detroit, well, there are casinos right by Ford Field, some nice Greek restaurants and, um, yeah. Let's be honest, that city is no one's idea of a great winter holiday spot. But the bowl is also likely to take 6-6 type teams, and when you finish with that kind of record, deep in the Big Ten standings, you don't really get to be choosy. The best thing about Detroit is that it's very close for most Big Ten fan bases, and if the bowl replaces the MAC with the ACC as the other tie-in, that has the potential to create some interesting games. And as I wrote, Big Ten fans are often complaining about how they play virtual road games during bowl season. Here's your Midwest bowl. Embrace it.
Mochila from Grand Rapids, Mich., writes: A fellow reader indicated that MSU's secondary will not be very good this year due to their spring game performance and past dependence on Johnny Adams to operate on an island. I think the secondary has the potential to be improved considering MSU returns two All-Big Ten performers in Darqueze Dennard and Isaiah Lewis, Kurtis Drummond at the other safety position, who played very well last year, and a young Trae Waynes at the other CB position who started and performed very well in the bowl game. Do you think MSU's secondary will improve, regress, or stay roughly the same?
Brian Bennett: Adams was the Spartans' second-best corner last year, as Dennard outplayed him the entire season. Michigan State's secondary played well in the Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl without Adams, who was injured. I really like the potential of Waynes, and I think the Spartans will be just as good if not better in the defensive backfield.
Vince from Phoenix, writes: Which game on Michigan's 2013 schedule do they have to win to (finally) win the Legends Division?
Brian Bennett: Winning all of them would be nice. The one that obviously sticks out is the Nov. 9 game at home against Nebraska, but it's probably more the three-game stretch that includes a road game at Michigan State the previous weekend and a trip to Northwestern on Nov. 16 that will make or break the Wolverines in the Legends race. Remember that road losses to the eventual division champions (at Michigan State in 2011 and at Nebraska last year) were what doomed Michigan the past two seasons. Brady Hoke's teams have been really good at home but are going to have to win away from the Big House to bring home a division championship.
K. Norris from Detroit writes: Hello! Not that I disagree with the overall intent of Mr. Ted Miller's post earlier this week, but I will come rushing to the support of my 2 favorite Big Ten bloggers. Regarding the following quote: "Not to be outdone in prognosticative tomfoolery, the Big Ten blog picked Michigan State to win the conference. What were those guys thinking?" I would educate Mr. Miller that the 2012 Spartans did lose 4 games by a combined total of 10 points. It was the difference between 6-6 & 10-2 season. The team in the national championship game (Notre Dame) did only win by 17 against MSU. Yes, the Spartans were unable to find the extra gear when it was necessary to earn the 'W' at the end of games last year. That being said, it really was not a bad pick even from a national perspective. (Yes, green "Kool-Aid" tastes horrible.)
Brian Bennett: I'm pretty sure this is the first time in about eight months that anyone has told us our Michigan State title pick was not bad. In all seriousness, we clearly underestimated the inexperience of the Spartans passing game and gave too much credit to their offensive line. But 2012 was a weird year, considering that a team that finished 7-5 in the regular season (Wisconsin) went to the Rose Bowl -- and lost at home to Michigan State, I might add.
@sammyj108 from Twitter writes: Could the Hoosiers really play 3 quarterbacks? Or a two-quarterback system? Or just pick a starter based on matchups week to week?
Brian Bennett: Indiana coach Kevin Wilson wanted to see someone among Nate Sudfeld, Cameron Coffman and Tre Roberson really stand out this spring, but they all played pretty equally. Ideally, he'd like to redshirt either Sudfeld or Coffman this year and have one main quarterback play. The problem is that Roberson is clearly the best runner but needs to improve as a passer, while Sudfeld and Coffman are both good passers but not great runners. I asked Wilson this spring whether he'd be comfortable playing a two-quarterback system, as he did last year after Roberson got hurt. "I don't know if you want one in, one out," he said. "I'd love to see one guy totally separate ... but if not, we can play more than one. I want to keep them all happy, and I want to keep them all here. But more than anything, we've got to win."
Jay from Cincinnati writes: I am a little worried about Ohio State's recruiting class this year so far. I know it's early but seems like to would be better at this point.
Brian Bennett: Is Urban Meyer still the head coach? Then I'm not worried at all. He's one of the best closers in the game. If you're worried about the Buckeyes' recruiting in late May, take a deep breath.
Jay from Arlington writes: Title drought? Who cares. It is not like most of the SEC's titles during their so-called streak are legit anyway. And honestly, it is a lot easier to get to the BCS title game when you only have to beat one or two good teams a year, which is all that is required of SEC teams due, in no small part, to media bias. Don't sell the Big Ten short. Penn State has every right to claim a share of the 2005 title having lost one game directly due to officiating. While Penn State lost a game a lot closer than the score, the 2009 Rose Bowl between Penn State and USC matched the top two teams in the country while the Fiesta Bowl matched the third and fourth best team in Texas and Ohio State. Conversely the title game set up the sixth best team (Florida) versus the eighth in Oklahoma.
Brian Bennett: I enjoy your theories and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. Revisionist history aside, however, the records are what they are. Seven straight titles trumps every argument.
John from Iowa writes: In response you your Hope springs article: You have some misinformation posted when you talk about how many teams from each conference have made a BCS title game. The SEC has sent 4 teams not 5. They are: Tennessee, LSU, Florida, and Alabama. Also when you talk about the Big 12 sending 3 teams to the Big 10's only 1 team. One of those teams was Nebraska so you're essentially using the traditional power of one of our own teams to make your point about the Big Ten not being traditionally good.
Brian Bennett: Wow, Auburn fans must be steamed that John has already forgotten their 2011 national title. First Toomer's Oaks, and now this. I also find it funny that we get a lot of angry comments whenever we include Big-12 era Nebraska teams and coaches in our polls and lists, yet you want to include the Huskers when it might help out.
GOB Bluth from Gobias Industries, Calif., writes: Have you seen Franklin? I heard he's in Portugal. That's in South America, right?
Brian Bennett: Did you check the dryer? He has had some trouble down there. If you go looking south of the border, watch out for Hermanos. C'mon!
Andy from Lincoln, Neb., writes: Do you think the Big Ten's weak crossover schedule in 2014 could potentially prevent a one-loss team, such as Michigan, Wisconsin, or Nebraska, from being a part of the four-team College Football Playoff? I could see Michigan losing to Ohio State in 2014, not making the Big Ten championship and being left out of the CFP. Another possible scenario is an undefeated Wisconsin or Nebraska team losing in the Big Ten championship and being out of the CFP. Thoughts?
Brian Bennett: The crossover schedule won't help, but the biggest hindrance to a one-loss, non-Big Ten champion making the playoff next year is the perception that the league is not that strong. The Big Ten will need to perform well this year and win some big nonconference games in 2014 to have any chance of putting two teams in the four-team playoff, which still seems like a long shot. Some 2014 out-of-league games like Michigan-Notre Dame, Ohio State-Virginia Tech and Nebraska-Miami could bolster the league's case. Wisconsin's 2014 non-league slate -- highlighted by Washington State and USF -- will leave the Badgers little room for error.
Rob NitLion from Morristown, N.J. writes: You "asked" (rhetorically) the wrong question in your recent blog post. The question is NOT "what do the Detroit Lions know about college football/bowl games" but "What is the draw for B1G fans to want to travel to Detroit in the winter...or in any season for that matter?" Is this really a destination that B1G fan bases want to travel to to see two mediocre teams face off in the post season? If my Nittany Lions finish 6-6 and make a bowl game (not for the next couple of years), do you really think I want to see them face a 6-6 ACC team (alright maybe Pitt) in any place other than a warm, sunny distination with other attractions to see as well as a football game? Can anyone say Detroit is a "winter destination" unless it's the SuperBowl?
Brian Bennett: First off, Rob, let's get the joke right. I asked, what do the Lions know about postseason football, a little jab at that organization's utter lack of playoff success. As for Detroit, well, there are casinos right by Ford Field, some nice Greek restaurants and, um, yeah. Let's be honest, that city is no one's idea of a great winter holiday spot. But the bowl is also likely to take 6-6 type teams, and when you finish with that kind of record, deep in the Big Ten standings, you don't really get to be choosy. The best thing about Detroit is that it's very close for most Big Ten fan bases, and if the bowl replaces the MAC with the ACC as the other tie-in, that has the potential to create some interesting games. And as I wrote, Big Ten fans are often complaining about how they play virtual road games during bowl season. Here's your Midwest bowl. Embrace it.
Mochila from Grand Rapids, Mich., writes: A fellow reader indicated that MSU's secondary will not be very good this year due to their spring game performance and past dependence on Johnny Adams to operate on an island. I think the secondary has the potential to be improved considering MSU returns two All-Big Ten performers in Darqueze Dennard and Isaiah Lewis, Kurtis Drummond at the other safety position, who played very well last year, and a young Trae Waynes at the other CB position who started and performed very well in the bowl game. Do you think MSU's secondary will improve, regress, or stay roughly the same?
Brian Bennett: Adams was the Spartans' second-best corner last year, as Dennard outplayed him the entire season. Michigan State's secondary played well in the Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl without Adams, who was injured. I really like the potential of Waynes, and I think the Spartans will be just as good if not better in the defensive backfield.
Vince from Phoenix, writes: Which game on Michigan's 2013 schedule do they have to win to (finally) win the Legends Division?
Brian Bennett: Winning all of them would be nice. The one that obviously sticks out is the Nov. 9 game at home against Nebraska, but it's probably more the three-game stretch that includes a road game at Michigan State the previous weekend and a trip to Northwestern on Nov. 16 that will make or break the Wolverines in the Legends race. Remember that road losses to the eventual division champions (at Michigan State in 2011 and at Nebraska last year) were what doomed Michigan the past two seasons. Brady Hoke's teams have been really good at home but are going to have to win away from the Big House to bring home a division championship.
K. Norris from Detroit writes: Hello! Not that I disagree with the overall intent of Mr. Ted Miller's post earlier this week, but I will come rushing to the support of my 2 favorite Big Ten bloggers. Regarding the following quote: "Not to be outdone in prognosticative tomfoolery, the Big Ten blog picked Michigan State to win the conference. What were those guys thinking?" I would educate Mr. Miller that the 2012 Spartans did lose 4 games by a combined total of 10 points. It was the difference between 6-6 & 10-2 season. The team in the national championship game (Notre Dame) did only win by 17 against MSU. Yes, the Spartans were unable to find the extra gear when it was necessary to earn the 'W' at the end of games last year. That being said, it really was not a bad pick even from a national perspective. (Yes, green "Kool-Aid" tastes horrible.)
Brian Bennett: I'm pretty sure this is the first time in about eight months that anyone has told us our Michigan State title pick was not bad. In all seriousness, we clearly underestimated the inexperience of the Spartans passing game and gave too much credit to their offensive line. But 2012 was a weird year, considering that a team that finished 7-5 in the regular season (Wisconsin) went to the Rose Bowl -- and lost at home to Michigan State, I might add.
@sammyj108 from Twitter writes: Could the Hoosiers really play 3 quarterbacks? Or a two-quarterback system? Or just pick a starter based on matchups week to week?
Brian Bennett: Indiana coach Kevin Wilson wanted to see someone among Nate Sudfeld, Cameron Coffman and Tre Roberson really stand out this spring, but they all played pretty equally. Ideally, he'd like to redshirt either Sudfeld or Coffman this year and have one main quarterback play. The problem is that Roberson is clearly the best runner but needs to improve as a passer, while Sudfeld and Coffman are both good passers but not great runners. I asked Wilson this spring whether he'd be comfortable playing a two-quarterback system, as he did last year after Roberson got hurt. "I don't know if you want one in, one out," he said. "I'd love to see one guy totally separate ... but if not, we can play more than one. I want to keep them all happy, and I want to keep them all here. But more than anything, we've got to win."
Jay from Cincinnati writes: I am a little worried about Ohio State's recruiting class this year so far. I know it's early but seems like to would be better at this point.
Brian Bennett: Is Urban Meyer still the head coach? Then I'm not worried at all. He's one of the best closers in the game. If you're worried about the Buckeyes' recruiting in late May, take a deep breath.
Jay from Arlington writes: Title drought? Who cares. It is not like most of the SEC's titles during their so-called streak are legit anyway. And honestly, it is a lot easier to get to the BCS title game when you only have to beat one or two good teams a year, which is all that is required of SEC teams due, in no small part, to media bias. Don't sell the Big Ten short. Penn State has every right to claim a share of the 2005 title having lost one game directly due to officiating. While Penn State lost a game a lot closer than the score, the 2009 Rose Bowl between Penn State and USC matched the top two teams in the country while the Fiesta Bowl matched the third and fourth best team in Texas and Ohio State. Conversely the title game set up the sixth best team (Florida) versus the eighth in Oklahoma.
Brian Bennett: I enjoy your theories and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. Revisionist history aside, however, the records are what they are. Seven straight titles trumps every argument.
John from Iowa writes: In response you your Hope springs article: You have some misinformation posted when you talk about how many teams from each conference have made a BCS title game. The SEC has sent 4 teams not 5. They are: Tennessee, LSU, Florida, and Alabama. Also when you talk about the Big 12 sending 3 teams to the Big 10's only 1 team. One of those teams was Nebraska so you're essentially using the traditional power of one of our own teams to make your point about the Big Ten not being traditionally good.
Brian Bennett: Wow, Auburn fans must be steamed that John has already forgotten their 2011 national title. First Toomer's Oaks, and now this. I also find it funny that we get a lot of angry comments whenever we include Big-12 era Nebraska teams and coaches in our polls and lists, yet you want to include the Huskers when it might help out.
GOB Bluth from Gobias Industries, Calif., writes: Have you seen Franklin? I heard he's in Portugal. That's in South America, right?
Brian Bennett: Did you check the dryer? He has had some trouble down there. If you go looking south of the border, watch out for Hermanos. C'mon!
Big Ten homecoming kick times announced
May, 23, 2013
May 23
12:30
PM ET
By
Brian Bennett | ESPN.com
College football begins in fewer than 100 days, and now we have some more kickoff times announced for Big Ten games. The league has announced times for several 2013 homecoming contests around the league.
Here are the new announced homecoming kickoffs (all times ET):
Illinois: Oct. 26 vs. Michigan State, 3:30 p.m.
Indiana: Nov. 2 vs. Minnesota, 3:30 p.m.
Iowa: Oct. 5 vs. Michigan State, Noon
Michigan State: Oct. 12 vs. Indiana, Noon
Nebraska: Oct. 5 vs. Illinois, Noon
Purdue: Sept. 28 vs. Northern Illinois, Noon
Wisconsin: Oct. 12 vs. Northwestern, 3:30 p.m.
TV information for those games will be determined at a later date. Here are the two previously announced homecoming kickoffs:
Northwestern: Oct. 5 vs. Ohio State, 8 p.m. (ABC/ESPN2)
Penn State: Oct. 12 vs. Michigan, 5 p.m. (ESPN/ESPN 2)
That just leaves three schools, who are expected to announce their homecoming kickoff times tomorrow: Michigan (Oct. 5 vs Minnesota), Minnesota (Sept. 28 vs. Iowa) and Ohio State (Oct. 19 vs. Iowa).
Here are the new announced homecoming kickoffs (all times ET):
Illinois: Oct. 26 vs. Michigan State, 3:30 p.m.
Indiana: Nov. 2 vs. Minnesota, 3:30 p.m.
Iowa: Oct. 5 vs. Michigan State, Noon
Michigan State: Oct. 12 vs. Indiana, Noon
Nebraska: Oct. 5 vs. Illinois, Noon
Purdue: Sept. 28 vs. Northern Illinois, Noon
Wisconsin: Oct. 12 vs. Northwestern, 3:30 p.m.
TV information for those games will be determined at a later date. Here are the two previously announced homecoming kickoffs:
Northwestern: Oct. 5 vs. Ohio State, 8 p.m. (ABC/ESPN2)
Penn State: Oct. 12 vs. Michigan, 5 p.m. (ESPN/ESPN 2)
That just leaves three schools, who are expected to announce their homecoming kickoff times tomorrow: Michigan (Oct. 5 vs Minnesota), Minnesota (Sept. 28 vs. Iowa) and Ohio State (Oct. 19 vs. Iowa).
I love it here: manicured lawns, planned activities, early dinners. What more does a kid need?
- A must read: the second part of Mgoblog's look at a week in the life of Michigan offensive coordinator Al Borges. Here's Part I. It seems unlikely the Wolverines will add a QB transfer. Michigan coach Brady Hoke talks turnovers (limiting them, that is).
- Some interesting thoughts from Purdue AD Morgan Burke on the Big Ten vs. SEC, the College Football Playoff and other national issues. A Q&A with Boilers offensive coordinator John Shoop. Former Boilers star Kawann Short signs with the Carolina Panthers.
- Former Penn State QB Steven Bench will transfer to South Florida. LSU is making a strong push for Penn State LB commit Jared Wangler (Insider). The rest of Penn State's 2013 recruiting class soon will arrive on campus.
- Find out why Ohio State coach Urban Meyer calls LB recruit Raekwon McMillan "bubble." A look at the Mount Rushmore of Ohio State tight ends.
- Kirk Ferentz says Northwestern was Iowa's "most representative" loss in 2012.
- Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio talks soft drinks -- and possibly hints at a 2-quarterback system, Mike Griffith writes. Some Spartans recruiting notes.
- It's OK the Big Ten dumps the Little Caesars Pizza Bowl, unless it partners with the new Detroit Lions bowl, Graham Couch writes.
- Illinois is following a pay-to-win model with its non-league schedule. The Illini pick up a 2014 commitment from a juco tight end.
- Ranking the Big Ten's top five wide receivers.
- Former Nebraska coach and AD Tom Osborne will serve on the board for a national mentoring organization.
- The latest Wisconsin recruiting nuggets.
- Minnesota will induct two former football stars into its "M" Club Hall of Fame.
BuckeyeNation
Austin Ward writes
: A handful of true freshmen could make an immediate impact for the Buckeyes.
Brad Bournival writes
: 2015 DE Rashod Berry has a handful of MAC offers, but it’s OSU’s interest that has the Lorain, Ohio, prospect feeling “overwhelmed.”
NittanyNation
Josh Moyer writes
: Everyone knows about the true freshman QB’s expectations, but there are a couple of other new kids on campus who could make an immediate impact.
WolverineNation
Chantel Jennings writes
: At 6-foot-6 Ian Bunting figured his college future was in basketball, but he quickly emerged as one of the nation’s top tight end prospects.
Austin Ward writes
Brad Bournival writes
NittanyNation
Josh Moyer writes
WolverineNation
Chantel Jennings writes
Green, Wilson make impact freshmen list
May, 22, 2013
May 22
5:00
PM ET
By
Adam Rittenberg | ESPN.com
Every Big Ten team will rely on a handful of freshmen (sometimes more than a handful) to fill key roles when the 2013 season rolls around. Which newcomers will make the biggest impact in the league?
Tom Luginbill, RecruitingNation's senior national recruiting analyst, has identified five names to remember among incoming freshmen
who will enroll this summer. Luginbill already singled out Ohio State cornerback Eli Apple as an early enrollee who could make a difference this fall
.
Two Big Ten freshmen make Luginbill's new list. Neither needs much of an introduction.
Michigan running back Derrick Green is expected to compete right away for a starting job. Ranked by RecruitingNation as the No. 5 running back (No. 38 overall player) in the 2013 class, Green will be Michigan's best option in the backfield as the Wolverines go back to a more traditional pro-set scheme that will emphasize power running. No Michigan back distinguished himself this spring, and Green likely will face the most competition from Fitzgerald Toussaint, who comes off of leg surgery.
Luginbill also likes the impact potential of Ohio State incoming freshman Dontre Wilson, who could be fill the so-called "Percy position" in Urban Meyer's spread offense in Columbus. Wilson, a speedster from Texas who picked Ohio State ahead of Oregon and Texas, brings playmaking ability to an offense that needs more of it other than star quarterback Braxton Miller. Although Jordan Hall returns to the mix after battling injuries throughout 2012, Wilson could have a significant role in the offensive vision with a strong preseason showing.
What other incoming freshmen (non-early enrollees) could make an impact in the Big Ten this season?
Here are a few:
Penn State QB Christian Hackenberg: It'll be Hackenberg or junior-college transfer Tyler Ferguson starting for the Lions in their season opener against Syracuse. Unless Ferguson creates significant separation in camp, Hackenberg likely will be a factor this season.
Indiana DT Darius Latham: The Hoosiers need help along their defensive line, and could turn to Latham right away. A four-star prospect with good size and athleticism (played basketball in high school), Latham should be part of the mix up front at IU.
Michigan State RB Delton Williams: The Spartans need help in the backfield after no one really emerged this spring, and the coaches moved backup middle linebacker Riley Bullough to offense for help. There's a good chance Michigan State turns to an incoming freshman and Williams, the team's highest-rated recruit in the 2013 class according to RecruitingNation, will have a golden opportunity in camp.
Ohio State S Vonn Bell: Unlike the other freshmen listed here, Bell doesn't play a position where Ohio State has an overly pressing need. But he might be too talented to keep off of the field, especially when the Buckeyes go to their nickel and dime packages.
Tom Luginbill, RecruitingNation's senior national recruiting analyst, has identified five names to remember among incoming freshmenTwo Big Ten freshmen make Luginbill's new list. Neither needs much of an introduction.
Michigan running back Derrick Green is expected to compete right away for a starting job. Ranked by RecruitingNation as the No. 5 running back (No. 38 overall player) in the 2013 class, Green will be Michigan's best option in the backfield as the Wolverines go back to a more traditional pro-set scheme that will emphasize power running. No Michigan back distinguished himself this spring, and Green likely will face the most competition from Fitzgerald Toussaint, who comes off of leg surgery.
Luginbill also likes the impact potential of Ohio State incoming freshman Dontre Wilson, who could be fill the so-called "Percy position" in Urban Meyer's spread offense in Columbus. Wilson, a speedster from Texas who picked Ohio State ahead of Oregon and Texas, brings playmaking ability to an offense that needs more of it other than star quarterback Braxton Miller. Although Jordan Hall returns to the mix after battling injuries throughout 2012, Wilson could have a significant role in the offensive vision with a strong preseason showing.
What other incoming freshmen (non-early enrollees) could make an impact in the Big Ten this season?
Here are a few:
Penn State QB Christian Hackenberg: It'll be Hackenberg or junior-college transfer Tyler Ferguson starting for the Lions in their season opener against Syracuse. Unless Ferguson creates significant separation in camp, Hackenberg likely will be a factor this season.
Indiana DT Darius Latham: The Hoosiers need help along their defensive line, and could turn to Latham right away. A four-star prospect with good size and athleticism (played basketball in high school), Latham should be part of the mix up front at IU.
Michigan State RB Delton Williams: The Spartans need help in the backfield after no one really emerged this spring, and the coaches moved backup middle linebacker Riley Bullough to offense for help. There's a good chance Michigan State turns to an incoming freshman and Williams, the team's highest-rated recruit in the 2013 class according to RecruitingNation, will have a golden opportunity in camp.
Ohio State S Vonn Bell: Unlike the other freshmen listed here, Bell doesn't play a position where Ohio State has an overly pressing need. But he might be too talented to keep off of the field, especially when the Buckeyes go to their nickel and dime packages.
Four more days.
- Penn State's "JoeBots" could end up driving Bill O'Brien away, David Jones writes. O'Brien opened up for an HBO interview.
- Offensive lineman Kyle Kalis "took the next step" during spring practice for Michigan. At least one Michigan football makes it clear that it was not made in Ohio.
- Incoming freshman Gerald Holmes is an intriguing option at tailback for Michigan State. Damion Terry could help the Spartans' offense evolve.
- Kirk Ferentz remains committed to having a quarterback competition. Examining the Iowa linebacker position.
- Burning questions for Wisconsin this fall. Gary Andersen served up some burgers at Culver's and also some Badgers nuggets.
- Purdue is working on renovating the south end zone at Ross-Ade Stadium.
- Ex-Nebraska star David Humm is getting assistance from the new Huskers Greats Foundation. Tom Osborne will focus on charity work after his retirement.
- Should Northwestern freshman Godwin Igwebuike play running back or safety?
- Examining the cornerback position at Ohio State.
- Tim Beckman is excited to take the Illini back to Camp Rantoul this August.
- The Little Caesars Bowl could continue ... outdoors ... in Detroit ... in December.
- Five breakout candidates in the Big Ten.
CBSSports.com's Bruce Feldman has come out with his popular annual "Freaks" list, which examines the top workout warriors in college football.
Feldman lists 20 freakish athletes, and it includes three Big Ten players. Checking in at No. 2 in the rankings, behind only South Carolina superhuman Jadeveon Clowney, is Minnesota senior defensive tackle Ra'Shede Hageman.
We've written before about the otherworldly physical gifts of Hageman, who appears locked in for a big season this year. Here's what Feldman writes about the giant Gopher:
Hageman has a chance to be the top defensive tackle in the Big Ten this year if he can take another leap like he did last season.
Michigan left tackle Taylor Lewan ranks No. 4 among the freaks.
Rounding out the Big Ten contingent among the freaks is Wisconsin linebacker Chris Borland at No. 9.
Auburn fullback Jay Prosch, who played at Illinois from 2010-11, made the freaks list for a second straight year, checking in at No. 20.
Feldman lists 20 freakish athletes, and it includes three Big Ten players. Checking in at No. 2 in the rankings, behind only South Carolina superhuman Jadeveon Clowney, is Minnesota senior defensive tackle Ra'Shede Hageman.
We've written before about the otherworldly physical gifts of Hageman, who appears locked in for a big season this year. Here's what Feldman writes about the giant Gopher:
"The 6-6, 312-pound converted tight end vertical jumped 36 inches this offseason when the Gophers tested him. More impressively, the former basketball standout (he used to play AAU ball against first-rounder Royce White) says he can still do a 360 dunk even though he's well over three bills. "But," Hageman adds, "it doesn't look as pretty as when I was 250." ...
Not only does he have the 36-inch vert, but he also has bench-pressed 465 pounds and clocked an electronically timed 10-yard sprint in 1.57 seconds. For comparison sake, no DT at this year's NFL Combine jumped higher than 33 inches, and Terron Armstead, the offensive tackle who ran the blazing 4.71 40 at the combine, did a 1.64 in his 10."
Hageman has a chance to be the top defensive tackle in the Big Ten this year if he can take another leap like he did last season.
Michigan left tackle Taylor Lewan ranks No. 4 among the freaks.
"According to Wolverines strength coach Aaron Wellman, Lewan has clocked an electronically-timed 4.8 40-yard dash. The Arizona native has also, despite his long arms, bench pressed 275 pounds 21 times and also squats 550 pounds. In addition, this offseason Lewan improved his vertical jump to 29 inches, up from 26 last year."
Rounding out the Big Ten contingent among the freaks is Wisconsin linebacker Chris Borland at No. 9.
"Borland does a standstill box jump of 51 inches, said strength coach Evan Simon. "He can also do a standing back flip at will and one time landed one in the splits for fun. He is as solid as two rocks and one of the hardest workers you'll find."
"Not only that, Badger insiders say Borland has also been known to kick 40-yard field goals, practice catching balls either with one hand or behind his back out of the jugs gun and can throw the ball about 50 yards on a line."
Auburn fullback Jay Prosch, who played at Illinois from 2010-11, made the freaks list for a second straight year, checking in at No. 20.
We're less than 100 days away from the kickoff of the 2013 season. Hooray. Want another reason to celebrate? There's just one more season to go before the BCS officially dies and we get a new, four-team college football playoff.
As the BCS era -- which began with the 1998 regular season -- draws to a close, we're taking a look at the best achievements and worst failures of every league during that time. Here are five highs and lows from the Big Ten:
Low Five:
1. National title drought: There's no getting around this one. The Big Ten has just one crystal football in its trophy case, thanks to Ohio State's overtime victory over Miami in the 2003 Fiesta Bowl. Other than that, the league has been shut out, and the Buckeyes got blown out in both the 2007 and 2008 BCS title games despite entering those contests ranked No. 1. Worse, Ohio State is the only Big Ten team that has even played in a national championship game. Compare that to the SEC, which has had five teams play for it all, or the Big 12, which has had three.
2. Rose Bowl record: OK, you say, so the Big Ten hasn't won a lot of national titles, but the Rose Bowl is the league's true ultimate goal. Well, the news there hasn't been very good, either. Since the dawn of the BCS era, the Big Ten has gone just 3-9 in the Grandaddy, with just one win in Pasadena since the 1999 season: Ohio State's 2010 victory over Oregon. That was the Buckeyes' only Rose Bowl appearance in the BCS era, as their success resulted in them playing in other bowls and often led to the league's second-best team going to California.
3. Non-Ohio State signature brands: We mentioned the lack of national title-game appearances outside of Ohio State. That's where the league's other brand-name schools have to take some blame. Michigan and Penn State have combined for seven BCS bowl appearances, which is good, but neither has made it to the national-title game. The Wolverines lost three out of four Rose Bowls from 2004-2007 and took a major step backward with the Rich Rodriguez hire. The Nittany Lions weren't able to play for a third national title and were sidelined for the final two BCS years because of probation. Nebraska hasn't reached the big stage game since joining the league two years ago, which was the continuation of a BCS drought for the Huskers that has now reached 11 seasons.
4. Scandal makers: The Big Ten takes great pride in its image and integrity, but the league took a serious hit in those areas toward the end of the BCS era. Three major programs -- Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan -- all went on NCAA probation, and the conference's assistance in helping keep several Buckeyes eligible for the 2011 Sugar Bowl wound up blowing up in its face a few months later. It also was poor timing that the Big Ten named its divisions Legends and Leaders right around the same time its supposedly squeaky-clean marquee programs were dealing with NCAA problems.
5. Recent New Year's massacres: Those with short memories may forget that the Big Ten actually performed quite well in its non-BCS bowls against the SEC and other power leagues for much of the BCS era. But more recent results have obscured that fact. New Year's Day 2011 might have been the low-water mark, as the league went 0-5 and got outscored 138-45 in its three games against the SEC. The Big Ten went 1-4 on Jan. 2, 2012, with Michigan State's overtime victory over Georgia saving the day (though Michigan did win the Sugar Bowl the following night). The league was more competitive on New Year's Day 2013 but still needed Northwestern to come through to avoid going 0-5 again. The Big Ten is just 2-7 against the SEC in the last three years, and that has damaged the perception of the conference's overall strength.
High Five
1. Doubling up: The BCS, all in all, has been good to the Big Ten. The league has made 26 BCS bowl appearances, more than any other conference (and one more than the mighty SEC). Until last year, the Big Ten had a streak of seven consecutive years of earning a BCS at-large bid. The conference's large, eager and sun-starved fan bases helped, especially for some teams with less than stellar résumés (i.e., Illinois in 2007, Michigan in 2011). The extra exposure and millions of dollars from those appearances have benefited the Big Ten, even if the league's 12-14 BCS record is a little wanting.
2. Ohio State's BCS run: Let's try and forget the '07 and '08 title games. The Buckeyes still have made an impressive run through the BCS era, with more appearances (nine) than any other school in the country. That number would have reached 10 last year if not for probation. The Buckeyes are also tied with USC for the most wins in BCS games (six), although the 2011 Sugar Bowl victory over Arkansas was later vacated by the NCAA.
AP Photo/Morry GashThe Badgers have been to five Rose Bowls during the BCS era, winning two of them.3. Wisconsin's Rose parade: No Big Ten team has spent more time in Pasadena during the BCS era than Wisconsin, which has made five Rose Bowls, including the past three in a row. The Badgers own two of the conference's three Rose wins in that time with back-to-back victories in the 1999 and 2000 games. Their three consecutive losses there are disappointing, but it's better to have lost in the Grandaddy than to not have gone at all.
4. Money, money, money: Sure, the Big Ten lacks national championship rings or a glittering Rose Bowl record. But that hasn't stopped the conference from growing exponentially during the BCS era. Commissioner Jim Delany pioneered the idea of a league-only TV channel, and the Big Ten Network has been hugely profitable. The Big Ten is the richest conference in the land right now and is poised to rake in more dough with its next TV deal.
5. Rise of the middle class: If the Big Ten's signature brands outside of Ohio State failed to make a dent in the BCS title picture, at least some of the other league programs rose up and became contenders. Iowa went to two BCS games and won the 2010 Orange Bowl. Illinois sandwiched Sugar and Rose bowl bids around some otherwise disappointing seasons. Purdue got to the Rose Bowl in 2001. Michigan State is still looking for its first-ever BCS bowl but did win a share of the Big Ten title in 2010 and the inaugural Legends Division crown in 2011. Northwestern has been solid under Pat Fitzgerald and appears to be on an upward trajectory. Wisconsin has ascended into an annual conference power. While not every program has been able to maintain high levels of success, at least the Big Ten wasn't just the Big Two and Little Nine (or Ten, depending on the year) every season.
As the BCS era -- which began with the 1998 regular season -- draws to a close, we're taking a look at the best achievements and worst failures of every league during that time. Here are five highs and lows from the Big Ten:
Low Five:
[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/Charlie RiedelOhio State went into the 2007 and 2008 BCS title games ranked No. 1, but came out without the crystal trophy.
AP Photo/Charlie RiedelOhio State went into the 2007 and 2008 BCS title games ranked No. 1, but came out without the crystal trophy.2. Rose Bowl record: OK, you say, so the Big Ten hasn't won a lot of national titles, but the Rose Bowl is the league's true ultimate goal. Well, the news there hasn't been very good, either. Since the dawn of the BCS era, the Big Ten has gone just 3-9 in the Grandaddy, with just one win in Pasadena since the 1999 season: Ohio State's 2010 victory over Oregon. That was the Buckeyes' only Rose Bowl appearance in the BCS era, as their success resulted in them playing in other bowls and often led to the league's second-best team going to California.
3. Non-Ohio State signature brands: We mentioned the lack of national title-game appearances outside of Ohio State. That's where the league's other brand-name schools have to take some blame. Michigan and Penn State have combined for seven BCS bowl appearances, which is good, but neither has made it to the national-title game. The Wolverines lost three out of four Rose Bowls from 2004-2007 and took a major step backward with the Rich Rodriguez hire. The Nittany Lions weren't able to play for a third national title and were sidelined for the final two BCS years because of probation. Nebraska hasn't reached the big stage game since joining the league two years ago, which was the continuation of a BCS drought for the Huskers that has now reached 11 seasons.
4. Scandal makers: The Big Ten takes great pride in its image and integrity, but the league took a serious hit in those areas toward the end of the BCS era. Three major programs -- Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan -- all went on NCAA probation, and the conference's assistance in helping keep several Buckeyes eligible for the 2011 Sugar Bowl wound up blowing up in its face a few months later. It also was poor timing that the Big Ten named its divisions Legends and Leaders right around the same time its supposedly squeaky-clean marquee programs were dealing with NCAA problems.
5. Recent New Year's massacres: Those with short memories may forget that the Big Ten actually performed quite well in its non-BCS bowls against the SEC and other power leagues for much of the BCS era. But more recent results have obscured that fact. New Year's Day 2011 might have been the low-water mark, as the league went 0-5 and got outscored 138-45 in its three games against the SEC. The Big Ten went 1-4 on Jan. 2, 2012, with Michigan State's overtime victory over Georgia saving the day (though Michigan did win the Sugar Bowl the following night). The league was more competitive on New Year's Day 2013 but still needed Northwestern to come through to avoid going 0-5 again. The Big Ten is just 2-7 against the SEC in the last three years, and that has damaged the perception of the conference's overall strength.
High Five
1. Doubling up: The BCS, all in all, has been good to the Big Ten. The league has made 26 BCS bowl appearances, more than any other conference (and one more than the mighty SEC). Until last year, the Big Ten had a streak of seven consecutive years of earning a BCS at-large bid. The conference's large, eager and sun-starved fan bases helped, especially for some teams with less than stellar résumés (i.e., Illinois in 2007, Michigan in 2011). The extra exposure and millions of dollars from those appearances have benefited the Big Ten, even if the league's 12-14 BCS record is a little wanting.
2. Ohio State's BCS run: Let's try and forget the '07 and '08 title games. The Buckeyes still have made an impressive run through the BCS era, with more appearances (nine) than any other school in the country. That number would have reached 10 last year if not for probation. The Buckeyes are also tied with USC for the most wins in BCS games (six), although the 2011 Sugar Bowl victory over Arkansas was later vacated by the NCAA.
AP Photo/Morry GashThe Badgers have been to five Rose Bowls during the BCS era, winning two of them.4. Money, money, money: Sure, the Big Ten lacks national championship rings or a glittering Rose Bowl record. But that hasn't stopped the conference from growing exponentially during the BCS era. Commissioner Jim Delany pioneered the idea of a league-only TV channel, and the Big Ten Network has been hugely profitable. The Big Ten is the richest conference in the land right now and is poised to rake in more dough with its next TV deal.
5. Rise of the middle class: If the Big Ten's signature brands outside of Ohio State failed to make a dent in the BCS title picture, at least some of the other league programs rose up and became contenders. Iowa went to two BCS games and won the 2010 Orange Bowl. Illinois sandwiched Sugar and Rose bowl bids around some otherwise disappointing seasons. Purdue got to the Rose Bowl in 2001. Michigan State is still looking for its first-ever BCS bowl but did win a share of the Big Ten title in 2010 and the inaugural Legends Division crown in 2011. Northwestern has been solid under Pat Fitzgerald and appears to be on an upward trajectory. Wisconsin has ascended into an annual conference power. While not every program has been able to maintain high levels of success, at least the Big Ten wasn't just the Big Two and Little Nine (or Ten, depending on the year) every season.
Follow us on Twitter. Let's get to those emails ...
Jeremy from Columbus writes: With regards to the future Big Ten schedules (2016 and beyond), will we go to a system of staggered crossover games? Since we went to divisions, we've played two non-protected crossover teams one year, then the same teams at opposite sites the next, leading to the same opponents two years in a row. With the three crossover schedule coming with nine conference games, are all three crossovers going to swap simultaneously, or can they implement a staggered system? We would have to in order to play all seven teams in the other division every four years, which I believe was a major goal for the ADs to allow every player to play against every other Big Ten team once. Alternatively, any chance of not playing direct home-and-homes with the crossover teams? For example, hosting a team one year, skipping them the next, then visiting them the third year? I personally would prefer this system in order to play the widest variety of teams.
Adam Rittenberg: Jeremy, I reached out to Big Ten scheduling czar Mark Rudner to get some clarity on your question. The main thing to remember, as you point out, is the league-wide directive to have each Big Ten team play every other conference member at least once every four years. That will happen in the post-2016 scheduling model. To meet that goal, the crossovers after 2016 will be staggered, so you won't always see the same teams in consecutive seasons. You also won't always see direct home-and-homes with crossover opponents. Eventually every game will be, in a sense, returned, but it won't be as "clean" as the current setup. The goal remains to avoid these long breaks without certain matchups.
Ethan from Prague writes: Adam, I am a PSU fan living in Prague so thank you for your blog so i can keep track of my team. I know the quarterback race is down to two: Ferguson and Hackenberg. For me, I think even if Hackenberg edges Ferguson slightly in preseason camp, I would rather have him redshirt just to save his eligibility. For PSU right now I think the long-run is more important than this season and having Hackenberg learn O'Brien's offense while not wasting a year of eligiblity could get many offensive recruits excited to come to PSU because they can play with him while competing for two bowl games. I also think O'Brien will be there for as long as Hackenberg is playing, so 5 years minimum with O'Brien would be better than any alternative. Thoughts?
Adam Rittenberg: Ethan, first off, thanks for reading us all the way from Prague. I've always wanted to visit. I understand your perspective here, and if Steven Bench had stuck around in Happy Valley, it might make sense for Penn State to consider redshirting Hackenberg if he and Ferguson are about even in preseason camp. But without Bench, Penn State doesn't have much else behind Ferguson if Hackenberg doesn't play. Penn State could start Ferguson with the hope he can last the entire season and perform at a relatively decent level, but if not, the team can't tank the season just to save a year of eligibility for Hackenberg. While it's never ideal for a quarterback to play as a true freshman, there could be tremendous value for Hackenberg, a mature kid with a high ceiling.
Keep in mind, too, that Penn State will surround its new quarterback with some good weapons. The offense has a chance to be good again and that, more than anything else, will help recruiting. I think you're overvaluing Hackenberg's effect on Penn State's recruiting and on O'Brien staying or leaving. Penn State still can recruit top offensive players even if Hackenberg doesn't play, and O'Brien likely will base his future on which NFL teams come calling and how comfortable he feels in State College.
Matt from Michigan writes: Hey Adam, there's been some confusion on whether or no Jake Ryan can medically redshirt this upcoming season. Some say that because he redshirted for non-medical reasons his freshman year that he could not redshirt again. Could you verify this? Thanks.
Adam Rittenberg: Matt, Ryan wouldn't get a second redshirt season but a sixth year of eligibility, which would come after he's exhausted the years given to each player coming into college. It would be similar to the Devin Gardner situation, except Gardner didn't redshirt as a freshman in 2010, but had his season limited by injury. If Ryan's injury is severe enough to cost him the entire 2013 season, he could return as a fifth-year senior in 2014 and then apply for a sixth year in 2015. He would need to show medical proof that he couldn't return for a good chunk of 2013. This all likely is moot as Michigan coach Brady Hoke has said repeatedly that Ryan will return this fall, but if he has a setback in his recovery, I could see him going the sixth-year route.
Michael from Los Feliz writes: Hey Adam, As a Gopher fan I am outraged over the twenty fourteen and fifteen schedules. Minnesota is finally building what looks like a solid program under new leadership at all the big positions: football coaching staff, University President, and AD. However, apparently Jim Delany wants to see the Gophers continue to struggle. It is totally unfair to saddle Minnesota with cross division games against Ohio State AND Michigan, the two best programs in the conference. You can force Minnesota to play one of those schools, but both is totally unfair. It's especially brutal because Wisconsin and Iowa look to be taking a step back on the field, yet Iowa gets Maryland/Indiana and Wisconsin gets Rutgers/Maryland. This is gerrymandering and I am livid. Don't you think the Gophers got screwed by JD?
Adam Rittenberg: No, I don't. This might absolutely shock the conspiracy-theorist contingent of Big Ten blog readers, but Jim Delany has almost nothing to do with league schedules. Mark Rudner and his staff handle the schedule, and, after the league-wide scheduling principles (i.e. no more than two straight road games) are met, a computer generates the schedule and then the ADs sign off on it. Minnesota AD Norwood Teague agreed to the schedule, just like his Big Ten colleagues did. Is it a tough crossover schedule for 2014 and 2015? Sure. But Minnesota still is in what most believe to be the more favorable division (West). The Gophers won't have to deal with Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Michigan State every year. Besides, aren't you happy that the Jug rivalry will continue in 2014? That has to be some sort of consolation.
Jon from Bangladesh writes: I've read a few articles that mope about the change of demographics and pool of talented players increasing in the South. No doubt as a Husker fan one has to accept that things aren't quite what they used to be. However I just had a thought today. What if the talent base in the South continued to increase? Assuming no new big Southern colleges are being founded, no move to Canadian style 13 players or more, and talented players not wanting to play third string, could a pattern like this actually begin to saturate the South, overflow a bit towards bigger colleges further North, and perhaps actually even the recruiting playing field a bit?
Adam Rittenberg: Jon, thanks for reading us from so far away. I've thought about the same thing: if demographic trends continue the way they are, more quality players should be looking for opportunities in far-flung leagues like the Big Ten. The counter argument is that SEC schools still will be getting the very top players from their surrounding areas and therefore will remain a cut above the Big Ten and the rest. If the SEC can pick and choose and not have to look far for national championship-type talent, it will continue to win those crystal footballs. That said, Big Ten schools must continue -- and, in some cases, ramp up -- their recruiting efforts in the South and Southeast. There's just too much talent in those regions to ignore and expect to compete at the highest level.
Stephen from Chicago writes: I am an Indiana Hoosier fan and was excited when Nebraska joined the Big Ten. I was looking forward to making the trek out to Lincoln and meet the supposed nicest fans in the country. As luck would have it, Nebraska ended up in the other division as Indiana and we were the one team that missed them the first four years in the conference. With Maryland and Rutgers joining the Big Ten, we were once again in the opposite division as Nebraska. Not only that, we were the only team with a protect cross over; meaning until the Big Ten goes to 9-game schedules, IU will only play one other team from the west each season. As I opened the 2014 schedule hoping for the 1 in 6 chance to find Nebraska, Nope we have Iowa. Am I ever going to see Nebraska play Indiana?
Adam Rittenberg: Stephen, this is a good point to raise, and it's obviously an unfortunate component of a scheduling model that keeps changing. Although having no Indiana-Nebraska game for Nebraska's first four seasons as a Big Ten member isn't ideal, it's not as bad as having a six-year break in the Illinois-Iowa series, which is currently going on and thankfully will end in 2014. The answer is yes, you'll see Nebraska soon enough, most likely in the 2016 schedule. After 2016, Indiana won't go four years without playing the Huskers. Things will begin to settle down from a scheduling standpoint. Look on the bright side: because of the quirky schedule, IU gets back-to-back home games against archrival Purdue this fall and next.
Kase from Dallas writes: Adam, as Nebraska alumni I'm a very disappointed in the 2014 (and 2015) schedule. No Penn State, No Ohio State, No Michigan. My biggest excitement about joining the B1G was getting to play these power programs. But it looks like this won't happen until at least 2016 when the B1G goes to a parity scheduling system. Home games against Illinois, Rutgers, Purdue & Minnesota are not exciting. Do you think the B1G is taking the Husker fans for granted? I doubt many other B1G programs would have sellout homes games with these opponents. Looking at 2015, I'm sure these schools will love the thousands of Nebraska fans that will likely travel to these away games. When making the schedule did the B1G take into account the "fans"?
Adam Rittenberg: I don't think the Big Ten bases its schedule on whether Nebraska can continue its sellout streak, if that's what you're asking. Certain home schedules will be more appealing than others, but until parity-based scheduling kicks in, Big Ten schedules aren't designed with the quality of opponent in mind. It's fairly random after the core principles agreed upon by all the ADs are met. The good news for Nebraska fans is after 2016, you'll see Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State in Lincoln more often than other East division teams. Although Nebraska fans aren't pleased with the 2014 home schedule, I'd be stunned if many stayed away. This is the same program that drew more than 60,000 for the spring game in April.
Jeremy from Columbus writes: With regards to the future Big Ten schedules (2016 and beyond), will we go to a system of staggered crossover games? Since we went to divisions, we've played two non-protected crossover teams one year, then the same teams at opposite sites the next, leading to the same opponents two years in a row. With the three crossover schedule coming with nine conference games, are all three crossovers going to swap simultaneously, or can they implement a staggered system? We would have to in order to play all seven teams in the other division every four years, which I believe was a major goal for the ADs to allow every player to play against every other Big Ten team once. Alternatively, any chance of not playing direct home-and-homes with the crossover teams? For example, hosting a team one year, skipping them the next, then visiting them the third year? I personally would prefer this system in order to play the widest variety of teams.
Adam Rittenberg: Jeremy, I reached out to Big Ten scheduling czar Mark Rudner to get some clarity on your question. The main thing to remember, as you point out, is the league-wide directive to have each Big Ten team play every other conference member at least once every four years. That will happen in the post-2016 scheduling model. To meet that goal, the crossovers after 2016 will be staggered, so you won't always see the same teams in consecutive seasons. You also won't always see direct home-and-homes with crossover opponents. Eventually every game will be, in a sense, returned, but it won't be as "clean" as the current setup. The goal remains to avoid these long breaks without certain matchups.
Ethan from Prague writes: Adam, I am a PSU fan living in Prague so thank you for your blog so i can keep track of my team. I know the quarterback race is down to two: Ferguson and Hackenberg. For me, I think even if Hackenberg edges Ferguson slightly in preseason camp, I would rather have him redshirt just to save his eligibility. For PSU right now I think the long-run is more important than this season and having Hackenberg learn O'Brien's offense while not wasting a year of eligiblity could get many offensive recruits excited to come to PSU because they can play with him while competing for two bowl games. I also think O'Brien will be there for as long as Hackenberg is playing, so 5 years minimum with O'Brien would be better than any alternative. Thoughts?
Adam Rittenberg: Ethan, first off, thanks for reading us all the way from Prague. I've always wanted to visit. I understand your perspective here, and if Steven Bench had stuck around in Happy Valley, it might make sense for Penn State to consider redshirting Hackenberg if he and Ferguson are about even in preseason camp. But without Bench, Penn State doesn't have much else behind Ferguson if Hackenberg doesn't play. Penn State could start Ferguson with the hope he can last the entire season and perform at a relatively decent level, but if not, the team can't tank the season just to save a year of eligibility for Hackenberg. While it's never ideal for a quarterback to play as a true freshman, there could be tremendous value for Hackenberg, a mature kid with a high ceiling.
Keep in mind, too, that Penn State will surround its new quarterback with some good weapons. The offense has a chance to be good again and that, more than anything else, will help recruiting. I think you're overvaluing Hackenberg's effect on Penn State's recruiting and on O'Brien staying or leaving. Penn State still can recruit top offensive players even if Hackenberg doesn't play, and O'Brien likely will base his future on which NFL teams come calling and how comfortable he feels in State College.
Matt from Michigan writes: Hey Adam, there's been some confusion on whether or no Jake Ryan can medically redshirt this upcoming season. Some say that because he redshirted for non-medical reasons his freshman year that he could not redshirt again. Could you verify this? Thanks.
Adam Rittenberg: Matt, Ryan wouldn't get a second redshirt season but a sixth year of eligibility, which would come after he's exhausted the years given to each player coming into college. It would be similar to the Devin Gardner situation, except Gardner didn't redshirt as a freshman in 2010, but had his season limited by injury. If Ryan's injury is severe enough to cost him the entire 2013 season, he could return as a fifth-year senior in 2014 and then apply for a sixth year in 2015. He would need to show medical proof that he couldn't return for a good chunk of 2013. This all likely is moot as Michigan coach Brady Hoke has said repeatedly that Ryan will return this fall, but if he has a setback in his recovery, I could see him going the sixth-year route.
Michael from Los Feliz writes: Hey Adam, As a Gopher fan I am outraged over the twenty fourteen and fifteen schedules. Minnesota is finally building what looks like a solid program under new leadership at all the big positions: football coaching staff, University President, and AD. However, apparently Jim Delany wants to see the Gophers continue to struggle. It is totally unfair to saddle Minnesota with cross division games against Ohio State AND Michigan, the two best programs in the conference. You can force Minnesota to play one of those schools, but both is totally unfair. It's especially brutal because Wisconsin and Iowa look to be taking a step back on the field, yet Iowa gets Maryland/Indiana and Wisconsin gets Rutgers/Maryland. This is gerrymandering and I am livid. Don't you think the Gophers got screwed by JD?
Adam Rittenberg: No, I don't. This might absolutely shock the conspiracy-theorist contingent of Big Ten blog readers, but Jim Delany has almost nothing to do with league schedules. Mark Rudner and his staff handle the schedule, and, after the league-wide scheduling principles (i.e. no more than two straight road games) are met, a computer generates the schedule and then the ADs sign off on it. Minnesota AD Norwood Teague agreed to the schedule, just like his Big Ten colleagues did. Is it a tough crossover schedule for 2014 and 2015? Sure. But Minnesota still is in what most believe to be the more favorable division (West). The Gophers won't have to deal with Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Michigan State every year. Besides, aren't you happy that the Jug rivalry will continue in 2014? That has to be some sort of consolation.
Jon from Bangladesh writes: I've read a few articles that mope about the change of demographics and pool of talented players increasing in the South. No doubt as a Husker fan one has to accept that things aren't quite what they used to be. However I just had a thought today. What if the talent base in the South continued to increase? Assuming no new big Southern colleges are being founded, no move to Canadian style 13 players or more, and talented players not wanting to play third string, could a pattern like this actually begin to saturate the South, overflow a bit towards bigger colleges further North, and perhaps actually even the recruiting playing field a bit?
Adam Rittenberg: Jon, thanks for reading us from so far away. I've thought about the same thing: if demographic trends continue the way they are, more quality players should be looking for opportunities in far-flung leagues like the Big Ten. The counter argument is that SEC schools still will be getting the very top players from their surrounding areas and therefore will remain a cut above the Big Ten and the rest. If the SEC can pick and choose and not have to look far for national championship-type talent, it will continue to win those crystal footballs. That said, Big Ten schools must continue -- and, in some cases, ramp up -- their recruiting efforts in the South and Southeast. There's just too much talent in those regions to ignore and expect to compete at the highest level.
Stephen from Chicago writes: I am an Indiana Hoosier fan and was excited when Nebraska joined the Big Ten. I was looking forward to making the trek out to Lincoln and meet the supposed nicest fans in the country. As luck would have it, Nebraska ended up in the other division as Indiana and we were the one team that missed them the first four years in the conference. With Maryland and Rutgers joining the Big Ten, we were once again in the opposite division as Nebraska. Not only that, we were the only team with a protect cross over; meaning until the Big Ten goes to 9-game schedules, IU will only play one other team from the west each season. As I opened the 2014 schedule hoping for the 1 in 6 chance to find Nebraska, Nope we have Iowa. Am I ever going to see Nebraska play Indiana?
Adam Rittenberg: Stephen, this is a good point to raise, and it's obviously an unfortunate component of a scheduling model that keeps changing. Although having no Indiana-Nebraska game for Nebraska's first four seasons as a Big Ten member isn't ideal, it's not as bad as having a six-year break in the Illinois-Iowa series, which is currently going on and thankfully will end in 2014. The answer is yes, you'll see Nebraska soon enough, most likely in the 2016 schedule. After 2016, Indiana won't go four years without playing the Huskers. Things will begin to settle down from a scheduling standpoint. Look on the bright side: because of the quirky schedule, IU gets back-to-back home games against archrival Purdue this fall and next.
Kase from Dallas writes: Adam, as Nebraska alumni I'm a very disappointed in the 2014 (and 2015) schedule. No Penn State, No Ohio State, No Michigan. My biggest excitement about joining the B1G was getting to play these power programs. But it looks like this won't happen until at least 2016 when the B1G goes to a parity scheduling system. Home games against Illinois, Rutgers, Purdue & Minnesota are not exciting. Do you think the B1G is taking the Husker fans for granted? I doubt many other B1G programs would have sellout homes games with these opponents. Looking at 2015, I'm sure these schools will love the thousands of Nebraska fans that will likely travel to these away games. When making the schedule did the B1G take into account the "fans"?
Adam Rittenberg: I don't think the Big Ten bases its schedule on whether Nebraska can continue its sellout streak, if that's what you're asking. Certain home schedules will be more appealing than others, but until parity-based scheduling kicks in, Big Ten schedules aren't designed with the quality of opponent in mind. It's fairly random after the core principles agreed upon by all the ADs are met. The good news for Nebraska fans is after 2016, you'll see Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State in Lincoln more often than other East division teams. Although Nebraska fans aren't pleased with the 2014 home schedule, I'd be stunned if many stayed away. This is the same program that drew more than 60,000 for the spring game in April.
100 days away ...
- Illinois is very much in the mix for Oklahoma State QB transfer Wes Lunt. Illini coach Tim Beckman and his assistants are social-media machines.
- A great look inside a week with Michigan offensive coordinator Al Borges. Michigan is in good shape to add standout CB recruit Jabrill Peppers. Former Wolverines star Mike Hart talks about the challenges that await incoming RB recruit Derrick Green.
- Top 2014 recruits are buying what Northwestern coach Pat Fitzgerald is selling, Jared Shanker writes. Incoming freshman Macan Wilson talks about why he picked the Wildcats.
- Junior college defensive lineman Robert Gregory hopes to arrive at Nebraska next month. Check out Huskers QB recruit Johnny Stanton.
- Purdue athletic director Morgan Burke is confident about the program's direction under new coach Darrell Hazell. Hazell meets with a group of local pastors.
- This is mostly basketball related, but colleague Myron Medcalf checks in with Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany.
- Christian Hackenberg will follow Penn State QB tradition and wear No. 14 for the Lions. Tom Dienhart breaks down Penn State's 2013 schedule. Lions coach Bill O'Brien is featured on HBO's "Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel."
- Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio discusses conflict resolution. Former Spartans LB Chris Norman chooses faith over football.
- Another great breakdown of Big Ten assistant coach salaries from Joe Rexrode. A look at how Maryland assistants' salaries stack up with the rest of the Big Ten.
- More on Iowa's coaches and their contracts.
- Indiana adds a big prep school lineman to its 2013 recruiting class.
- A Federal judge mulls whether Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett's lawsuit against the NCAA will move forward.
- Some good news for TBDBITL. Ohio State coach Urban Meyer is looking rather busty.
- Tom Brady played for Michigan, but his son is sporting Minnesota Golden Gopher gear. A positive spin on Minnesota's tough upcoming schedules.
- New Wisconsin coach Gary Andersen and his staff cast a wide recruiting net.
- Please consider donating to the Red Cross or The Salvation Army to help the victims of Monday's tornado in Moore, Okla.
B1G Official Visit: No. 1 CB Peppers ready
May, 21, 2013
May 21
11:30
AM ET
By ESPN.com staff | ESPN.com

The no. 2 recruit in the country, Jabrill Peppers, will be announcing his decision live this Sunday at 5:15 p.m. on ESPNU. Tom VanHaaren stops by the show to break down the latest with Peppers and what the Michigan Wolverines’ chances are. Also, Jared Shanker joins the show to explain what’s behind the recent recruiting success of Northwestern.
Good news: We are just 100 days away from the start of college football.
To mark the occasion, we're pulling out a checklist today of things that Big Ten teams need to accomplish between now and the start of the season. It's not quite "The Final Countdown" (cue GOB Bluth), but we are inching ever so close to kickoff. Here's what needs to happen in the next 100 days:
1. Identify a starting quarterback at Iowa, Indiana, Michigan State, Penn State, Purdue and Wisconsin: It seems as if there are an unusually high number of Big Ten teams who don't know for sure who their starting quarterbacks will be in the fall. (You could also add Illinois and Minnesota to this list, though it appears likely that Nathan Scheelhaase and Philip Nelson, respectively, would have to lose the job in the summer.) Iowa had a three-man race this spring that will probably come down to Jake Rudock and Cody Sokol in training camp. There's very little separation between Cameron Coffman, Nate Sudfeld and Tre Roberson at Indiana. Connor Cook continues to breathe down the neck of incumbent Andrew Maxwell at Michigan State. Tyler Ferguson claimed the starting job at Penn State during the spring, prompting Steven Bench to transfer, but highly touted recruit Christian Hackenberg will push for immediate time. Purdue will likely decide between senior Rob Henry and true freshman Danny Etling. Joel Stave and Curt Phillips separated themselves from the Wisconsin QB derby this spring, while incoming junior college transfer Tanner McEvoy could expand the race this summer. All these situations should work themselves out in August, but no team wants to be dealing with an unsettled quarterback competition once the season starts.
2. Solidify the defensive front sevens at Nebraska and Ohio State: The Huskers and Buckeyes stand out as two of the top Big Ten contenders in 2013, but both have serious questions at defensive line and linebacker. The issue is more dire at Nebraska, which struggled there last year and is replacing all but one starter from 2012. Summer arrivals, including junior college star Randy Gregory, could make an immediate impact, and players coming back from injury such as linebacker Zaire Anderson and defensive tackle Thad Randle will need to play up to potential. Ohio State is less concerned about its defense after the spring performance of defensive ends Noah Spence and Adolphus Washington, but linebacker Ryan Shazier is still the only returning starter in the front seven. Curtis Grant must finally live up to his talent to provide help to Shazier, and someone must assume John Simon's leadership role.
3. Locate the next great receivers: A few Big Ten teams, such as Nebraska, Penn State and Indiana, don't have to worry too much about who will catch the ball this year. But just about everybody else needs to find playmakers in the passing game. The top of that list includes Iowa, which couldn't generate a downfield passing attack last year; Illinois, which needs receivers to make new coordinator Bill Cubit's spread system work; Michigan State, whose young wideouts must improve on last year's shaky performance; Minnesota, which doesn't have many proven weapons to surround Nelson; and Wisconsin, which still must find a complement to Jared Abbrederis. Ohio State coach Urban Meyer is hoping some incoming freshmen augment a very thin receiver group, while Michigan needs to replace the production of Roy Roundtree. Purdue and Northwestern have lots of speedy options but could use the emergence of a true No. 1 target. Receiver was a weak spot as a whole in the Big Ten in 2012, and hopefully some players will improve through offseason voluntary passing drills.
4. Strengthen the running game at Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana and elsewhere: It's a cliché to say that you have to run the ball to win, but in the case of the Big Ten, that's always been true. That's why it's so vital for the Wolverines and Spartans -- who both expect to contend in the Legends Division -- to find answers in their rushing attacks. Michigan is replacing its entire starting interior offensive line after struggling to get a running game going outside of Denard Robinson last year. Fitz Toussaint is hoping to bounce back from a disappointing season and a leg injury, while hotshot freshman Derrick Green could get lots of carries right away. Michigan State's efforts to replace workhorse extraordinaire Le'Veon Bell this spring ended up with converted linebacker Riley Bullough emerging as the top back in a mediocre field. Three incoming freshmen will compete for time right away this summer. Indiana coach Kevin Wilson put a heavy emphasis on the running game this spring, hoping for more balance after his team led the league in passing and finished last in rushing last season. Iowa has depth for once at running back but needs to stay healthy there, as the ground game is the key to the Hawkeyes' entire offensive philosophy. Nebraska also can't afford injuries, as Ameer Abdullah and Imani Cross are the lone backs with any experience. Illinois averaged just 3.5 yards per carry as a team last year, a number that must improve. And while Purdue loved what it saw from Akeem Hunt this spring, he still must prove he can be an every-down back after attempting only 42 carries last season.
5. Mesh with new coaches: Wisconsin's Gary Andersen and Purdue's Darrell Hazell are the fresh faces among head coaches in the league, and while they did a great job of connecting with their players this spring, they still need to get their new systems fully in place. The Badgers will be using some new, 3-4 looks on defense, while Hazell wants a more physical and disciplined team than we've seen from the Boilermakers of late. Michigan State has a new offensive playcaller in Dave Warner, while Cubit was one of many staff changes at Illinois. Penn State's John Butler takes over from Ted Roof as the Lions' defensive coordinator. With only 15 spring practices so far to implement their styles, those new coaches have had to rely on a lot of classroom time and players learning on their own. That will have to continue this summer during voluntary workouts and then will intensify when preseason practice begins. For new coaches, it's a race against the calendar -- and the calendar says there are only 100 days until kickoff.
To mark the occasion, we're pulling out a checklist today of things that Big Ten teams need to accomplish between now and the start of the season. It's not quite "The Final Countdown" (cue GOB Bluth), but we are inching ever so close to kickoff. Here's what needs to happen in the next 100 days:
1. Identify a starting quarterback at Iowa, Indiana, Michigan State, Penn State, Purdue and Wisconsin: It seems as if there are an unusually high number of Big Ten teams who don't know for sure who their starting quarterbacks will be in the fall. (You could also add Illinois and Minnesota to this list, though it appears likely that Nathan Scheelhaase and Philip Nelson, respectively, would have to lose the job in the summer.) Iowa had a three-man race this spring that will probably come down to Jake Rudock and Cody Sokol in training camp. There's very little separation between Cameron Coffman, Nate Sudfeld and Tre Roberson at Indiana. Connor Cook continues to breathe down the neck of incumbent Andrew Maxwell at Michigan State. Tyler Ferguson claimed the starting job at Penn State during the spring, prompting Steven Bench to transfer, but highly touted recruit Christian Hackenberg will push for immediate time. Purdue will likely decide between senior Rob Henry and true freshman Danny Etling. Joel Stave and Curt Phillips separated themselves from the Wisconsin QB derby this spring, while incoming junior college transfer Tanner McEvoy could expand the race this summer. All these situations should work themselves out in August, but no team wants to be dealing with an unsettled quarterback competition once the season starts.
2. Solidify the defensive front sevens at Nebraska and Ohio State: The Huskers and Buckeyes stand out as two of the top Big Ten contenders in 2013, but both have serious questions at defensive line and linebacker. The issue is more dire at Nebraska, which struggled there last year and is replacing all but one starter from 2012. Summer arrivals, including junior college star Randy Gregory, could make an immediate impact, and players coming back from injury such as linebacker Zaire Anderson and defensive tackle Thad Randle will need to play up to potential. Ohio State is less concerned about its defense after the spring performance of defensive ends Noah Spence and Adolphus Washington, but linebacker Ryan Shazier is still the only returning starter in the front seven. Curtis Grant must finally live up to his talent to provide help to Shazier, and someone must assume John Simon's leadership role.
3. Locate the next great receivers: A few Big Ten teams, such as Nebraska, Penn State and Indiana, don't have to worry too much about who will catch the ball this year. But just about everybody else needs to find playmakers in the passing game. The top of that list includes Iowa, which couldn't generate a downfield passing attack last year; Illinois, which needs receivers to make new coordinator Bill Cubit's spread system work; Michigan State, whose young wideouts must improve on last year's shaky performance; Minnesota, which doesn't have many proven weapons to surround Nelson; and Wisconsin, which still must find a complement to Jared Abbrederis. Ohio State coach Urban Meyer is hoping some incoming freshmen augment a very thin receiver group, while Michigan needs to replace the production of Roy Roundtree. Purdue and Northwestern have lots of speedy options but could use the emergence of a true No. 1 target. Receiver was a weak spot as a whole in the Big Ten in 2012, and hopefully some players will improve through offseason voluntary passing drills.
4. Strengthen the running game at Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana and elsewhere: It's a cliché to say that you have to run the ball to win, but in the case of the Big Ten, that's always been true. That's why it's so vital for the Wolverines and Spartans -- who both expect to contend in the Legends Division -- to find answers in their rushing attacks. Michigan is replacing its entire starting interior offensive line after struggling to get a running game going outside of Denard Robinson last year. Fitz Toussaint is hoping to bounce back from a disappointing season and a leg injury, while hotshot freshman Derrick Green could get lots of carries right away. Michigan State's efforts to replace workhorse extraordinaire Le'Veon Bell this spring ended up with converted linebacker Riley Bullough emerging as the top back in a mediocre field. Three incoming freshmen will compete for time right away this summer. Indiana coach Kevin Wilson put a heavy emphasis on the running game this spring, hoping for more balance after his team led the league in passing and finished last in rushing last season. Iowa has depth for once at running back but needs to stay healthy there, as the ground game is the key to the Hawkeyes' entire offensive philosophy. Nebraska also can't afford injuries, as Ameer Abdullah and Imani Cross are the lone backs with any experience. Illinois averaged just 3.5 yards per carry as a team last year, a number that must improve. And while Purdue loved what it saw from Akeem Hunt this spring, he still must prove he can be an every-down back after attempting only 42 carries last season.
5. Mesh with new coaches: Wisconsin's Gary Andersen and Purdue's Darrell Hazell are the fresh faces among head coaches in the league, and while they did a great job of connecting with their players this spring, they still need to get their new systems fully in place. The Badgers will be using some new, 3-4 looks on defense, while Hazell wants a more physical and disciplined team than we've seen from the Boilermakers of late. Michigan State has a new offensive playcaller in Dave Warner, while Cubit was one of many staff changes at Illinois. Penn State's John Butler takes over from Ted Roof as the Lions' defensive coordinator. With only 15 spring practices so far to implement their styles, those new coaches have had to rely on a lot of classroom time and players learning on their own. That will have to continue this summer during voluntary workouts and then will intensify when preseason practice begins. For new coaches, it's a race against the calendar -- and the calendar says there are only 100 days until kickoff.
BuckeyeNation
Brad Bournival writes
: WR commit Lonnie Johnson has the size (6-foot-2, 180 pounds) and speed (sub 4.5-second 40-yard dash) to become a major deep threat for the Buckeyes.
Austin Ward writes: Here’s a ranking of OSU’s opponents for the 2013 season.
NittanyNation
Josh Moyer writes
: The Nittany Lions will face some difficult opposing offensive players in 2013, with the emphasis on dual-threat quarterbacks.
Moyer writes
: His high school coach says run-on WR Gregg Garrity Jr. plays a technically sound, intelligent game, which should not come as a surprise to Nittany Lions fans.
WolverineNation
Michael Rothstein writes: Trey Burke has been home in Columbus, Ohio, prepping for the NBA draft with a close circle of advisors who’ve been around him for the long haul, including his father, Benji.
Brad Bournival writes
Austin Ward writes: Here’s a ranking of OSU’s opponents for the 2013 season.
NittanyNation
Josh Moyer writes
Moyer writes
WolverineNation
Michael Rothstein writes: Trey Burke has been home in Columbus, Ohio, prepping for the NBA draft with a close circle of advisors who’ve been around him for the long haul, including his father, Benji.
I missed our correspondence during my vacation. Let's let the letters commence:
Alex from New York writes: As a Michigan fan, the release of the new schedules starting in 2014 is pretty infuriating. Both MSU and OSU on the road in a given year? Are you kidding me? Did Dave Brandon not bother fighting this at all? Couple this with some of the recent basketball schedulings, like giving OSU a home game against Michigan next year but not vice versa, it seems like sometimes the Big Ten is out to screw Michigan. I realize that I'm overreacting, but as far as football is concerned, I think this is unacceptable, especially having to play MSU on the road twice in two years. It makes for a great home schedule one year, and a very lackluster one the following year. What are your thoughts?
Brian Bennett: The Big Ten is out to get Michigan? I think Michigan State fans would find that funny. Playing at Michigan State and Ohio State in the same year is tough, but is it really more difficult than last season, when the Wolverines played at Nebraska and at Ohio State? With Penn State coming to Ann Arbor in 2014 and Michigan's other Big Ten road games being at Northwestern and at Rutgers, you can't say that's an especially difficult schedule. It stinks for Wolverines fans that the games against the Spartans, Buckeyes and Notre Dame will all be on the road next season, but Ohio State and Michigan State will come to the Big House in 2015. And the rotation could change again when the league goes to a nine-game schedule in 2016.
Dave from Nashville writes: Regarding the new 2014 B1G schedules: There's a lot to comment on, but I'm gonna focus right now on, wow, Ohio State has a crazy easy schedule. Toughest games at home? Arguably the best team in the B1G having its two cross-overs with arguably the West's two worst teams (final decision pending Iowa's Greg Davis-induced implosion). Seems the B1G is desperate to get a team into the first College Football Playoff. They have chosen their champion, and have laid the easiest path possible for them to reach it. Michigan seems like a back-up option for 2015 with the favorable schedule, but even they have to contend with a dangerous NW squad. Better get them in before "parity-based" scheduling and 9 conference games make it more difficult ...
Brian Bennett: It's disappointing that we won't see the Buckeyes play Nebraska, Wisconsin or Northwestern in 2014. Perhaps Minnesota will have improved enough by next year that it will give Ohio State a test in Minneapolis. The Buckeyes still have to go to Michigan State and Penn State, and they have Navy, Cincinnati and Virginia Tech in the nonconference, which is a major step up from their 2012 and 2013 out-of-league slate. Perhaps after playing Michigan, Michigan State and Nebraska as crossover opponents in 2011 and 2012, Ohio State was due for a break. Getting Michigan at home next year will also be key in the inaugural East Division race. While it's always dangerous to make assumptions on what will happen more than a year away, the Buckeyes do seem to have an advantageous position in 2014.
Mike from Madison, Wis., writes: So I just read the piece on how many of the B1G coaches and Jim Delany support to increase the win requirements to go to a bowl from the current 6-6 to 7-5. I agree with that and also the fact that a fan bases of a 6-6 team is less enthused to have to pay all the costs involved with going to a bowl game and that some fans and students ultimately don't go because its not worth it. However, I also agree with coaches that the extra game and more importantly practice time that goes along with a bowl game is greatly beneficial to a 6-6 team. I have an idea that will please everyone involved: 6-6 teams get cut from being in a bowl game. However, they are permitted to play an extra game with a school in their region and that the game would be held at the one of the school's football stadiums. Don't know how that would be decided but everyone involved wins. Coaches get their game and fans get it closer and cheaper.
Brian Bennett: I'm divided on my opinion about whether 6-6 teams should go bowling. On the one hand, I believe there are too many bowl games and that teams should have to accomplish more than merely going .500. How much, for example, did Purdue gain by going to a bowl last year, as the Boilermakers fired coach Danny Hope the day after they clinched postseason eligibility and then got embarrassed by Oklahoma State? On the other hand, bowls still provide us entertainment in December, and more college football is rarely a bad thing. I'm much more in favor of 6-6 teams going to bowls if they play a nine-game conference schedule. That's much more of an achievement, since programs can't simply schedule four nonconference patsies and then go 2-6 in the league and declare their season a success. I'm surprised a team like Indiana, which will have its hands full in the East Division, supports the seven-win requirement.
As for your idea, Mike, I'm not exactly sold. A large part of the appeal for a 6-6 team to go bowling is that the players get a nice trip somewhere warm and a bowl-like experience out of it. Who would have gotten fired up last year for, say, Purdue at Central Michigan or Iowa State at Minnesota last December in the cold?
Rob NitLion from Morristown, N.J., writes: Bennett! Long time since I last emailed you. Please PLEASE tell me that with the new bowl scheduling partnerships the B1G will no longer have 5 schools playing at the same time on New Year's Day...as a B1G fan, I cannot stand missing the Rose Bowl because there are other attractive B1G matchups at the same time. I'm hoping Delaney has found some way to facilitate changing the times or dates of some of these bowl games as to not have B1G fans scrambling to try to catch multiple games at the same time on New Year's Day. Even if your team isn't playing in the Rose Bowl, as a college football fan, specifically a B1G fan, who doesn't want to watch the Rose Bowl and all its Pagentry? I know the Capital One and Outback bowls are probably remaining in the B1G bowl line up, but do you foresee any chance that there are changes so the times are not conflicting with the Rose Bowl?
Brian Bennett: I don't think that avoiding overlapping times is a major concern for the Big Ten as it tries to find the best bowl lineup. However, it's inevitable that we'll see some changes in that regard as the new lineup and the new playoff structure take hold. The playoff semifinals are going to own New Year's Day, so we'll have to see how that affects when the other bowls decide to kick off. There could still be several Big Ten teams playing at once, especially with the league holding onto ties with the Capital One and Outback bowls and sharing a slot with the ACC on the Gator. But with access to the Orange Bowl and other moves, I doubt we'll see as big of a Big Ten logjam in the bowls.
Aaron from Minneapolis, Minn., writes: As a Minnesota fan, I generally like the direction that the conference is going with non-conference scheduling. But I've heard a lot about how Iowa is being handcuffed by their annual tilt with Iowa State, and I was just wondering why this is a big deal. Lots of annual non-conference rivalries are going by the wayside these days (Michigan-ND, Florida-Miami, Nebraska-Oklahoma, etc.). While I understand that an in-state game is big for fans, I can't imagine Iowa fans will suddenly be at a loss for bad blood with Wisconsin, Minnesota, and even a potentially budding rivalry with Nebraska each year. And even if the game is not played annually, two games every four years would open up much more breathing room for Iowa to continue to schedule strong opponents on a regular basis. Am I completely off base here?
Brian Bennett: You're not wildly off base, Aaron, especially because the Iowa-Iowa State game doesn't really move the needle nationally. Still, I think it would be a shame to see that series end. I'm a huge proponent of in-state rivalries, especially in a state like Iowa where there are only two major programs. It's one thing for Florida and Miami not to play, but at least Florida-Florida State and Florida State-Miami continues. These are the kinds of rivalry games that keep friends, co-workers and neighbors talking year round within the state. I'd rather see Iowa test itself by playing one other marquee game in the nonconference schedule than losing the Iowa State series, though I understand why that's difficult with a nine-game league schedule. And speaking of in-state rivalries ...
Erik S. from Tallahassee, Fla., writes: With the renewal of the PSU-Pitt rivalry in 2016 and the dedication both sides feel about making the game happen every year, I'm hopeful that we'll get to see more of these games after the upcoming four-year contract is over. My question is that in the years Penn State plays Pitt, will that game become Penn State's required "one marquee nonconference game" or do you think another "Big Five" conference team would make the slate in addition?
Brian Bennett: There were some very encouraging comments last week from both sides about the future of the Penn State-Pitt rivalry, one that I think ought to return to being an annual affair. Penn State will have to decide how it wants to schedule its three nonconference games after 2016, and complicating matters is the NCAA probation. Do the Nittany Lions want to take on tough opponents as they're coming out of the sanctions era, or do they want to help themselves ease back into bowl contention? When at full strength, I absolutely think Penn State is the type of program that can handle playing Pitt and one other marquee, or at least major-conference, opponent every year. Given Pitt's near-perennial habit of underachieving, simply playing the Panthers probably wouldn't be enough to make the Nittany Lions' strength-of-schedule argument a compelling one in most years.
Bear rom Waco, Texas, writes: Baylor/Big 12 fan here just wanting to say props for the Big Ten agreeing to schedule nine conference games and no FCS opponents. The Big Ten, like every other conference, has its problems, but I really respect that y'all want to make create the highest quality football match-ups possible. So thanks Big Ten from down in Waco!
Brian Bennett: I guess it's always good to have a bear on your side, rather than the other way around.
Alex from New York writes: As a Michigan fan, the release of the new schedules starting in 2014 is pretty infuriating. Both MSU and OSU on the road in a given year? Are you kidding me? Did Dave Brandon not bother fighting this at all? Couple this with some of the recent basketball schedulings, like giving OSU a home game against Michigan next year but not vice versa, it seems like sometimes the Big Ten is out to screw Michigan. I realize that I'm overreacting, but as far as football is concerned, I think this is unacceptable, especially having to play MSU on the road twice in two years. It makes for a great home schedule one year, and a very lackluster one the following year. What are your thoughts?
Brian Bennett: The Big Ten is out to get Michigan? I think Michigan State fans would find that funny. Playing at Michigan State and Ohio State in the same year is tough, but is it really more difficult than last season, when the Wolverines played at Nebraska and at Ohio State? With Penn State coming to Ann Arbor in 2014 and Michigan's other Big Ten road games being at Northwestern and at Rutgers, you can't say that's an especially difficult schedule. It stinks for Wolverines fans that the games against the Spartans, Buckeyes and Notre Dame will all be on the road next season, but Ohio State and Michigan State will come to the Big House in 2015. And the rotation could change again when the league goes to a nine-game schedule in 2016.
Dave from Nashville writes: Regarding the new 2014 B1G schedules: There's a lot to comment on, but I'm gonna focus right now on, wow, Ohio State has a crazy easy schedule. Toughest games at home? Arguably the best team in the B1G having its two cross-overs with arguably the West's two worst teams (final decision pending Iowa's Greg Davis-induced implosion). Seems the B1G is desperate to get a team into the first College Football Playoff. They have chosen their champion, and have laid the easiest path possible for them to reach it. Michigan seems like a back-up option for 2015 with the favorable schedule, but even they have to contend with a dangerous NW squad. Better get them in before "parity-based" scheduling and 9 conference games make it more difficult ...
Brian Bennett: It's disappointing that we won't see the Buckeyes play Nebraska, Wisconsin or Northwestern in 2014. Perhaps Minnesota will have improved enough by next year that it will give Ohio State a test in Minneapolis. The Buckeyes still have to go to Michigan State and Penn State, and they have Navy, Cincinnati and Virginia Tech in the nonconference, which is a major step up from their 2012 and 2013 out-of-league slate. Perhaps after playing Michigan, Michigan State and Nebraska as crossover opponents in 2011 and 2012, Ohio State was due for a break. Getting Michigan at home next year will also be key in the inaugural East Division race. While it's always dangerous to make assumptions on what will happen more than a year away, the Buckeyes do seem to have an advantageous position in 2014.
Mike from Madison, Wis., writes: So I just read the piece on how many of the B1G coaches and Jim Delany support to increase the win requirements to go to a bowl from the current 6-6 to 7-5. I agree with that and also the fact that a fan bases of a 6-6 team is less enthused to have to pay all the costs involved with going to a bowl game and that some fans and students ultimately don't go because its not worth it. However, I also agree with coaches that the extra game and more importantly practice time that goes along with a bowl game is greatly beneficial to a 6-6 team. I have an idea that will please everyone involved: 6-6 teams get cut from being in a bowl game. However, they are permitted to play an extra game with a school in their region and that the game would be held at the one of the school's football stadiums. Don't know how that would be decided but everyone involved wins. Coaches get their game and fans get it closer and cheaper.
Brian Bennett: I'm divided on my opinion about whether 6-6 teams should go bowling. On the one hand, I believe there are too many bowl games and that teams should have to accomplish more than merely going .500. How much, for example, did Purdue gain by going to a bowl last year, as the Boilermakers fired coach Danny Hope the day after they clinched postseason eligibility and then got embarrassed by Oklahoma State? On the other hand, bowls still provide us entertainment in December, and more college football is rarely a bad thing. I'm much more in favor of 6-6 teams going to bowls if they play a nine-game conference schedule. That's much more of an achievement, since programs can't simply schedule four nonconference patsies and then go 2-6 in the league and declare their season a success. I'm surprised a team like Indiana, which will have its hands full in the East Division, supports the seven-win requirement.
As for your idea, Mike, I'm not exactly sold. A large part of the appeal for a 6-6 team to go bowling is that the players get a nice trip somewhere warm and a bowl-like experience out of it. Who would have gotten fired up last year for, say, Purdue at Central Michigan or Iowa State at Minnesota last December in the cold?
Rob NitLion from Morristown, N.J., writes: Bennett! Long time since I last emailed you. Please PLEASE tell me that with the new bowl scheduling partnerships the B1G will no longer have 5 schools playing at the same time on New Year's Day...as a B1G fan, I cannot stand missing the Rose Bowl because there are other attractive B1G matchups at the same time. I'm hoping Delaney has found some way to facilitate changing the times or dates of some of these bowl games as to not have B1G fans scrambling to try to catch multiple games at the same time on New Year's Day. Even if your team isn't playing in the Rose Bowl, as a college football fan, specifically a B1G fan, who doesn't want to watch the Rose Bowl and all its Pagentry? I know the Capital One and Outback bowls are probably remaining in the B1G bowl line up, but do you foresee any chance that there are changes so the times are not conflicting with the Rose Bowl?
Brian Bennett: I don't think that avoiding overlapping times is a major concern for the Big Ten as it tries to find the best bowl lineup. However, it's inevitable that we'll see some changes in that regard as the new lineup and the new playoff structure take hold. The playoff semifinals are going to own New Year's Day, so we'll have to see how that affects when the other bowls decide to kick off. There could still be several Big Ten teams playing at once, especially with the league holding onto ties with the Capital One and Outback bowls and sharing a slot with the ACC on the Gator. But with access to the Orange Bowl and other moves, I doubt we'll see as big of a Big Ten logjam in the bowls.
Aaron from Minneapolis, Minn., writes: As a Minnesota fan, I generally like the direction that the conference is going with non-conference scheduling. But I've heard a lot about how Iowa is being handcuffed by their annual tilt with Iowa State, and I was just wondering why this is a big deal. Lots of annual non-conference rivalries are going by the wayside these days (Michigan-ND, Florida-Miami, Nebraska-Oklahoma, etc.). While I understand that an in-state game is big for fans, I can't imagine Iowa fans will suddenly be at a loss for bad blood with Wisconsin, Minnesota, and even a potentially budding rivalry with Nebraska each year. And even if the game is not played annually, two games every four years would open up much more breathing room for Iowa to continue to schedule strong opponents on a regular basis. Am I completely off base here?
Brian Bennett: You're not wildly off base, Aaron, especially because the Iowa-Iowa State game doesn't really move the needle nationally. Still, I think it would be a shame to see that series end. I'm a huge proponent of in-state rivalries, especially in a state like Iowa where there are only two major programs. It's one thing for Florida and Miami not to play, but at least Florida-Florida State and Florida State-Miami continues. These are the kinds of rivalry games that keep friends, co-workers and neighbors talking year round within the state. I'd rather see Iowa test itself by playing one other marquee game in the nonconference schedule than losing the Iowa State series, though I understand why that's difficult with a nine-game league schedule. And speaking of in-state rivalries ...
Erik S. from Tallahassee, Fla., writes: With the renewal of the PSU-Pitt rivalry in 2016 and the dedication both sides feel about making the game happen every year, I'm hopeful that we'll get to see more of these games after the upcoming four-year contract is over. My question is that in the years Penn State plays Pitt, will that game become Penn State's required "one marquee nonconference game" or do you think another "Big Five" conference team would make the slate in addition?
Brian Bennett: There were some very encouraging comments last week from both sides about the future of the Penn State-Pitt rivalry, one that I think ought to return to being an annual affair. Penn State will have to decide how it wants to schedule its three nonconference games after 2016, and complicating matters is the NCAA probation. Do the Nittany Lions want to take on tough opponents as they're coming out of the sanctions era, or do they want to help themselves ease back into bowl contention? When at full strength, I absolutely think Penn State is the type of program that can handle playing Pitt and one other marquee, or at least major-conference, opponent every year. Given Pitt's near-perennial habit of underachieving, simply playing the Panthers probably wouldn't be enough to make the Nittany Lions' strength-of-schedule argument a compelling one in most years.
Bear rom Waco, Texas, writes: Baylor/Big 12 fan here just wanting to say props for the Big Ten agreeing to schedule nine conference games and no FCS opponents. The Big Ten, like every other conference, has its problems, but I really respect that y'all want to make create the highest quality football match-ups possible. So thanks Big Ten from down in Waco!
Brian Bennett: I guess it's always good to have a bear on your side, rather than the other way around.

