Big Ten: Purdue Boilermakers
Wishing you a happy and healthy holiday weekend.
Kevin from Minneapolis writes: Adam, Morgan Burke's comments comparing the difference in the number of varsity sports sponsored by Big Ten and SEC athletic departments translating to on the field performance are rather perplexing, but he is really missing the other half of the argument. If you want to correlate the business side of college football with wins/losses, the focal point has to be on the investment in facilities and the resulting impact on recruiting. It is hard to make an argument that having to support additional non-revenue sports causes Big Ten teams to lag behind when in recent years we have seen programs like Ohio State, Wisconsin, and Michigan hurling millions at (football only) Student Performance Centers. Heck, Nebraska's weight room is said by some as being the best in the country, trumping even the SEC. I could see how non-revenue sports affect the Big Ten athletic departments operating in the red, but I'm not buying this argument from those with a net profit.
Adam Rittenberg: Good points here, Kevin. The Big Ten isn't lagging behind in football facilities and boasts some of the best stadiums/practice complexes in the FBS. Every team in the league either has completed a renovation or a new project, is in the construction process (Iowa, Wisconsin) or is raising funds (Northwestern). But facilities are only one piece of the recruiting process. Assistant coaches are another, and Big Ten programs aren't as willing to throw boatloads of money at top assistants as SEC programs, in part because they have more sports to fund. There have been some increases in this area in recent years, but on average, Big Ten assistants aren't making what SEC assistants earn. I recently asked Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith, whose department sponsors 36 sports, if Big Ten programs have the resources to compete nationally in football. He said they do. Still, Burke makes a notable point about the different athletic models and football being a religion in the South. When football season ends, most Big Ten fans turn their attention to basketball. That's not the same in the SEC. Football is a bigger deal in that region year-round.
Mike H. from Pittsburgh writes: Regarding the Big Ten and SEC having different models: While it may slightly hurt the Big Ten, in relation to the SEC, not devoting all of its revenue to football, it can not be blamed for the struggles. First of all, like the high standard of academics being important, having broader and more sports programs is advantageous and respectable. True most have low interest and lose money, but as a recent graduate, many students take pride in all of their teams. I think it is awesome that PSU has one of the best all-around sports programs in the country. While as a football writer you could care less about non-revenue sports, the broad sports programs most importantly provide opportunities for more student-athletes to get a quality education while fulfilling dreams of playing at the college level. Yes it takes some money away from football but I am pretty sure none of the large Big Ten football programs are struggling for facilities, revenue, etc.
Adam Rittenberg: Mike, there's definitely value in having a truly broad-based athletic program, and many Big Ten fans like you celebrate all the teams, not just the ones generating revenue. The broad-based programs and the opportunities provided are integral parts of the Big Ten's athletic culture and won't change. It's why Nebraska has been such a good fit in the league so far. I also agree the different program models can't be used as an excuse for the Big Ten's football struggles. There are other factors involved. But it makes it tough for the Big Ten to catch the SEC when the SEC has such a clear football focus plus more elite recruits living in its backyard.
Travis from Madison, Wis., writes: I have a question pertaining to the love OSU is getting for next season. Are we, and by we I mean you (ESPN), overlooking their losses on defense? I understand they have Roby and Shazier, both excellent players, but otherwise they will be wading in uncharted waters. Clearly they have talent coming in to replace the departed starters, but the instances of talented replacements not panning out are endless. I'm not trying to be a hater, I'll be the first to admit their offense looks to be extremely good and Braxton Miller is deserving of his Heisman chatter, and seeing how their schedule might be the easiest schedule I've seen in recent memory, I too would declare them favorites to win the B1G. However, we saw plenty of squeaker games by OSU last season against teams that look to be much improved, so I'm just wondering if those who are crowning OSU B1G champs are doing so while considering their lack of experience on defense.
Adam Rittenberg: Travis, Brian and I recognize Ohio State's question marks on defense and the fact that, despite a 12-0 record, the Buckeyes easily could have dropped a few games last season. Ohio State wasn't a dominant team in 2012. There are some significant challenges on defense, especially with the defensive line, and losing Shazier and, to a lesser extent, Roby to injury could be devastating for Ohio State. But when you look at the schedule, which includes Wisconsin and Penn State in Columbus, plus the returning firepower on offense and another full offseason under Urban Meyer and his staff, Ohio State's potential for 2013 can't be ignored. The Buckeyes' recruiting has been exceptional, especially along the defensive line, the No. 1 area of need right now. When you take everything into account, it's hard not to pick Ohio State to win the league. We're not crowning anyone at this point and recognize the challenges Ohio State faces on defense, but the Buckeyes have a leg up on the rest of the league entering the fall.
Brian from Atlanta writes: Adam, being a CA boy may be clouding your judgement a little. Switching from 3 B12 bowls and 1 P12 bowl to 3 P12 bowls and maybe no B12 bowl doesn't improve variety and it makes for much longer bowl trips. That's fine for the Rose Bowl, but who wants to travel 2000 miles to SF for a mediocre bowl? In addition, the B10 lost a bastion of alumni in AZ. At best this is a wash to me. I'd rather see a balanced slate of 2 each versus the ACC, B12, P12 and SEC plus 1 MAC game (1 CA, 1 AZ, 2 TX, 2 FL, NY, MI, other).
Adam Rittenberg: Brian, you bring up an important point about the Big Ten-Big 12 games going away in the new lineup. I liked the Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl and so did Big Ten fans who attended the game, but I hear that a lower payout stemming from the Fiesta Bowl mess turned off the Big Ten from continuing the agreement. More of a business move than anything. Overall, I haven't loved the Big Ten-Big 12 matchups because it always seems like the Big 12 team is a huge favorite (i.e. Oklahoma State-Purdue). If there's a way to create more evenly matched postseason pairings between the two leagues, I'm all for it. But my main point is that the Big Ten has much more in common with the Pac-12 than any other league. The Rose Bowl matchup isn't enough, especially when the traditional champion vs. champion pairing is happening less and less often. That's a fair point about the travel distance for smaller bowls, but the Holiday Bowl isn't a small-potatoes game, and the Kraft Fight Hunger will increase its profile by moving to the 49ers' new stadium in 2014. Plus, there are major clusters of Big Ten alumni in California who can easily attend both games.
Christopher from Middleton, Wis., writes: When Wisconsin offensive coordinator Paul Chryst left Wisconsin to become Pitt's Head coach for the 2012 season many fans were concerned that Wisconsin had lost the man that was most responsible for the team's success. The 2012 Wisconsin team complete with an overhaul of new assistant coaches struggled on offense. Wisconsin now has a new head coach after Bret Bielema left for Arkansas. Will Wisconsin return to their dominating offensive ways? Will Bielema duplicate the offense that he had at Wisconsin at Arkansas? Will Paul Chryst prove to be the best coach of the three?
Adam Rittenberg: Christopher, time will tell whether Christ, Bielema or Gary Andersen proves to be the best coach, but Chryst is off to a rocky start at Pitt. The Panthers went 6-7 in his first season, endured multiple off-field incidents and had a key player transfer this spring. Chryst needs to stabilize things on the hilltop. He's a tremendous offensive coach, but whether he can be a great CEO and leader for a program remains to be seen. Most Wisconsin fans can't stand Bielema, but the guy had a lot of success and navigated the Badgers through a difficult stretch in 2008 to get back to the top of the Big Ten. He'll keep a similar offensive structure at Arkansas under Jim Chaney. Wisconsin also won't fundamentally change on offense under Andersen and coordinator Andy Ludwig, who runs a similar West Coast system to Chryst. Will the Badgers put up the numbers they did in 2010 and 2011? Probably not. But if they continue to recruit dynamic running backs and massive offensive linemen, they should be fine on that side of the ball. I also think Andersen could take the defense from solid to great over time through his recruiting efforts.
Chris from Traverse City, Mich., writes: It is very costly to get to Florida, let alone California Adam. 3 bowl games in California? Really? This eliminates the little guy for those bowl games but let's the rich enjoy California I guess. However, I like the history of the Holiday Bowl, but wish we could have added another East Coast bowl like the Belk or Military, or even the Liberty Bowl.
Adam Rittenberg: I hear ya, Chris, but the Big Ten will have the Music City Bowl in Nashville in three of the next six years as well as the Pinstripe Bowl (I know New York is expensive, but it's closer) and most likely the new Detroit Lions Bowl. The other thing to keep in mind is Big Ten fans/alums are really spread out nationally, so I don't know if it's just the "rich guys" who can get to Florida and California. There are a lot of people already living in or close to those states.
Spartan Fan from the Sunshine State writes: Adam, my question is more of a comment. With the schedule set up as it is, at least on paper it would appear the Spartans should have a pretty good shot at going undefeated in regular season play. What do you think? Bye weeks after N.D. and Michigan should set them up nicely.
Adam Rittenberg: Love the optimism, Sunshine State, although you might be getting a little too much sun. Michigan State lost six games last season, and while five were close losses, it's hard to imagine all of those will swing in the Spartans' favor this season. The good news is Michigan State once again boasts a nationally elite defense. The semi-good news is Michigan State doesn't need its offense to be like Oregon's or Texas A&M's to be in position to win most games. The bad news is the offense has a ton of question marks, from quarterback to running back to receiver to tight end. Michigan State still must travel to Notre Dame, to Nebraska and to Northwestern. All three of those teams recorded double-digit wins a year ago. I also put very little stock into the timing of open weeks. Although they can help teams get healthy, they often don't translate to wins on the field. Can Michigan State win the Legends division? Sure. Will the Spartans be better this season? I think they will. But they aren't going undefeated.
John from Houston writes: Just wondering, how do Michigan and MSU divide up the state? As in: is Michigan more popular in the southern parts and MSU more popular in the north parts? Or is Michigan more popular in the cities while MSU is more popular in the rural areas? Or do they both divide up the state exactly equal?
Adam Rittenberg: As Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio often says, you're either green or blue in that state. Michigan State is more popular in the Western half of the state, which includes cities like Grand Rapids but obviously isn't as populated as the Detroit area. Michigan has a bigger cluster of fans closer to its campus in the Eastern portion of the state, although there's a growing pocket of blue in the Grand Rapids/Holland area. If you split the state along Interstate 69 and include the Lansing area in the west/MSU portion, you can get a fairly good idea of how the allegiances break down.
Kevin from Minneapolis writes: Adam, Morgan Burke's comments comparing the difference in the number of varsity sports sponsored by Big Ten and SEC athletic departments translating to on the field performance are rather perplexing, but he is really missing the other half of the argument. If you want to correlate the business side of college football with wins/losses, the focal point has to be on the investment in facilities and the resulting impact on recruiting. It is hard to make an argument that having to support additional non-revenue sports causes Big Ten teams to lag behind when in recent years we have seen programs like Ohio State, Wisconsin, and Michigan hurling millions at (football only) Student Performance Centers. Heck, Nebraska's weight room is said by some as being the best in the country, trumping even the SEC. I could see how non-revenue sports affect the Big Ten athletic departments operating in the red, but I'm not buying this argument from those with a net profit.
Adam Rittenberg: Good points here, Kevin. The Big Ten isn't lagging behind in football facilities and boasts some of the best stadiums/practice complexes in the FBS. Every team in the league either has completed a renovation or a new project, is in the construction process (Iowa, Wisconsin) or is raising funds (Northwestern). But facilities are only one piece of the recruiting process. Assistant coaches are another, and Big Ten programs aren't as willing to throw boatloads of money at top assistants as SEC programs, in part because they have more sports to fund. There have been some increases in this area in recent years, but on average, Big Ten assistants aren't making what SEC assistants earn. I recently asked Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith, whose department sponsors 36 sports, if Big Ten programs have the resources to compete nationally in football. He said they do. Still, Burke makes a notable point about the different athletic models and football being a religion in the South. When football season ends, most Big Ten fans turn their attention to basketball. That's not the same in the SEC. Football is a bigger deal in that region year-round.
Mike H. from Pittsburgh writes: Regarding the Big Ten and SEC having different models: While it may slightly hurt the Big Ten, in relation to the SEC, not devoting all of its revenue to football, it can not be blamed for the struggles. First of all, like the high standard of academics being important, having broader and more sports programs is advantageous and respectable. True most have low interest and lose money, but as a recent graduate, many students take pride in all of their teams. I think it is awesome that PSU has one of the best all-around sports programs in the country. While as a football writer you could care less about non-revenue sports, the broad sports programs most importantly provide opportunities for more student-athletes to get a quality education while fulfilling dreams of playing at the college level. Yes it takes some money away from football but I am pretty sure none of the large Big Ten football programs are struggling for facilities, revenue, etc.
Adam Rittenberg: Mike, there's definitely value in having a truly broad-based athletic program, and many Big Ten fans like you celebrate all the teams, not just the ones generating revenue. The broad-based programs and the opportunities provided are integral parts of the Big Ten's athletic culture and won't change. It's why Nebraska has been such a good fit in the league so far. I also agree the different program models can't be used as an excuse for the Big Ten's football struggles. There are other factors involved. But it makes it tough for the Big Ten to catch the SEC when the SEC has such a clear football focus plus more elite recruits living in its backyard.
Travis from Madison, Wis., writes: I have a question pertaining to the love OSU is getting for next season. Are we, and by we I mean you (ESPN), overlooking their losses on defense? I understand they have Roby and Shazier, both excellent players, but otherwise they will be wading in uncharted waters. Clearly they have talent coming in to replace the departed starters, but the instances of talented replacements not panning out are endless. I'm not trying to be a hater, I'll be the first to admit their offense looks to be extremely good and Braxton Miller is deserving of his Heisman chatter, and seeing how their schedule might be the easiest schedule I've seen in recent memory, I too would declare them favorites to win the B1G. However, we saw plenty of squeaker games by OSU last season against teams that look to be much improved, so I'm just wondering if those who are crowning OSU B1G champs are doing so while considering their lack of experience on defense.
Adam Rittenberg: Travis, Brian and I recognize Ohio State's question marks on defense and the fact that, despite a 12-0 record, the Buckeyes easily could have dropped a few games last season. Ohio State wasn't a dominant team in 2012. There are some significant challenges on defense, especially with the defensive line, and losing Shazier and, to a lesser extent, Roby to injury could be devastating for Ohio State. But when you look at the schedule, which includes Wisconsin and Penn State in Columbus, plus the returning firepower on offense and another full offseason under Urban Meyer and his staff, Ohio State's potential for 2013 can't be ignored. The Buckeyes' recruiting has been exceptional, especially along the defensive line, the No. 1 area of need right now. When you take everything into account, it's hard not to pick Ohio State to win the league. We're not crowning anyone at this point and recognize the challenges Ohio State faces on defense, but the Buckeyes have a leg up on the rest of the league entering the fall.
Brian from Atlanta writes: Adam, being a CA boy may be clouding your judgement a little. Switching from 3 B12 bowls and 1 P12 bowl to 3 P12 bowls and maybe no B12 bowl doesn't improve variety and it makes for much longer bowl trips. That's fine for the Rose Bowl, but who wants to travel 2000 miles to SF for a mediocre bowl? In addition, the B10 lost a bastion of alumni in AZ. At best this is a wash to me. I'd rather see a balanced slate of 2 each versus the ACC, B12, P12 and SEC plus 1 MAC game (1 CA, 1 AZ, 2 TX, 2 FL, NY, MI, other).
Adam Rittenberg: Brian, you bring up an important point about the Big Ten-Big 12 games going away in the new lineup. I liked the Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl and so did Big Ten fans who attended the game, but I hear that a lower payout stemming from the Fiesta Bowl mess turned off the Big Ten from continuing the agreement. More of a business move than anything. Overall, I haven't loved the Big Ten-Big 12 matchups because it always seems like the Big 12 team is a huge favorite (i.e. Oklahoma State-Purdue). If there's a way to create more evenly matched postseason pairings between the two leagues, I'm all for it. But my main point is that the Big Ten has much more in common with the Pac-12 than any other league. The Rose Bowl matchup isn't enough, especially when the traditional champion vs. champion pairing is happening less and less often. That's a fair point about the travel distance for smaller bowls, but the Holiday Bowl isn't a small-potatoes game, and the Kraft Fight Hunger will increase its profile by moving to the 49ers' new stadium in 2014. Plus, there are major clusters of Big Ten alumni in California who can easily attend both games.
Christopher from Middleton, Wis., writes: When Wisconsin offensive coordinator Paul Chryst left Wisconsin to become Pitt's Head coach for the 2012 season many fans were concerned that Wisconsin had lost the man that was most responsible for the team's success. The 2012 Wisconsin team complete with an overhaul of new assistant coaches struggled on offense. Wisconsin now has a new head coach after Bret Bielema left for Arkansas. Will Wisconsin return to their dominating offensive ways? Will Bielema duplicate the offense that he had at Wisconsin at Arkansas? Will Paul Chryst prove to be the best coach of the three?
Adam Rittenberg: Christopher, time will tell whether Christ, Bielema or Gary Andersen proves to be the best coach, but Chryst is off to a rocky start at Pitt. The Panthers went 6-7 in his first season, endured multiple off-field incidents and had a key player transfer this spring. Chryst needs to stabilize things on the hilltop. He's a tremendous offensive coach, but whether he can be a great CEO and leader for a program remains to be seen. Most Wisconsin fans can't stand Bielema, but the guy had a lot of success and navigated the Badgers through a difficult stretch in 2008 to get back to the top of the Big Ten. He'll keep a similar offensive structure at Arkansas under Jim Chaney. Wisconsin also won't fundamentally change on offense under Andersen and coordinator Andy Ludwig, who runs a similar West Coast system to Chryst. Will the Badgers put up the numbers they did in 2010 and 2011? Probably not. But if they continue to recruit dynamic running backs and massive offensive linemen, they should be fine on that side of the ball. I also think Andersen could take the defense from solid to great over time through his recruiting efforts.
Chris from Traverse City, Mich., writes: It is very costly to get to Florida, let alone California Adam. 3 bowl games in California? Really? This eliminates the little guy for those bowl games but let's the rich enjoy California I guess. However, I like the history of the Holiday Bowl, but wish we could have added another East Coast bowl like the Belk or Military, or even the Liberty Bowl.
Adam Rittenberg: I hear ya, Chris, but the Big Ten will have the Music City Bowl in Nashville in three of the next six years as well as the Pinstripe Bowl (I know New York is expensive, but it's closer) and most likely the new Detroit Lions Bowl. The other thing to keep in mind is Big Ten fans/alums are really spread out nationally, so I don't know if it's just the "rich guys" who can get to Florida and California. There are a lot of people already living in or close to those states.
Spartan Fan from the Sunshine State writes: Adam, my question is more of a comment. With the schedule set up as it is, at least on paper it would appear the Spartans should have a pretty good shot at going undefeated in regular season play. What do you think? Bye weeks after N.D. and Michigan should set them up nicely.
Adam Rittenberg: Love the optimism, Sunshine State, although you might be getting a little too much sun. Michigan State lost six games last season, and while five were close losses, it's hard to imagine all of those will swing in the Spartans' favor this season. The good news is Michigan State once again boasts a nationally elite defense. The semi-good news is Michigan State doesn't need its offense to be like Oregon's or Texas A&M's to be in position to win most games. The bad news is the offense has a ton of question marks, from quarterback to running back to receiver to tight end. Michigan State still must travel to Notre Dame, to Nebraska and to Northwestern. All three of those teams recorded double-digit wins a year ago. I also put very little stock into the timing of open weeks. Although they can help teams get healthy, they often don't translate to wins on the field. Can Michigan State win the Legends division? Sure. Will the Spartans be better this season? I think they will. But they aren't going undefeated.
John from Houston writes: Just wondering, how do Michigan and MSU divide up the state? As in: is Michigan more popular in the southern parts and MSU more popular in the north parts? Or is Michigan more popular in the cities while MSU is more popular in the rural areas? Or do they both divide up the state exactly equal?
Adam Rittenberg: As Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio often says, you're either green or blue in that state. Michigan State is more popular in the Western half of the state, which includes cities like Grand Rapids but obviously isn't as populated as the Detroit area. Michigan has a bigger cluster of fans closer to its campus in the Eastern portion of the state, although there's a growing pocket of blue in the Grand Rapids/Holland area. If you split the state along Interstate 69 and include the Lansing area in the west/MSU portion, you can get a fairly good idea of how the allegiances break down.
Have a great and safe Memorial Day weekend, everybody.
- Ohio State landed the third linebacker in its 2014 class in Akron's Dante Booker. Former Buckeye Ray Small apologized for his missteps.
- Brady Hoke doesn't know where Michigan's "Not in Ohio" footballs came from. Dave Brandon is not a fan of parity-based scheduling. Fitz Toussaint is fired up to regain his starting tailback job.
- Mark Hollis recalls the process of hiring Mark Dantonio at Michigan State. The son of former Spartans star Jim Morrissey is becoming a big-time prospect. Le'Veon Bell is drawing some rave reviews with the Pittsburgh Steelers.
- Bill O'Brien is comfortable with John Butler as his defensive coordinator. Eugene Lewis should help Penn State at receiver and in the return game. Adam Breneman won a national honor for his charity work.
- Eric Crouch expresses regrets about how he handled his NFL experience. A future Husker is trying to finish strong in his high school track career.
- A pair of twins who signed with Pitt could transfer to Purdue. A Q&A with Boilers offensive coordinator John Shoop.
- Landing Wes Lunt would be a boost for Tim Beckman and Illinois. Paul Myerberg previews the Illini, whom he ranks No. 110 in the country.
- Choosing the best Iowa players of the Kirk Ferentz era. How Big Ten division re-alignment will affect the pocketbooks of Hawkeyes' fans.
- Northwestern freshman running back Warren Long has West Coast roots, a talent for the guitar and an interest in becoming a barber.
- Wisconsin has a schedule built for success.
- Minnesota's Ra'Shede Hageman is getting some national notice.
The Big Ten is rich. The SEC is rich. The two leagues are head and shoulders above the rest in terms of popularity and power.
So why is the SEC so far ahead on the football field? The question has been dissected over and over throughout the SEC's run of seven consecutive football national championships. You've heard about demographic changes and how there are more elite football recruits living closer to SEC campuses than Big Ten campuses. You've heard about speed. You've heard about oversigning. You've heard about superior coaching. You've heard about the passionate/maniacal year-round obsession with college football in the South that doesn't really exist in other regions.
Purdue athletic director Morgan Burke sheds light on another key difference between the Big Ten and the SEC, one that relates to revenue and specifically how the leagues use revenue differently. In an interview with The (Fort Wayne) News-Sentinel's Pete DiPrimio, Burke talks about the differences in the athletic department models between the Big Ten and the SEC.
Ohio State sponsors 36 varsity sports, while Penn State has 31 and Michigan has 27. Most SEC schools sponsor 19-21 sports. Purdue has 20 varsity teams but finds itself near the bottom of the Big Ten along with Northwestern (19 teams).
Big Ten fans probably don't want to hear that sports that generate little interest and zero revenue might be holding back their football teams from competing with the SEC for national championships. But Burke's point is valid: there are more mouths to feed in the Big Ten. It's a big reason why the Big Ten, while committing more money to assistant coaches, still lags behind the SEC in that area.
Some will say Burke is making excuses for the Big Ten's recent woes. But he hits on an important difference between the two leagues that often gets overlooked. He also talks about the heightened interest level in the South -- "Football in the south is a religion. It just is" -- that can't be dismissed when sizing up these two conferences.
What do you think? Does the Big Ten's broad-based model hold it back on the gridiron, or is it just another way to mask bigger deficiencies in the league's football programs?
So why is the SEC so far ahead on the football field? The question has been dissected over and over throughout the SEC's run of seven consecutive football national championships. You've heard about demographic changes and how there are more elite football recruits living closer to SEC campuses than Big Ten campuses. You've heard about speed. You've heard about oversigning. You've heard about superior coaching. You've heard about the passionate/maniacal year-round obsession with college football in the South that doesn't really exist in other regions.
Purdue athletic director Morgan Burke sheds light on another key difference between the Big Ten and the SEC, one that relates to revenue and specifically how the leagues use revenue differently. In an interview with The (Fort Wayne) News-Sentinel's Pete DiPrimio, Burke talks about the differences in the athletic department models between the Big Ten and the SEC.
"The SEC model, almost across the board, is sponsoring the minimum number of sports (16)," Burke told the News-Sentinel. "I'm not being negative toward the SEC, but their strategy has been to take seven men's sports and nine women's sports. That puts them in a gender equity balance. If you are getting 80,000 to 90,000 in your stadium, what that means is you're spending an awful lot on football. You have to call it what it is. I'm not saying it's wrong.
"The Big Ten model is, let's get more kids, more opportunities. We have a larger athlete base. Our grant in aid [scholarship] base is bigger. It's not that we don't spend, but football in the south is a religion. It just is. When you look at the dollars and models, they're very different."
Ohio State sponsors 36 varsity sports, while Penn State has 31 and Michigan has 27. Most SEC schools sponsor 19-21 sports. Purdue has 20 varsity teams but finds itself near the bottom of the Big Ten along with Northwestern (19 teams).
Big Ten fans probably don't want to hear that sports that generate little interest and zero revenue might be holding back their football teams from competing with the SEC for national championships. But Burke's point is valid: there are more mouths to feed in the Big Ten. It's a big reason why the Big Ten, while committing more money to assistant coaches, still lags behind the SEC in that area.
"The SEC and Big Ten are opposite ends of the spectrum. It makes for a challenge if you're going to try to challenge for a national championship."
Some will say Burke is making excuses for the Big Ten's recent woes. But he hits on an important difference between the two leagues that often gets overlooked. He also talks about the heightened interest level in the South -- "Football in the south is a religion. It just is" -- that can't be dismissed when sizing up these two conferences.
What do you think? Does the Big Ten's broad-based model hold it back on the gridiron, or is it just another way to mask bigger deficiencies in the league's football programs?
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.
Now that spring practice is over, we're examining the most indispensable players on each Big Ten team for the 2013 season.
By indispensable, we don't necessarily mean best. We mean the players who would be hardest to replace between now and the start of the season if they got hurt or suspended or forced to listen to William Hung songs until their ears exploded. That could be because of their value to the team, or because of a lack of depth at their position.
We'll pick two players from each team, usually offense and defense, but not always. Purdue is our penultimate team in the series.
Bruce Gaston Jr., DT, Sr.
The Boilers already will be without a standout defensive tackle in Kawann Short, a second-round pick in April's NFL draft (first Big Ten player selected). They can ill afford to lose another space-eater in the interior defensive line. Gaston is a three-year starter who recorded two forced fumbles, two fumble recoveries and 5.5 tackles for loss as a junior in 2012. Although Gaston hasn't put up All-Big Ten-type numbers, he has been consistently productive in his career and could take things to the next level as a senior leader. Gaston missed most of spring practice following thumb surgery but made an impact after returning for the final few workouts. "There’s weight classes in boxing for a reason," Boilers defensive coordinator Greg Hudson said, referring to Gaston. "When big guys move around, things happen. They create space and they alter the line of scrimmage." Hudson thinks Gaston, with a strong summer, could flourish at the 3-technique for Purdue this fall. He's critical to improving Purdue's run defense and overall consistency and would be missed if he goes down.
Akeem Hunt, RB, Jr.
There are several other possibilities here -- Ryan Russell, Dolapo Macarthy, Robert Kugler -- but it's hard to ignore what Hunt did this spring at a position where Purdue currently has very little depth. Hunt capitalized on the chance to establish himself as the Boilers' No. 1 back and more than just a speed guy. Although Purdue likely needs another back or two to emerge and could rely on incoming freshmen like Keyante Green, the coaches can enter camp knowing they have a good option with some experience and knowledge of John Shoop's offense. The passing game is a significant question mark as Purdue remains unsettled at quarterback and needs several receivers to step up. The Boilers can help their unproven signal-caller with a threat in the run game, and Hunt provides it. His contributions on special teams as arguably the Big Ten's fastest player also can't be overlooked.
More indispensable:
Michigan
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Nebraska
Indiana
Michigan State
Ohio State
Iowa
Penn State
Illinois
By indispensable, we don't necessarily mean best. We mean the players who would be hardest to replace between now and the start of the season if they got hurt or suspended or forced to listen to William Hung songs until their ears exploded. That could be because of their value to the team, or because of a lack of depth at their position.
We'll pick two players from each team, usually offense and defense, but not always. Purdue is our penultimate team in the series.
Bruce Gaston Jr., DT, Sr.
The Boilers already will be without a standout defensive tackle in Kawann Short, a second-round pick in April's NFL draft (first Big Ten player selected). They can ill afford to lose another space-eater in the interior defensive line. Gaston is a three-year starter who recorded two forced fumbles, two fumble recoveries and 5.5 tackles for loss as a junior in 2012. Although Gaston hasn't put up All-Big Ten-type numbers, he has been consistently productive in his career and could take things to the next level as a senior leader. Gaston missed most of spring practice following thumb surgery but made an impact after returning for the final few workouts. "There’s weight classes in boxing for a reason," Boilers defensive coordinator Greg Hudson said, referring to Gaston. "When big guys move around, things happen. They create space and they alter the line of scrimmage." Hudson thinks Gaston, with a strong summer, could flourish at the 3-technique for Purdue this fall. He's critical to improving Purdue's run defense and overall consistency and would be missed if he goes down.
Akeem Hunt, RB, Jr.
There are several other possibilities here -- Ryan Russell, Dolapo Macarthy, Robert Kugler -- but it's hard to ignore what Hunt did this spring at a position where Purdue currently has very little depth. Hunt capitalized on the chance to establish himself as the Boilers' No. 1 back and more than just a speed guy. Although Purdue likely needs another back or two to emerge and could rely on incoming freshmen like Keyante Green, the coaches can enter camp knowing they have a good option with some experience and knowledge of John Shoop's offense. The passing game is a significant question mark as Purdue remains unsettled at quarterback and needs several receivers to step up. The Boilers can help their unproven signal-caller with a threat in the run game, and Hunt provides it. His contributions on special teams as arguably the Big Ten's fastest player also can't be overlooked.
More indispensable:
Michigan
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Nebraska
Indiana
Michigan State
Ohio State
Iowa
Penn State
Illinois
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.
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.
Gerad Parker and his fellow Purdue assistants need no tutorial on what the state of Texas means to the Boilers' program.
They get a reminder every time they turn on the television every Sunday during the NFL season. Former Purdue coach Joe Tiller built his program largely on recruiting the Lone Star State, and the centerpiece of Tiller's efforts plays quarterback for the New Orleans Saints.
"We knew from what Coach Tiller was able to do here at Purdue," Parker, Purdue's recruiting coordinator and tight ends coach, recently told ESPN.com. "The players that came out of [Texas], the first one obviously being You Know Who in Mr. [Drew] Brees. Those guys did a good job in Texas."
Purdue's 2000 team that won the Big Ten and reached the Rose Bowl included 12 Texans on the roster, including Brees, first-team All-Big Ten linebacker Akin Ayodele, linebacker Landon Johnson and safety Ralph Turner. The Boilers currently have five Texans on the roster, including starting defensive end Ryan Russell.
Those numbers could increase under the new staff. Although head coach Darrell Hazell and several of his assistants have ties to the East Coast and, of course, to Ohio, Texas will be a priority for Purdue's recruiting in the coming years. Parker had two assistants each spend a week recruiting in Texas during the post-spring evaluation period.
Purdue's lone commitment so far for the 2014 -- wide receiver Trae Hart -- hails from Texas. The Boilers are pursuing other Texas prospects like quarterback David Blough, a Carrolton native recently selected for the Elite 11 finals. Blough learned he had made the finals when Brees tweeted about it.
"Texas is another state that has great football, great tradition, those kids grow up playing, they're well-coached" Parker said. "So we wanted to get back and put our feet in the ground and obviously get some kids from that area."
Purdue's previous coaching staff didn't hide its preference for Florida recruits, and there are 19 Floridians on the current roster and five in the incoming recruiting class. Although the team's recruiting map will spread out a little more under Hazell and his assistants, they aren't going to neglect the Sunshine State.
Three of Hazell's assistants -- offensive line coach Jim Bridge, defensive line coach Rubin Carter and secondary coach Jon Heacock -- all have recruited Florida for years and will continue to do so.
"We've got Florida still covered, there's no question about it," Parker said. "With the players we have currently, who are all pretty good players, we want to keep that tradition alive, and the only way you do that is continue to sign kids from that area."
They get a reminder every time they turn on the television every Sunday during the NFL season. Former Purdue coach Joe Tiller built his program largely on recruiting the Lone Star State, and the centerpiece of Tiller's efforts plays quarterback for the New Orleans Saints.
"We knew from what Coach Tiller was able to do here at Purdue," Parker, Purdue's recruiting coordinator and tight ends coach, recently told ESPN.com. "The players that came out of [Texas], the first one obviously being You Know Who in Mr. [Drew] Brees. Those guys did a good job in Texas."
[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/J.D. PooleyNew Purdue coach Darrell Hazell and his staff will be making recruiting talent out of Texas a priority.
AP Photo/J.D. PooleyNew Purdue coach Darrell Hazell and his staff will be making recruiting talent out of Texas a priority.Those numbers could increase under the new staff. Although head coach Darrell Hazell and several of his assistants have ties to the East Coast and, of course, to Ohio, Texas will be a priority for Purdue's recruiting in the coming years. Parker had two assistants each spend a week recruiting in Texas during the post-spring evaluation period.
Purdue's lone commitment so far for the 2014 -- wide receiver Trae Hart -- hails from Texas. The Boilers are pursuing other Texas prospects like quarterback David Blough, a Carrolton native recently selected for the Elite 11 finals. Blough learned he had made the finals when Brees tweeted about it.
"Texas is another state that has great football, great tradition, those kids grow up playing, they're well-coached" Parker said. "So we wanted to get back and put our feet in the ground and obviously get some kids from that area."
Purdue's previous coaching staff didn't hide its preference for Florida recruits, and there are 19 Floridians on the current roster and five in the incoming recruiting class. Although the team's recruiting map will spread out a little more under Hazell and his assistants, they aren't going to neglect the Sunshine State.
Three of Hazell's assistants -- offensive line coach Jim Bridge, defensive line coach Rubin Carter and secondary coach Jon Heacock -- all have recruited Florida for years and will continue to do so.
"We've got Florida still covered, there's no question about it," Parker said. "With the players we have currently, who are all pretty good players, we want to keep that tradition alive, and the only way you do that is continue to sign kids from that area."
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.
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.
Serving up the links at lunch because, well, it's my job.
- Kirk Ferentz opens up in this Q&A with Bryce Miller.
- True freshman Dymonte Thomas has a chance to contribute right away in the Michigan secondary. The Wolverines' hopes of landing a transfer quarterback are dimming. Jake Long offered counsel to Taylor Lewan about his draft decision.
- Mark Dantonio talks about the business of recruiting. Michigan State is upgrading its practice field. The Spartans' offensive assistants got bigger raises than their defensive counterparts.
- Jon Tevlin tries to figure out how Minnesota lost money selling beer at football games. Philip Nelson has a lot to work on this summer.
- Nebraska's pursuit of a top 2014 wide receiver is one to watch closely. Tim Beck's value to the Cornhuskers is clear, Sam McKewon writes.
- Wisconsin admirably is upgrading its nonconference schedules, but that might not benefit the fans who pay for seats at Camp Randall Stadium.
- He might not be the No. 1 tailback, but Rod Smith should play a key role in Ohio State's offense. Breaking down the Buckeyes' linebackers.
- Northwestern incoming freshman quarterback Matt Alviti is excited for the future.
- Why so many are still fighting for Joe Paterno. Another impressive "run-on" joins the Nittany Lions.
- A preview of Illinois' 2014 season.
- Purdue athletic director Morgan Burke wants his teams to break out of mediocrity.
- Big Ten teams should cut out their September snoozers, Lee Barfknecht writes.
B1G assistant coach salaries on the rise
May, 20, 2013
May 20
9:00
AM ET
By
Adam Rittenberg | ESPN.com
Ohio State already had started paying more competitive salaries for assistant coaches before Urban Meyer arrived in November 2011.
But when Meyer and athletic director Gene Smith sat down to discuss staff pay, Smith soon realized he needed to do more.
"I think Michigan had stepped up with their coordinators," Smith recalled last week during Big Ten spring meetings in Chicago. "So we were already going to that before Urban Meyer came, but we bumped it up a little more. Any time there's change, you have that opportunity."
"Everyone's always focused on head coaches' salaries," Smith continued. "That's always the thing. But really when you look at the changes, it's really been assistants' salaries across the country -- not just in the SEC, but the Big 12, Pac-12, all across the country."
The Big Ten is part of the change, too, as the league is allocating more money toward football assistants than ever before. The Detroit Free Press has an excellent look at Big Ten assistants' salaries, complete with a database that includes 10 of the 12 current members (Northwestern doesn't submit salaries as a private institution, and Penn State doesn't have to because of state laws).
The Free Press found that eight of the 10 schools are paying more for assistants in 2013 than they did in 2012 (only Indiana and Illinois are not). There are some significant total increases, such as Wisconsin (up $558,000), Nebraska (up $518,500), Purdue ($400,000) and Minnesota ($355,000). Staff pay had been an issue at Wisconsin, which lost six assistant coaches following the 2012 Rose Bowl, and at Purdue, which paid less for its staff during the Danny Hope era than any Big Ten school.
The total trend among the 10 schools is an increase of $1,720,852.24 for 2013.
Ohio State and Michigan remain No. 1 and No. 2 in Big Ten staff salary, as the Buckeyes allocate $3.416 million and the Wolverines allocate $2.805 million. Nebraska and Wisconsin make the biggest moves in the league for 2013, as the Huskers rise from sixth to third and the Badgers rise from seventh to fourth.
Illinois, which replaced five assistants from the 2012 team, including co-offensive coordinators Chris Beatty and Billy Gonzales, dropped from third in staff pay ($2.314 million) to eighth ($2.065 million).
The database shows that nearly every Big Ten assistant with "coordinator" in his title -- whether he's the sole coordinator or a co-coordinator -- will earn north of $300,000 for 2013. Only 18 assistants listed will make less than $200,000 in 2013 -- 15 work for Minnesota, Illinois, Purdue and Indiana.
Some notes:
The Big Ten still lacks some of the OMG totals seen in the SEC -- LSU is paying new offensive coordinator Cam Cameron $3.4 million in the next three years -- but the overall trend puts the league more on par with what we're seeing nationally.
But when Meyer and athletic director Gene Smith sat down to discuss staff pay, Smith soon realized he needed to do more.
"I think Michigan had stepped up with their coordinators," Smith recalled last week during Big Ten spring meetings in Chicago. "So we were already going to that before Urban Meyer came, but we bumped it up a little more. Any time there's change, you have that opportunity."
[+] Enlarge
Lon Horwedel/Icon SMIMichigan DC Greg Mattison ranks as the highest-paid assistant coach in the Big Ten for the 2013 season.
Lon Horwedel/Icon SMIMichigan DC Greg Mattison ranks as the highest-paid assistant coach in the Big Ten for the 2013 season.The Big Ten is part of the change, too, as the league is allocating more money toward football assistants than ever before. The Detroit Free Press has an excellent look at Big Ten assistants' salaries, complete with a database that includes 10 of the 12 current members (Northwestern doesn't submit salaries as a private institution, and Penn State doesn't have to because of state laws).
The Free Press found that eight of the 10 schools are paying more for assistants in 2013 than they did in 2012 (only Indiana and Illinois are not). There are some significant total increases, such as Wisconsin (up $558,000), Nebraska (up $518,500), Purdue ($400,000) and Minnesota ($355,000). Staff pay had been an issue at Wisconsin, which lost six assistant coaches following the 2012 Rose Bowl, and at Purdue, which paid less for its staff during the Danny Hope era than any Big Ten school.
The total trend among the 10 schools is an increase of $1,720,852.24 for 2013.
Ohio State and Michigan remain No. 1 and No. 2 in Big Ten staff salary, as the Buckeyes allocate $3.416 million and the Wolverines allocate $2.805 million. Nebraska and Wisconsin make the biggest moves in the league for 2013, as the Huskers rise from sixth to third and the Badgers rise from seventh to fourth.
Illinois, which replaced five assistants from the 2012 team, including co-offensive coordinators Chris Beatty and Billy Gonzales, dropped from third in staff pay ($2.314 million) to eighth ($2.065 million).
The database shows that nearly every Big Ten assistant with "coordinator" in his title -- whether he's the sole coordinator or a co-coordinator -- will earn north of $300,000 for 2013. Only 18 assistants listed will make less than $200,000 in 2013 -- 15 work for Minnesota, Illinois, Purdue and Indiana.
Some notes:
- Although Wisconsin paid former offensive coordinator Paul Chryst good coin, the school has increased its commitment for Gary Andersen's staff, not only with the coordinators but with some coveted position coaches like running backs coach Thomas Hammock ($300,000).
- All of Nebraska's assistants are earning $200,000 or more for 2013, but there's a huge drop-off between Beck and the next highest-paid assistant (defensive coordinator John Papuchis at $310,000).
- Michigan State has a similar drop off between Narduzzi and co-offensive coordinators Dave Warner ($270,000) and Jim Bollman ($260,000). Warner will be the primary offensive play-caller and has been on Mark Dantonio's staff since 2006, while Bollman is a newcomer.
- Although Michigan is paying top dollar for its coordinators, the school gets its assistants for a relative bargain. Receivers coach/recruiting coordinator Jeff Hecklinski will earn $225,000 in 2013, while the others all will earn $205,000. Ohio State, meanwhile, pays all but one of its assistants $286,000 or more.
- The Big Ten's three lowest-paid assistants all are in their first years: Illinois wide receivers coach Mike Bellamy ($125,000) and Purdue linebackers coach Marcus Freeman and running backs coach Jafar Williams (both at $120,000).
- Although schools like Illinois, Wisconsin and Iowa ($325,000) pay their coordinators the exact same amount, others have slight differences in salary. Purdue's Shoop makes $5,000 more than defensive coordinator Greg Hudson. Minnesota defensive coordinator Tracy Claeys ($340,000) makes $5,000 more than offensive coordinator Matt Limegrover. Wonder if that leads to any underlying jealousy?
- Most Big Ten schools have assistant salaries in round numbers, but there are some interesting totals from Indiana, which pays co-offensive coordinators Seth Littrell and Kevin Johns $255,500.04 and new recruiting coordinator/assistant defensive line coach James Patton $173,740.08. Never know when that change can come in handy.
The Big Ten still lacks some of the OMG totals seen in the SEC -- LSU is paying new offensive coordinator Cam Cameron $3.4 million in the next three years -- but the overall trend puts the league more on par with what we're seeing nationally.

