Friday, February 28, 2014
Big Ten Friday mailblog
By Adam Rittenberg
Your second mailblog of the week has arrived. Enjoy another weekend of snow (if you're in the Midwest, at least). Spring ball kicks off Saturday at Maryland, and eight teams get started next week. Good times.
Don't forget: Twitter!
To the inbox ...
Logan from just north of Piscataway writes: In response to Matt Brown's lengthy article on Nebraska, I can say that it has been quite frustrating, this past decade. I graduated from UNL in 2003, meaning that I was there for the end of the heyday. That was hard. I've watched my Big Red on four different continents, having kickoffs at all hours of the night and day, and it has worn on me, them not winning. However, I do have great faith in Coach Bo and truly do believe he is the man for the job. He's passionate and, yes, a bit gnarly with the press at times. My question: Do you feel this kind of coach helps, or is he just a distraction?
Adam Rittenberg: I think teams reflect their coach, and Nebraska at times has reflected Bo Pelini's volatile personality. It comes through the annual turnover problems and the week-to-week unpredictability (which team will show up?). Still, I think Bo is an excellent defensive coach who could produce a very good defense in Lincoln most seasons, including 2014. His players really like him, and the program hasn't had many off-field issues. So there are some things to like. Coaches always talk about how they have to be themselves, and Bo always will be a fiery guy. That's OK. But sometimes it goes too far, and the team seems to reflect that volatility.
John from Boise writes: Do you think the Big Ten would ever follow the ACC/SEC model and allow teams to schedule traditional rivals the last week of the season instead of creating conference rivals that make no sense? I mean, Penn State-Pitt is more interesting than Penn State-Mich State, Rutgers, Maryland, etc. Would make more sense and possibly help the lower attendance over the Thanksgiving weekend.
Adam Rittenberg: John, I'll look into this some more, but I think there will be an increased willingness to do so, especially with the Big Ten scheduling league games earlier in the future. Although the Big Ten wants to showcase some of its best games during Thanksgiving weekend, there are certain conference matchups that don't move the needle and others, like Penn State-Pitt, that could do much better in terms of interest/ratings. It's good to see the Big Ten embracing earlier league games, especially with the move to a nine-game league slate in 2016.
Kevin from Evanston, Ill., writes: Trevor Siemian seems to be the No. 1 QB heading into spring practices. Do you think Northwestern would be better off going with Matt Alviti as a starter this year? I feel like with Alviti as QB, they will get the best out of Venric Mark. I think with Trevor Siemian in there, Venric may not used to the best of his ability. I think we will end up seeing the two-QB system, however I feel like it may be more like last year rather than the year before. Also, exactly how good is Oliver?
Adam Rittenberg: Some good points here, Kevin. I agree Alviti's style might better serve Mark, but ultimately you have to go with the best option for the entire offense. Mark's durability is a question mark after last year (and the end of the 2012 season), so building the offense around him and the option game has its risks. Northwestern fans are optimistic about Alviti because of his success in high school, but he has to show significant improvement this spring to truly push Siemian, who has been pretty good in games when healthy. The same goes for Zack Oliver, who has been better in practice after some rough days early in his career.
I disagree Northwestern will use a two-QB system. That ship seems to have sailed. If Siemian wins the job, as expected, I think you'll see an offense that more closely resembles the 2007-10 version (pass-focused, a lot of short- to medium-length throws).
Sammy from Buffalo, N.Y., writes: As an IU fan, and as a student there I was excited when the team played night games, but was discouraged when at least half the crowd leaves at halftime. This does not only happen when the Hoosiers are losing, but it happened in every game this season. College students don't want to be at a dry stadium until 11 p.m. on a Thursday, Friday or Saturday night, especially at a school like Indiana, and the older alumni have a long drive home on a slow moving state highway. Am I wrong in thinking that night games may actually hurt the Hoosiers more than help them?
Adam Rittenberg: Sammy, it might hurt them with students, but the student-attendance problems at IU, where many traditionally gather outside the stadium but not enough go inside, aren't going away until the team starts winning more. Night games are family-friendly because many kids have their own games in the morning or early afternoon on Saturdays. I agree they can be hard on the older alumni, but there are more benefits for your real target audience (ages 18-45, plus kids), not to mention the increased exposure the program gets from playing under the lights.
Rick from Union City, Calif., writes: Hey Adam, when (not if) the BIG expands, and if they do think about adding KU and OK and possibly TX … do you think that then they will finally invite Mizzou to help create a BIG western (old Big Eight) division? I really don't think that VA or UNC will ever leave the ACC ... stopping any further southern expansion. Any thoughts?
Adam Rittenberg: Ah, expansion questions, how I've missed thee. The problem with Oklahoma and Texas is the likelihood of having to add other schools such as Oklahoma State and Texas Tech that don't fit into the Big Ten from an academic/profile standpoint. Remember Gordon Gee's email comment about Texas's "Tech problem?" That's still an issue. Same with Oklahoma regarding Oklahoma State. Moreover, the Big Ten is clearly making a push toward the East Coast and its big markets. These schools don't really fit into that vision.