Tuesday, April 15, 2014
Big Ten Tuesday mailblog
By Adam Rittenberg
It's tax day and you owe me some emails. No refunds granted here, unless you follow us on Twitter.
To the inbox ...
Brutus from The Ninth Circle writes: What's your take on where B1G recruiting stands at the moment, and where do you think it will be, come signing day? I'm not sure which is more surprising, that Penn State is as strong as it is at the moment, or that Ohio State and Michigan aren't that high in the lists. Granted, there is still quite a bit of time to go until signing day, but momentum is important. Do you think this all evens out by signing day and Ohio State takes the No. 1 spot within the B1G?
Adam Rittenberg: Brutus, although the recruiting cycle is accelerated, it's way too soon to draw conclusions about the Big Ten recruiting for 2015. Penn State's early surge is notable because coach James Franklin came in making bold declarations and so far has backed them up. Michigan typically has been a very fast starter and the Wolverines already have five verbals for 2015, led by ESPN 300 cornerback Garrett Taylor. Ohio State often makes its push later on, even before signing day, and has the luxury of being patient. There are pros and cons to racking up a bunch of early commitments.
It's a good thing for Penn State. As running backs coach Charles Huff recently told me, "We're the new girl in school, so a lot of guys want to date us." But I wouldn't worry about Ohio State and Michigan. They'll both be fine.
Brian from Atlanta writes: Adam, I've often seen you support more weeknight and Saturday night games for the B10. On the other hand, I've seen the presidents and ADs in the P12 complain incessantly about how many weeknight and Saturday night games they have. In 2013, they played 33 night games to our 18 (both split equally between ESPN/FOX and BTN/P12N/FS1). Is this a case of the grass always being greener, or is there a sweet spot in the middle?
Adam Rittenberg: Another great question, Brian. Keep 'em coming. It really comes down to what's best for each conference. The Big Ten boasts the biggest stadiums and some of the largest fan bases in college football. It still moves the needle even though on-field performance has been down for some time. The Big Ten should be competing for that Saturday night TV window as often as possible. Until recently, the league has been missing out.
The Pac-12, meanwhile, loses a huge audience when its games kick off after 5 p.m. local time. If you start a game at 7:30 p.m. Pacific time, most of the country has tuned out. There are pros and cons to weeknight games, and I understand the concern about an early weeknight kickoff -- like Oregon-Stanford -- as it’s hard to fill the stands. But TV is king here, and the Pac-12 needs to showcase its product.
Josh C. from Atlantic City, N.J., writes: Hey Adam, Big Rutgers fan here. Couldn't be more excited for the new season in the B1G. In fact lots of people in NJ are talking about the move and better competition. I've heard a lot of talk about "non-existent" RU fans. Do you think the rest of the B1G is underestimating the volume of fans? Whether it be quantity or quality.
Adam Rittenberg: I hope so, Josh, and it's good to hear the buzz is building in the Garden State for Rutgers' Big Ten arrival. I sense that there's a portion of Rutgers fans waiting to come out and support the team when things improve on the field. We saw a lot of enthusiasm for the program during the breakout season in 2006 (Who can forget Jeremy Ito?). Rutgers followed up with several solid seasons before taking a step back in 2013. The Big Ten move should generate excitement and support, especially when teams such as Penn State, Michigan and Wisconsin visit Piscataway. But Rutgers needs to perform well to show the Big Ten that its fan base is significant.
Austin from Iowa writes: What are the chances Jake Rudock has the best Career of any quarterback in the Ferentz era with two years to go and a stacked offense matched with a decent Iowa defense in a division with no real power team at the moment? Is it possible for Rudock to really make a name for himself nationally and lead Iowa to a couple of division, maybe conference titles?
Adam Rittenberg: Austin, at first I thought it would be really tough for Rudock to eclipse other Kirk Ferentz-era quarterbacks Ricky Stanzi, Brad Banks or even Drew Tate. Banks had a phenomenal year in 2002 but struggled at times the previous season. Stanzi led Iowa to an 18-4 record as the starter in 2008 and 2009 and had his best statistical season by far in 2010, but the team massively underachieved that fall. Tate had good years in 2004 and 2005 but struggled in his final season in 2006. So yes, Rudock has a chance. I wouldn't say Iowa's offense is stacked, though, and the Hawkeyes must show more explosiveness at the skill positions. A favorable schedule gives Iowa a great chance to reach the Big Ten title game this year, which would put Rudock in the category with the other Hawkeyes QBs mentioned.
Tom from Lincoln, Neb., writes: Adam -- a few months ago a local TV station ran an interview with FauxPelini, but agreed not to show his face or reveal his identity. Turns out he lives in the Chicago area. So I gotta ask: Is it you?
Adam Rittenberg: I wish I were that funny, Tom. No, it's not me. But if I ever locate Faux in Chicago, I'm buying him a beer for bringing me a lot of laughs over the years. I'm quite happy that Bo has regained custody of the cat. I'm allergic to them.