ESPN College Football

Two years ago, expansion took center stage at the Big Ten spring meetings. Last year, league commissioner Jim Delany revealed a proposal being discussed that would allocate more money to student-athletes on full scholarships.

What will be the big topic at this year's Big Ten spring gathering? You'll have to wait and find out. The meetings take place Tuesday and Wednesday at a downtown Chicago hotel.

A major change to this year's joint group meetings is that the Big Ten football coaches will not attend. The coaches held their annual business meeting Feb. 3 at Big Ten headquarters in Park Ridge, Ill., and opted not to join the spring get-together. Most if not all Big Ten athletic directors will attend, along with senior woman administrators and faculty representatives. Delany and other top league officials will be on hand, along with Big Ten Network president Mark Silverman and other BTN representatives.

Let's look at some of the big items to be discussed during the next two days:

1. The Big Ten's place in a future football postseason model: Delany has generated headlines in recent weeks with his so-called top 6 proposal as well as his desire to have league champions and division champions in a playoff ahead of those who didn't win either title. The Big Ten's top priority, in case you've been in a cave, is to protect the Rose Bowl, which Delany regards as the league's most important external relationship. Although the presidents have the final say -- Big Ten presidents meet June 3 in Park Ridge -- and no BCS officials will be attending the meetings, Delany will brief the ADs on the models being discussed. "To me, the the Rose Bowl is still the pinnacle and it’s very important," Purdue AD Morgan Burke told The (Lafayette) Journal and Courier. "The question is how can that can be integrated." What's best for the Big Ten? On-campus games, strong access for league champions or simply Rose Bowl relevancy? There's much to discuss this week.

2. The Pac-12 scheduling partnership: Athletic directors Barry Alvarez (Wisconsin) and Gene Smith (Ohio State) told ESPN.com last month that some details still must be worked out for the Big Ten/Pac-12 scheduling partnership, which is set to begin in football in 2017 but likely will have a staggered start. Alvarez told Brian Bennett that some Pac-12 schools are "dragging their feet" a bit on scheduling, and Smith told me that Ohio State won't begin the partnership until 2018 because of previously scheduled games. The partnership surely will be discussed this week.

3. The bowls: The league is halfway through its four-year cycle with most recent bowl lineup, which remains the nation's most challenging, given the locations. It's a good time to evaluate the bowls and whether to look for any adjustments going forward. The automatic-qualifier status is gone, and there's momentum to revamp the way top bowls select teams in order to generate better matchups. Will league tie-ins even matter going forward? Also, bowl-eligibility requirements might be increased from six wins to seven wins, which Big Ten athletic directors like Iowa's Gary Barta and Michigan's Dave Brandon support but others may not.

Other items: The ADs will discuss football league championship game, how the first event went in Indy and possibly how the first season went with division play. As usual, they'll discuss NCAA proposals/changes (scholarships, academics, recruiting, compliance, etc.), nonconference scheduling and the league's media agreements (BTN, ABC/ESPN). While Big Ten expansion isn't on the horizon, it's hard to imagine realignment won't come off after all of the recent news around college sports.

Who knows, maybe the ADs will have the sudden impulse to approve November night games for football. Ah, to dream ...

Check the blog for spring meetings updates throughout the next few days.

White Fang-ing these links.

• The Alex Anzalone case at Ohio State shows the dangers of social media for athletes, Rob Oller writes. The Buckeyes' John Simon made former colleague Bruce Feldman's annual "Freaks" list.
• The versatile Bill Belton could be a huge weapon in Bill O'Brien's Penn State offense. O'Brien says only about a third of the team's starters have been identified so far.
• Grantland's Charles P. Pierce tackles the Ron Brown issue and what he sees as the looming end of homophobia in sports.
• Purdue's Antavian Edison has used Twitter to declare his innocence on gun charges. The Boilermakers picked up a junior-college defensive end.
• Barry Alvarez favors a selection committee for picking the four teams involved in the coming playoff. Former Wisconsin fullback Bradie Ewing had his path cleared toward playing for the Falcons.
• Former Michigan State star T.J. Duckett has made life after football all about community service. Keith Nichol is trying to catch on with the Redskins. Denicos Allen is looking to get better on his fundamentals after a breakthrough year.
• Jordan Kovacs is looking forward to Michigan's night games this season. Kevin Koger is staying upbeat despite a devastating injury that killed his draft chances.
• Kirk Ferentz is hoping his young team can make some fast improvements.
• Illinois is keeping tabs on a pair of Indiana high school teammates.
• Former Minnesota defensive lineman Anthony Jacobs signed with the Vikings. A local kicker is headed to the Gophers.
• Off Tackle Empire examines Northwestern's prospects.

Is it really May already? Can't believe it. Anyway, our first May chat is in the books. In case you missed out on the fun, here's the full transcript.

Some highlights:

lites from New Jersey: Lots of talk about Wisconsin and Iowa having to improve recruiting to maintain position at the top of the B1G, yet both (lately mostly the UW) have just fine, thanks, by following a method of development of 3* guys rather than fighting the true bigs for 5* guys. As Alvarez's experience several years back, isn't aiming too high a potential risk as much as a reward?

Adam Rittenberg: Lites, while I see what you're saying about high-level recruits, just because Wisconsin and Iowa are strong developmental programs doesn't mean they couldn't help top-level recruits become even better. Sure, you'll probably encounter more prima donnas -- or "hat dance" guys, as Northwestern's Pat Fitzgerald calls them -- among the five-star recruits, but there are also guys who back up the hype. Wisconsin and Iowa have positioned themselves to at least aim for the best of the best. Their main selling point: recent NFL draft success. Both teams will continue to develop under-the-radar guys, but they shouldn't hold back from the best prospects, either.

Adam from B10 Country: What's the chance that Hoke has a crash landing this year, seems like last years schedule was as favorable as you could ever get and a lot of balls bounced the teams way, is 6-6 out of the question?

Adam Rittenberg: Adam, I think 6-6 is out of the question, but Michigan could end up being a better team than in 2011 with a worse record. The schedule is that taxing, and a 2-2 split with Alabama, Notre Dame, Nebraska and Ohio State would be impressive in my book. The Wolverines still have to play MSU at home. I'd put Michigan in the 8- to 11-win range this fall.

Joe from Columbus: Do you think Tressel will get into the college football HOF?

Adam Rittenberg: Joe, this is a fascinating question, one I might have to address in a lengthier blog post. My inclination is yes because time tends to heal some wounds and Tressel's accomplishments as a coach, both at Youngstown State and at Ohio State, would make him a shoo-in for the HOF. It depends on how his violations are viewed when it's time for the selections. But if I had to make a prediction, I'd say yes.

Michael from DC: Adam, there's been a lot of talk about the Michigan and MSU squads, but I feel like this has been done in a vacuum; nobody is talking about the matchups on the field. While Michigan's defense may not be quite as stout, I think it is relatively more stout compared to MSU's offense. UM (finally!) has depth in the back seven and MSU has a lot of questions at receiver, even if Arnett plays. I also think its DL will perform better than people think. On the other side, Michigan (for the first time since Henne) has a returning starter at QB running the same offense and a talented OL that I think will be able to run the ball against MSU, as its strength on DL is its pass rush. How do you see these matchups playing out?

Adam Rittenberg: Michael, I applaud you for making the discussion about the matchups rather than the typical meatball stuff I hear from both fan bases. I'm particularly interested in seeing Michigan's offense vs. Michigan State's defense. Both units could be among the league's best -- Michigan State's D might be the league's best overall unit. Michigan will need to make the Spartans defend the entire field and keep Gholston out of the backfield. The Lewan-Gholston matchup should be fascinating, and not just because of the stuff that happened last year. If Michigan's defensive line can take away Le'Veon Bell and the run game, MSU will have a tough time scoring points. Michigan boasts two strong corners in Countess and Floyd, and Michigan State's receivers have a long way to go. The Spartans have to be a run-first team in 2011, and Michigan will try to take away that element. Should be a lot of fun at the Big House.

Mystery Coach from B10 Country: I develop talent better than anyone in the conference, who am I?

Adam Rittenberg: You are Kirk Ferentz. But sometimes you are Bret Bielema. Depends on the year.

Thanks again for all the questions and comments, and my apologies to those who didn't make the rundown. Let's do it again soon.

Happy birthday to Rogers Hornsby, Ulysses S. Grant, Enos Slaughter, George "Iceman" Gervin, Chris Carpenter, Sheena Easton and ... I know I'm forgetting somebody. Who could it be?

• Illinois scored its first major recruiting victory with a commitment from dual-threat quarterback Aaron Bailey. A.J. Jenkins was caught off guard when he joined teammate Whitney Mercilus in the first round.
• Iowa got the go ahead to build phase two of its new football facility. Riley Reiff followed in the footsteps of Bryan Bulaga.
• Ryan Van Bergen has been told he'll go in the sixth round.
• Michigan State fans will get a long look at Connor Cook in the spring game, because there's no other quarterback to look at.
• Lavonte David will have to wait another day to be drafted.
• For just the fifth time in 14 years, Ohio State didn't have a first-round pick.
• Is Paul Jones getting too much hype at Penn State? Fourth-string, senior quarterback Shane McGregor still has hope of making an impact.
• Tom Dienhart has a Q&A with Indiana coach Kevin Wilson.
• Lloyd Carr as Wisconsin coach? It might have happened, had Barry Alvarez turned down the Badgers. Wisconsin defensive tackle Jordan Kohout shares his Muslim views on Twitter.
• A high school kicker accepted a preferred walk-on position at Northwestern.
• Scroll down this Sid Hartman column to find an item about high season-ticket renewals at Minnesota.
• Purdue's Ricardo Allen challenged his Twitter followers to play him on NCAA Football 2012, and so far he's beat them all.

I'm in full rest mode as I get ready for another half-marathon on Saturday. But I'll exert a little bit of energy answering your emails.

Johnny from East Lansing, Mich., writes: One of you recently wrote an article or reply about out-of-conference scheduling and how Wisconsin could increase their difficulty level, my question is why should they? Mark Hollis recently stated that football differs from basketball in one key aspect, basketball teams get rewarded by the selection committee for strength-of-schedule, football teams get rewarded on wins. I think it's safe to assume that if any B1G/SEC/PAC12 team went undefeated, you would have a hard time keeping them out of the national championship game. Wisconsin got a lot of criticism for their schedule last season, but if it wasn't for a couple of hail mary plays, they would have been playing LSU. If the only way to elevate your program is to compete for championships, why shouldn't you take the safest route to get there?

Brian Bennett: You make some valid points, Johnny. Win a power league and go undefeated, and odds are you'll be in pretty good shape. The problems arrive if there are two or more other undefeated teams from power leagues who did play at least one strong opponent in the nonconference schedule. Then you've set yourself up to be left out -- see Auburn in 2004. And with the new four-team "event" that seems inevitable, who knows what the criteria will be for inclusion? There seems to be some desire to include strength of schedule in whatever criteria is used.

There's no question Wisconsin's nonconference schedules have been pretty soft of late. Not all of that is the Badgers' fault. Oregon State, which was on last year's and is on this year's schedule, just happened to go in the tank before the games were played. Wisconsin also has future games with Virginia Tech (2016 and 2017) and Washington ('17 and '18). I asked Bret Bielema and Barry Alvarez about scheduling when I was in Madison this week. Here's what they had to say:

Bielema: "It's tough to get a home and home with good teams, because they don't want to play [at Camp Randall Stadium]. We've gone three years now and we haven't had a loss at home, and I've lost five games in nine years here. Football people know how tough we are, and for that reason people don't want to go home and home with us. We've
tried to bring in some really elite teams, and they just won't do it."

Alvarez: "We've had had issues with that. It's been hard to match up people. We've got to have a minimum of seven home games, and occasionally get an eighth one in there for our budget. To get somebody to go home and home, sometimes we have problems with that, so we end up buying somebody for a year. I know [the schedule] has been one of the criticisms of our fans, and I'm sensitive to that. I was very encouraged with our Pac-12 agreement that puts another quality opponent on our schedule."

---

Trotter from Des Moines, Iowa, writes: Thank you to both bloggers in helping me keep my sanity at work. I always have the B1G blog open in a link all day. Anyways, it has been a great week for Iowa recruiting. Now I'm not saying the guys we picked up are all stars or anything, but at this point last year Iowa had one recruit, and already this year they have 6! Would you say this is due more to the unforced coaching changes made this last year, the new facility being built in Iowa City, or the fact kids are starting to realize you have a better shot then at most places of making it to the professional level? I know all 3 of these play their own part, but which do you think is the biggest reason?

Brian Bennett: We're always happy to diminish the productivity of the American work force, Trotter. Iowa coach Kirk Ferentz was asked about the early commitments, which appear to be a record for the Hawkeyes at this time of the year, this week. He had this to say:

"I think it's just a sign of the times. A couple of years back, it really became commonplace for prospects to be out visiting places in June and July, to some extent. But, and I think all we've seen now, and this is kind of national, it's translating into March and April now. I think that's just how the recruiting is going. It's driven by social media, and it's become a real industry. ... I think it's just a reflection of that. We're not doing anything differently, other than hosting more prospects than we used to."

Ferentz is right in that the recruiting calendar has really sped up. It's a good sign for Iowa that he and his staff are keeping up with the new reality.

---

Michael from St. Louis writes: There's a lot of talk about how Michigan and Ohio State are already landing top-rated recruits. Isn't it possible that these recruits are rated highly in part *because* they're committing to big-name schools early? (I think this would explain how Texas can consistently land "top 5" classes without delivering on the field.) Come on, Bennett - give us non-Ohio State/Michigan fans some hope.

Brian Bennett: Michael, I would say that might have been the case a few years ago, when any time a player committed to Notre Dame or a big-name school, his status was automatically increased (and vice versa, if a player signed with a lesser brand name school). But I don't think that's true now, because as Ferentz mentioned, recruiting has become such an industry. Players are now evaluated and rated by scouting services and web sites by the time they enter their junior year. So when a prospect commits early, he already has a rating attached to him.

You want hope? Well, part of the reason it seems Texas has dropped off is because the Longhorns finish so much of their recruiting on junior day, and then a lot of those players either get complacent or don't develop as hoped. That's a concern when you lock up recruiting so early. Michigan's Brady Hoke, who has been gobbling up players before their senior year, told me that "sometimes you get a guy committed ... and he kind of feels like he's made it and he doesn't do the job he should do for his high school." Michigan State is a school that has success waiting on guys to develop. So there are many different ways to get it done.

---

Willie the Wildcat from Boston writes: With the NFL Draft approaching, I'm getting my costume in a bunch trying to discern where my beloved fellow wildcats might end up. What do you think the draft will hold for Dunsmore, Mabin, Persa, Peters, and Ebert? Is Dunsmore the best bet for an early round pick? Who do you think will roll the dice on Persa?

Brian Bennett: Our Scouts Inc. guys didn't have any Northwestern players going in their seven-round mock draft. However, while I respect their efforts, it's nearly impossible to predict that much of the draft with accuracy, and it only takes one team to like a player for him to get drafted. I believe Drake Dunsmore has the best chance of being selected, and Jeremy Ebert has an outside shot after putting up good numbers at his pro day. But the rest will likely have to go the free agent route.

---

Andrew F. from Fremont, Ind., writes: I'm a bit disappointed with the release of the primetime schedule. As a Purdue fan, it seems odd that bottom feeder Indiana has three primetime games and we have none. Now I realize we don't play anyone of note in the non-conference at home unless you count Marshall, but you would think hosting Michigan or Wisconsin would warrant an appearance. After all Indiana has Indiana State and MAC "heavy-weight" Ball State in prime-time; that seems odd, unless they want to show Ball State manhandle Indiana again or Indiana State slap the Hoosiers around like they did Western Kentucky last season. My question is why did Purdue get the short end of the stick? I guess I should get used to lots of more noon kickoffs.

Brian Bennett: I can understand why Purdue fans would be disappointed, Andrew. Purdue's Ross-Ade Stadium doesn't have permanent lights, which might have played a small factor in the decision. When the Boilers played Notre Dame last year at night, for example, ESPN brought in and paid for temporary lights. But the school has had night games in the past few years, so if there was a matchup that TV deemed appealing enough to put in primetime, then it would happen. Purdue is going to need to win more games and raise its profile to become more attractive to television. And the Boilermakers will kick off at 4 p.m. against Michigan on Oct. 6, so that game should end past sundown, and will break up all the noon starts.

---

Kyle G. from Madison, Wis., writes: Another factor as to why the Wisconsin-Michigan State isn't a night game is its the same day as the big Halloween Party on State Street, Freakfest. The university has an informal agreement in place with the City of Madison to not have both events to occur at the same time. The police force, emergency services, etc simply don't have the manpower to handle a Badger football game and the party on State Street.

Brian Bennett: Oct. 27 will be quite a day in Mad-town. Where do I sign up?

---

Kevin from Ann Arbor writes: After seeing the Buckeye defense during the spring game, I think it is going to be a long season for the Buckeyes. Urban Meyer wasn't joking when he said they lack speed. They do. They are going to have a hard time getting to seven wins with their schedule and that defense.

Brian Bennett: Trolling from Ann Arbor, perhaps? I'm not too worried about the Ohio State defense. The front four should be great, with John Simon, Jonathan Hankins, Michael Bennett and all those talented freshman coming in to provide depth. Three potential starters in the back seven didn't play in the spring game because of injuries, so don't read too much into that exhibition. And the Buckeyes have a very manageable nonconference schedule, so seven wins should be very much attainable.

---

Kyle W. from Chicago writes: I've been in favor of rewarding the top two teams in the nation when it comes to a playoff. Assuming that it's a four-team playoff and on-campus semifinal games are off the table, what do you think about rewarding the higher seed with more tickets to the game for fans? Possibly a 65-35 split. The team gets a set amount of days to sell their allottment, then it opens up for the other if they aren't capable of selling them all.

Brian Bennett: That might work, although in these kinds of events you might have a heavy corporate/neutral presence. And the NCAA basketball tournament doesn't give higher-seeded teams more tickets. That event does reward higher seeds by keeping them closer to home, which could be a possible consideration in football. Let's say there are neutral sites for semifinals outside of the bowls, and a Midwest location like Indianapolis or Detroit has a game. If a Big Ten team finishes in the top two, let it play its semifinal in that region. I'm just spitballin' here, and who knows what will ultimately come out of these meetings with all the different agendas in the room. At least we can be happy that a four-team playoff is actually going to happen.

---

Pat from Columbus, Ohio, writes: I was just reading Adam's article about how proximity is important to the B1G for any playoff system. I was wondering why the B1G is in favor of on-campus games, and the SEC et al. is not? It seems like their home game atmosphere is just as much an advantage for them as it would be for us.

Brian Bennett: Come on, Pat. You don't really think the SEC wants to play up north when it's cold, do you?

Thanks to those who sent in opinions on the Joe Paterno stadium/field naming issue at Penn State. I've included several at the bottom of the mailblog.

Let's get going.

Bill T. from Ottawa, Ill., writes: As a Purdue Alumnus I have watched in agony over the past several seasons as Purdue fell short of all our fans' expectations. I find it absolutely frustrating that Danny Hope claims he is going to use Terbush and Marve this upcoming season...again. Don't you think that it destroys the momentum of the team offensively and also shatters the confidence of both quarterbacks? Additionally I have read all the buzz about how we are a sleeper team in the Big Ten. I would really like to express that we have traditionally struggled against Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio State (even at the height of the program at the turn of the century). What makes you guys think this year is going to be different? We have returned a ton of starters before and sputtered (2004 and 2005). Do we really deserve sleeper status?

Adam Rittenberg: Bill, I certainly understand the philosophy that two quarterbacks equals no quarterbacks. That said, I'm interested to see how Hope employs his signal-callers when all three, including Rob Henry, are healthy. He always has had a lot of confidence in Robert Marve, and Marve hasn't been healthy during his time at Purdue. If Marve plays to his capabilities at 100 percent, I'd imagine Purdue will stick with him at quarterback. The wild card in my mind is Henry, who had an excellent offseason in 2011 and would have been the starter if not for his own knee injury. As for the sleeper status, the Leaders division is wide open and Purdue returns nine starters on both sides of the ball. Purdue also has shown flashes of taking the next step, particularly with its two victories against Ohio State under Hope. Now I'm hardly sold on the Boilers, who make too many major mistakes in all three phases to consistently win against upper-tier teams. But if Purdue can get more consistent in its play, it can do some damage. Talent doesn't seem to be the issue in West Lafayette.

---

Adam from East Lansing, Mich., writes: As a Michigan State fan, when I heard JLS was hired at Arkansas I was in shock. This is the last person I would ever hire to drive a top 10 team to an SEC title. JLS has been known to blow it with good teams and although he gave MSU a pulse and hope to start a season, we would always blow it in some fashion. From the biggest comeback ever (at NW) to the Ohio State FG and Notre Dame night game collapse, JLS has proven he is not a steady coach. I guarantee you this though, they will beat Alabama or LSU at home for a program victory (but then somehow lose to Vanderbilt at home the following week). Do you think JLS can finally be a steady coach?

Adam Rittenberg: Adam, you bring up some excellent points here. While I understand why Arkansas went with John L. Smith, who brings years of head-coaching experience not found among the remaining assistants, I completely agree with you about the unsteadiness of his personality. He's a treat to cover and always provides great sound bytes, but his colorful personality has reflected in his team's play, at least at Michigan State. Now John L. had success elsewhere, namely Louisville, but the fragility of his teams at Michigan State cannot be overlooked. Arkansas is an extremely talented team with some veteran leaders, but the players have been on an emotional roller-coaster after the Petrino scandal. I would think they'd be better served by a coach known for his steady demeanor, rather than one best remembered for slapping himself and going ballistic during a halftime interview at Ohio State.

---

Michael from St. Louis writes: Nebraska just received a verbal from a kid named Courtney Love. How long before the Hole/Nirvana jokes get really old?

Adam Rittenberg: It will be a tough call between Courtney Love and Taco Charlton for the captain of our all-name recruit team for 2013. It's too bad both Courtney Love and recent Wisconsin recruit Hugs Etienne both play defense. That would be a fun matchup. Oh well, whatever, never mind.

---

Samuel from Iowa City, Iowa, writes: Adam, just started reading your post on Gene Smith and Urban Meyer and I had to stop to get a question in. Smith ONLY attended three practices this spring? Smith will be a fixture on the sidelines in August? Am I only the only who isn't very comfortable with an AD spending so much time on, let alone being so CLOSE to, one of his programs? I realize football is the cash machine, so it consumes most of his time. But it seems to me a heathy distance from the football program is necessary for an AD to be an objective chief executive officer.

Adam Rittenberg: Sam, while I see what you're saying, I don't think Gene Smith is too involved with the football team by attending practices. Keep in mind he's a former football player himself, so he has a unique connection to the game and to the players. I agree that ADs must be careful not to micromanage or be too involved in one of their programs, even if it's their most important sport. But I don't think Smith is crossing that line. It's also important that he keeps tabs on things after the NCAA situation, something he and Ohio State never want to go through again. There definitely have been instances of ADs meddling with football, even in the Big Ten, but I don't think Smith is overstepping his bounds.

---

Mike from Superior, Wis., writes: Hey Adam, when I'm reading this blog and I see schools like Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, even Minnesota, scheduling high profile, or at least higher profile non-conference games against really good opponents, it makes me wonder why does a school like Wisconsin fail to do the same with it's non-conference schedule? I don't understand why they wouldn't want to do the same to increase their exposure more and have a shot at getting some serious quality wins. Thoughts?

Adam Rittenberg: Mike, this isn't a new issue for Wisconsin fans, but it remains a point of contention in Badger Land. I don't get the sense Barry Alvarez is going to dramatically upgrade the Badgers' non-league schedule as long as he's AD. Wisconsin got a bit unlucky with teams like Oregon State, which has been pretty decent until recently, but you don't see the "wow" games nearly enough with the Badgers. I do like that Wisconsin recently added a home-and-home series with Washington, part of the Big Ten-Pac-12 partnership. But it'd be nice to see more. We've heard about potential games with teams like TCU and Notre Dame in recent years, but they haven't come to fruition. While Wisconsin isn't exactly struggling for exposure, it could certainly benefit from a few more showcase opportunities.

---

John from Prince William County writes: Adam, while the Big Ten clearly has underperformed since 2000 as opposed to the pre-BCS years when it was indisputably the top conference in the country every year from 1992 to 2000, you exaggerate the fall off. While not as dominant as it was, the Big Ten has been the best conference in the country during the BCS era just as it was prior to and is the nation's top conference more often than not.

Adam Rittenberg: Wow, John, and I thought your Penn State comments were insane. How is the Big Ten the nation's best conference in the BCS era? One national title and three Rose Bowl wins in 14 years. How is that exaggerating the drop-off? Those are the facts. The Big Ten isn't the nation's worst major conference by any means, and there are some inherent disadvantages the Big Ten faces regarding bowl locations, etc. But c'mon. The Big Ten isn't the league it was in the mid to late 1990s. The Big Ten is typically a top-3 conference with the SEC and Big 12 or Pac-12. But it will take several national titles for the Big Ten to claim to be the nation's top league again.

Now for some thoughts on Joe Paterno and Beaver Stadium ...

Bernie from Princeton, N.J.: If the university wants to do the right thing in honoring Joe Paterno they will name the field or stadium after him WITHOUT the family signing off on the gesture. The university, specifically the Board of Trustees, acted in a tremendously dishonorable fashion during a very difficult time, but that does not proclude them from being held responsible by the Paterno family if they choose to take some sort of legal action at a later date. The university is trying to save face with the alumni and Paterno family rather than doing the right thing.

Alex from Henry, Ill.: Adam, I may be a UT Longhorn fan, but i am a constant reader of all the blogs here on ESPN.com. Joe Paterno was the face of Penn State up until his dismissal from the university. I think that Beaver Stadium should eventually be named Joe Paterno Stadium, but it should not be for a reason as silly as to avoid a law suit. It should be named after him because of the forty-five years that he was the head football coach and not to mention the fifteen more he was an assistant. Sixty years at the same university is unheard of in this day. It should be because of the 409 wins including 24 bowl wins. If you aren't going to rename it because of his achievements on the field, do it for his achievements off the field. He donated A LOT of money to the university.

Mike from Allentown, Pa.: Hi Adam,Regarding the Stadium/Field naming. As a Penn State Alumni I think the idea of "Paterno Field at Beaver Stadium" is a bit outlandish. Nobody will remember that as the full name, and if you need evidence just ask a Florida State fan. How many times to you hear "Bobby Bowden Field at Doak Walker Stadium"? Hardly ever. I think the library having his name is good, but maybe they could add another building possiblye one frequented by English majors? That, or they just rename the whole stadium, like Alabama, to Beaver-Paterno Stadium. However, if they do not rename any buildings/stadiums, I don't think it that takes away from everything Joe did for 62 years. His name is on the library, and really he cared more about books than wins.

Howard from New York: Joe Paterno did so much more for Penn State than just create a college football brand. He was about education, charity and then football. Look at the former players that have come to his defense. Not a single bad word mentioned from any former coach or player. The stadium should be named after Joe for the fans who loved him. That would be the library and the stadium..that's a first. Enough said.

Jerry from Kelayres, Pa.: I don't know about renaming Beaver Stadium. If the fans want it, fine. But for the board to use this offer to ameliorate the family for slandering JoePa, is just buying the Paterno family favor.The facts are on Paterno's side. He was unjustly associated with somehow enabling Sandusky to do what he is accused of. A clear view of the facts show JoePa is innocent and could harm no one let alone innocent young boys.JoePa's reputation must be clear first before they do anything to justly honor JoePa.

MADISON, Wis. -- Just thinking about all the talent Wisconsin has lost in the past two years can be a little daunting.

The Badgers saw four first- or second-team All-Americans leave after the 2010 season (Gabe Carimi, John Moffitt, Lance Kendricks and J.J. Watt) and two more depart after last season (Peter Konz, Kevin Zeitler), along with their NCAA record-breaking transfer quarterback (Russell Wilson). Many programs would expect a dip after having so much star power leave town, but Bret Bielema is feeling fine.

"I used to freak out when we lost players, too," Bielema said. "But we do a good job of just developing. We always talk about being a developmental program, and I think it truly is that type of program now."

Wisconsin's ability to keep reloading will be put to the test in 2012. The team returns just 11 starters from last year's Big Ten champions, and six assistant coaches -- including almost all of the offensive brain trust -- left for other jobs in the offseason. Yet many still predict the Badgers will repeat as Leaders Division champs.

They will need new starters to emerge at receiver, on the right side of the offensive line, on the defensive line, in the secondary and of course at quarterback, where Maryland transfer Danny O'Brien could plug the hole. But O'Brien is the exception, as Wisconsin usually just brings along the next man on the depth chart.

"There are All-Americans sitting behind All-Americans, especially at spots like offensive line and running back," linebacker Chris Borland said. "Like last year, having lost Moffitt and Carimi, and then our line was arguably better. I think it speaks more to the development than it does to the players."

Madison might well be the world's leading producer of offensive linemen, and the running back tradition is just as strong. But other positions are becoming known for their string of successes as well, including tight end and safety. In each of the past two years, Wisconsin has lost an all-conference safety -- Jay Valai in 2010 and Aaron Henry in 2011. But Bielema says this year's pair of starters, Dezmen Southward and Shelton Johnson, might be his best duo yet.

"A guy might not be good enough to play right away, but a lot of times he'll develop for a year and come on the scene when a guy leaves or gets injured," said Jared Abbrederis, who's gone from former walk-on to one of the league's best wideouts. "That's kind of how it goes around here."

What's most impressive about the Badgers' recent run is that they've done it without many high-profile recruits. Bielema mostly signs three-star types and rarely brings in the true blue-chipper that gets scouting services drooling. Even though the program's exposure has increased of late, he still has little interest in trying to recruit much outside of a few key areas.

"We do what we can with what we've got," Bielema said. "I don't think we want more national recruits. A lot of times, those guys come with some issues you don't want to deal with. I take a lot of pride with the way our guys go about their business and handle themselves."

Player development is going to be key for Wisconsin's immediate future, because a cavalry of help isn't coming. The team signed only 12 players in February and expects to bring in an even smaller class next year. The reason? So few players have left before their eligibility ended.

"A lot of places sign 24 or 25 kids every year, so something is happening to those kids," Bielema said. "Of the last 66 kids we signed, 64 of them are still on campus, which is an unheard of number."

Last year's Rose Bowl team had only 24 juniors and seniors, and the rest were underclassmen. If those youngsters develop the way their predecessors have, then the Badgers will have a deep and experienced team soon. In fact, when O'Brien -- who has two years of eligibility remaining -- came on his visit, Bielema told him, "I think we'll be really good this year. But next year, on paper, might be the best team I've ever had."

That's a big statement, given how much talent -- both players and coaches -- has exited Madison in the past two years. But Wisconsin is confident in its ability to reload from within.

"We realize we're a developmental program," athletic director Barry Alvarez said. "We don't have the access to a lot of five-star guys. We might have a Joe Thomas coming out of the state or get a Ron Dayne because of his ties to the area. But for the most part, we develop players. And I think we have the right formula."

It figures that the most important meetings to determine college football's future postseason structure are taking place this week in Hollywood, Fla.

After all, every other meaningful event in the sport occurs well south of the Mason-Dixon Line.

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany needs to make sure that changes, no matter which playoff format the BCS leaders ultimately choose. Forget the laughable "Four Teams Plus" plan that keeps the Rose Bowl in the mix for determining the national champion, but has virtually no chance of being approved by commissioners not from the Big Ten or Pac-12. While Delany loves the Rose Bowl and always will, his top priority this week in South Florida should be proximity.

If a four-team postseason plan is green-lighted, as many expect, Delany must ensure that it's possible for at least some of the games to be played in or near the Big Ten footprint. Because the current system doesn't serve the Big Ten or its fans.

There are myriad reasons for the Big Ten's downturn during the BCS era, but the location of the most significant bowl games, including the national championship, undoubtedly hurts the league, which has played several virtual road contests.

Since the BCS launched in 1998, the Big Ten has dropped two games to LSU in New Orleans, including the national title game after the 2007 season. The Big Ten also is 0-4 against USC at the Rose Bowl. While there are exceptions, like Penn State's Orange Bowl win against Florida State, Big Ten teams generally become roadkill in these matchups.

The Big Ten's destination dilemma is inherent within the current bowl/BCS system. The big bowl games always have been played in the south and west, and because of the "double-hosting" model, the same holds true for the national championship games. Most Big Ten fans understand the reasons behind this, and have willingly hopped on airplanes every December and traveled far and wide to see their teams play. It's this willingness that has made Big Ten teams so attractive to BCS bowl committees.

But the future postseason structure will bring change. A four-team setup would create two semifinals, which might take place within the current bowl structure, but most likely will not. The semis could take place at on-campus sites belonging to the higher seeds, a plan Delany advocates, or at neutral sites like Indianapolis' Lucas Oil Stadium and Detroit's Ford Field. The Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis? Beats facing LSU in NOLA.

"Yes, has to be," Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith recently told ESPN.com. "If you go neutral sites, you've got to have one in the Midwest. You've just got to. If it's campus sites, it's hard to dictate that, because it depends on the rankings. If you go campus sites, you hope some Midwest team is up there and they get to host."

Although Big Ten fans travel better than any in the country, the cost of making two long trips -- for the semifinals and championship game -- in a short span around the holidays will be too much for many to bear.

"If you think about it, just about every conference now has a [championship game], so you expect your fans to go to that," Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez, who is attending the BCS meetings along with Delany, told ESPN.com. "Now you're going to go to a bowl site, and if you're in a championship game, that's three games you want them to travel to. It would be nice if one of those games would be at a home site, or two of them."

There's also the possibility the national championship game moves away from the bowl sites and goes to the highest bidder, which could bring venues like Lucas Oil Stadium and Ford Field into the rotation. The chance to play for a title on Big Ten soil will excite fans around the Midwest, but they'll settle for having some type of nationally relevant football game within driving distance in late December or early January.

Delany's ideal setup likely would call for semifinal games on campus, and the national title game at the Rose Bowl every year. Don't hold your breath on either element coming to fruition, but having a neutral-site semifinal in the Midwest every year certainly isn't too much to ask.

Big Ten fans have served their league and its teams extremely well by traveling in droves to big-time bowl games in faraway destinations.

It's time for Delany to return the favor by ensuring they'll have a chance to see their teams play meaningful games closer to home.

Bennett vs. yours truly in the circle drill. Who ya got?

• The Big Ten's primary playoff interests -- maintaining the Rose Bowl's prestige and having semifinals on campus -- don't seem to be catching on, Teddy Greenstein writes. Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez is intimately involved in the BCS playoff discussions. The Big Ten will have a big voice in this week's BCS meetings, Dennis Dodd writes.
• Big Ten ticket prices are on the rise, Matt Charboneau writes. The Star Tribune's Phil Miller wraps up spring ball in the Big Ten.
• The man likely to be named Minnesota's next AD knows his hoops but raises some doubts on the football side.
• A story I can't read enough -- the amazing comeback of Michigan State's Arthur Ray Jr. More on Ray here. Spartans DT Anthony Rashad White adjusts to the 3-technique.
• It won't happen this year, but I agree with Angelique Chengelis that a Michigan State-Michigan night game would be amazing.
• After winning over many Penn State fans, Bill O'Brien needs Ws on the field this fall. A poor spring game performance could hurt Rob Bolden in Penn State's quarterback race, while Paul Jones is certainly in the picture. Penn State will host UMass in 2014.
• Ohio State center Corey Linsley is a changed man. The circle drill set the tone for Urban Meyer's first spring game at Ohio State. Everything about the game showed change has come to Columbus.
• Illinois' three coordinators weigh in on their groups after the spring. Young offensive line coach Luke Butkus has a challenge ahead of him.
• Quarterback Joel Stave worked with Wisconsin's first-team offense for all of Saturday's scrimmage. Wisconsin's reputation as an offensive line factory has reached north of the border.
• Iowa had a productive weekend on the recruiting trail. The "bubble" is no more, and Iowa's facilities plan is moving forward.
• Nebraska's Alfonzo Dennard thrives on proving people wrong, and he'll have to do it again after this weekend's mishap. The Huskers pick up another recruit from the alma mater of Bo Pelini and Tim Beck.
• Linebacker Brandin Hawthorne looks comfortable as Michigan's man in the middle. Michigan defensive coordinator Greg Mattison helped boost Mike Martin's draft stock.
• Six storylines for Purdue's offense coming out of the spring.

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- When the Big Ten and Pac-12 announced their partnership in December, they targeted 2017 as the first season of head-to-head play in football.

But the nature of nonconference scheduling and the needs of 24 different schools could result in a staggered start. Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez told Brian Bennett that some Pac-12 schools are "dragging their feet a little bit" in relation to football scheduling, citing the difficulty of a slate featuring nine league games, a Big Ten opponent and, for some teams, another major-conference opponent.

There are also obstacles in the Big Ten. Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith told ESPN.com that the Buckeyes aren't scheduled to begin the Pac-12 partnership in football until the 2018 season.

The reason: Ohio State already has nonconference games scheduled against Oklahoma (home) and North Carolina (road) in 2017.

"I'm not taking [a Pac-12 game]," Smith said. "We can't start in '17, so we will start in '18."

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany on Thursday issued a statement to ESPN.com that reads in part: "Both conferences reaffirmed plans to play an annual 12 interconference game football schedule beginning in 2017, subject to previously contracted non-conference games." The key line there is subject to previously contracted nonconference games. The way scheduling works, many schools have contracts out to 2017 and beyond.

Big Ten spokesman Scott Chipman on Friday told ESPN.com that the two conferences still have 2017 as the desired start date for all 12 football games. There's a chance teams could move around dates of games, which happens quite often. Michigan State recently added a home-and-home series against Oregon -- not part of the Big Ten/Pac-12 partnership -- because West Virginia had to get out of a series with the Spartans as part of its move to the Big 12.

Bottom line: both sides want an agreement, but there are a lot of moving parts (i.e. signed contracts with other teams). A lot could change before 2017, and the discussions will continue next month when the Big Ten athletic directors have their spring meeting in Chicago.

"It's more an issue of when we start," Smith said. "Is it '17 or '18, or is it '17 with some schools phasing in in '18 and '19? It's going to happen. It's just a matter of will it be just like we felt it was going to be at the beginning. Everybody's committed to making it happen."

MADISON, Wis. -- In late December, the Big Ten and Pac-12 announced that they would enter into a new scheduling partnership, and that by 2017 there would be an annual football series involving all 12 schools in both leagues.

But Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez told ESPN.com on Thursday that the partnership in football had not been finalized because "there are a couple of teams in the Pac-12 that are dragging their feet a little bit."

"We hope we can finalize it," Alvarez said. "I think it would be healthy for our league and their league."

The sticking point, Alvarez said, is how difficult the schedule could become for some Pac-12 teams. That league is committed to playing a full nine-game conference schedule. A Big Ten opponent would mean 10 tough games, and schools like USC and Stanford have an annual series with Notre Dame.

"So I can see why somebody would be reluctant to jump in with both feet and say, 'Hey this is great,' with the schedule they're playing," Alvarez said. "Most of the people I've talked to have been in favor it, and the ADs out there have been in favor of it. But I can see where some people, some coaches could be reluctant."

However, when contacted by ESPN.com, the Big Ten said the series is still on. The league issued this statement from commissioner Jim Delany.

"We have just concluded very high level presidential meetings, at which time both conferences reaffirmed plans to play an annual 12 inter-conference game football schedule beginning in 2017, subject to previously contracted non-conference games. It was also reaffirmed that the collaboration was critically important to implement across a wide area of athletic and academic endeavors. We have made significant progress across the board in other scheduling areas."

The Pac-12 added this statement:

"Our schools are excited about the collaboration with the Big Ten, and we are continuing to work on sports scheduling details."

Alvarez said the series will be discussed further when Big Ten athletic directors meet next month in Chicago. While it appears to still be a go, this is a reminder that 2017 is a long way away, and conferences' priorities can change. Remember when the Big Ten was seemingly gung ho about a nine-game league schedule?

On Monday, I unveiled the start of our own little March Madness: A Big Ten Champions Tournament.

In case you missed it, I selected an eight-team field of champions from the past 15 years. Your votes will determine who wins each matchup. Voting in the first game of our first round is open until 9 a.m. ET Wednesday, though No. 1 seed 2002 Ohio State appears to be running away from No. 8 seed 2007 Ohio State, as expected.

Now it's time to reveal the second matchup of our first round:

No. 2 seed 1997 Nebraska vs. No. 7 seed 1999 Wisconsin

The 1997 Cornhuskers were one of the best teams in school history, romping through an undefeated season and whipping Tennessee in the Orange Bowl to earn a share of the national title. This team was nearly unstoppable on the ground, rushing for an amazing 72 touchdowns in 13 games. Nebraska had the Outland Trophy winner in Aaron Taylor and the Lombardi Award winner in Grant Wistrom, along with All-Americans Jason Peter and Ahman Green. However, there are those who'll still insist the Huskers should have lost to Missouri in the famous "Flea Kicker" game.

The 1999 Wisconsin team had two losses, including one to Cincinnati. But these Badgers won their final eight games and beat Stanford in their second straight Rose Bowl appearance. They had the Heisman Trophy winner in Ron Dayne and a strong young quarterback in Brooks Bollinger. Barry Alvarez would have a chance to coach against his alma mater in this theoretical matchup. But would Wisconsin have the speed to slow down a high-octane Nebraska rushing attack?

Vote in the poll to determine the winner of this game, and send me your reasons for why you voted the way you did. The best responses will be included in the post announcing who moves onto the semifinals.

Every Big Ten administrator who has commented on the league's four-team playoff proposal also has made sure to acknowledge the Rose Bowl in the same breath.

"The Rose Bowl is extremely important to Michigan State just as it is to every school in the Big Ten and Pac-12," Michigan State athletic director Mark Hollis told the Associated Press.

"Any talk of a limited playoff needs to keep the tradition of the Rose Bowl and the bowl system in play," Iowa AD Gary Barta wrote to the Des Moines Register in an email.

"My concern -- first and foremost -- is maintaining our relationship with the Rose Bowl," Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez wrote in his monthly letter to fans.

Perhaps there's some little-known Big Ten bylaw requiring league officials and administrators to pay homage to the Rose Bowl whenever discussing the future of college football. Commissioner Jim Delany always makes a point to acknowledge the Rose Bowl as the league's most important external relationship.

Kevin Ash, the Rose Bowl's chief administrative officer, enjoys hearing this from one of the game's conference partners. He hopes the pledges continue, as the Rose Bowl needs both the Big Ten and Pac-12 to be in its corner.

One of the big questions with any playoff model is how it would impact the current bowls, including the Rose. Would the Rose Bowl remain a premier sporting event on New Year's Day, or would the game start seeing drops in attendance and ratings like some of the other major bowls?

The Big Ten plan would remove the top four teams from the BCS bowl pool and have semifinal games played on the college campus of the higher seed. The championship game then could be bid out, like the Super Bowl.

The Rose Bowl's fate largely rests with Delany and his Pac-12 counterpart Larry Scott.

"We rely on them heavily to lead on our behalf, because we don't sit at the table with them," Ash told ESPN.com on Thursday. "We're not an active party. We know they have our best interest at heart, and we're a huge part of who they are in the postseason."

Like many, Ash senses the momentum building toward a college football playoff. He understands that the next BCS cycle, beginning in 2014, could bring changes for the Rose Bowl.

"It's going to be interesting to see some of the proposals," he said. "There could be variations that could be OK for the Rose Bowl game. If the commissioners feel we need to move in a different direction, which is best for college football, we've got to be a part of that."

The desire to maintain the traditional Big Ten-Pac-12 Rose Bowl matchup has been viewed as one of the primary impediments to a college football playoff.

Like the Big Ten and, to a lesser extent, the Pac-12, the Rose Bowl has been viewed as an obstruction to a college football playoff. Although the game has loosened its access rules and has had teams from other leagues, most recently TCU in the 2011 game, the desire always has been to have the Big Ten champion face the Pac-12 champion on Jan. 1 in Pasadena, Calif.

Any type of playoff format would decrease the likelihood of having both league champions in the game.

"Whatever system they decide to put forward, we will deal with the access issue as it applies to us, and we will embrace any visitor that comes to our game," Ash said. "But each year, we hope to have a Pac-12 and Big Ten champion playing for the Rose Bowl championship. Simple as that. Does it hurt us to have other teams in here? No. But we're traditionalists. It's a part of who we are."

Some see the Rose Bowl's traditionalist nature as being inflexible. The Big Ten, and, to a lesser extent, the Pac-12, have been viewed this way as well.

Ash said it's not the case.

"Since the BCS, we've learned to evolve, and we still have our tradition," Ash said. "Tradition is a two-sided sword. If you sit on tradition, then you can get left behind, but if you are careful about how you move forward, then you can keep that tradition going. There's possibilities out there, models that can be successful for us. We've got to see what plays out."

And follow Delany's and Scott's lead.

"They're very, very intelligent guys, and their leadership is amazing," Ash said. "We need to evolve in order to stay relevant. I think those are the guys who can take us there.

"They're going to protect us as best they can."

Add another influential Big Ten figure to those who are at least open to the idea of a college football playoff.

Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez wrote a column for Varsity, the school's online magazine, in which he addressed the plan floated by Big Ten officials that would see a four-team playoff with semifinal games played at campus sites. Alvarez wrote that he feels "comfortable taking a serious look at our potential options" and that he is "definitely intrigued by the proposal."

Alvarez said his "first and foremost" concern is protecting the Rose Bowl, which is understandable given the way Badgers fans have responded to their Pasadena trips. But if that can be done, he said he likes the idea in general, and calls the use of campus sites "one way of leveling the playing field a little bit."

"I've felt that SEC teams have had an advantage because of the number of bowls that have been played in their backyard," Alvarez writes. "What would they think about leaving the South and playing in the Midwest?"

Alvarez said he wants to maintain the importance of the regular season, and pointed to Duke's recent loss at home to Miami in men's basketball as an example of a regular-season game that likely will be long forgotten and irrelevant come tournament time. He doesn't want that to happen in football. But the beauty of the proposal is that teams will have to keep fighting to earn home-field advantage. And since it only adds one more game to the schedule for two teams, Alvarez said the idea is "workable."

The Wisconsin legend's support is important. Remember that Alvarez played a key role in getting Nebraska into the league as the 12th member by relying on his relationship with his alma mater.

In the piece, Alvarez also seeks to clarify his comments last week in response to Bret Bielema's allegations of "illegal" recruiting by Ohio State's Urban Meyer. Alvarez reiterated that there's no "gentleman's agreement" in Big Ten recruiting but said he in no way was trying to contradict or show a lack of respect for his head football coach.

Big Ten coaches didn't sing "Kumbaya" after Friday's meeting at league headquarters in Park Ridge, Ill.

"I don't think anybody wanted to sing," Northwestern coach Pat Fitzgerald said, laughing.

But the leagues coaches finished the meeting with handshakes after a contentious week regarding recruiting.

Fitzgerald, the chair of the Big Ten coaches' group, told ESPN.com on Friday the coaches are "unified" and "on the same page" regarding recruiting practices after meeting for several hours. Wisconsin coach Bret Bielema had voiced concerns about the recruiting practices of Ohio State coach Urban Meyer earlier this week, although Bielema told colleague Joe Schad on Friday that he never accused Meyer of violating NCAA recruiting rules. Bielema said the coaches "are moving forward."

Eleven of the league's 12 head coaches gathered Friday for a non-mandatory meeting (Penn State's Bill O'Brien, who is preparing for Sunday's Super Bowl, didn't attend).

"We understand what's acceptable and what's not acceptable in recruiting," Fitzgerald told ESPN.com. "We also talked about regardless of what's been reported, we agreed there's been no basis for accusing any coaches of illegal or unethical recruiting. There's been no gentleman's agreement inhibiting recruitment of verbally committed players, but we're going to do all of our recruiting based on respect for each other.

"Nothing but great dialogue."

Meyer issued a statement earlier Friday calling the meeting "productive" and reiterating that his coaches been in full NCAA compliance and that "no one on this staff did anything illegal or unethical." Bielema on Wednesday said he contacted Meyer about some recruiting issues and "the situation got rectified." Sporting News reported Thursday that Bielema had asked Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez to contact Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany about Meyer's recruiting methods.

But things seemed to be smoothed over during Friday's meeting. While Fitzgerald didn't want to speak for Bielema and Meyer -- "I'd rather have the comments and discussions that were had between Bret and Urban discussed with Bret and Urban," he said -- he doesn't think there's bad blood between the league's coaches.

"Everybody's on the same page," Fitzgerald said. "We're going to do everything relentlessly for our programs and do everything we can to sign the best players we possibly can for our programs, but we're always going to do it with the utmost respect. Regardless of what was reported in the media, we all agree that there was no basis for accusing any coaches of illegal or unethical recruiting."

Delany met with the coaches for a portion of the meeting, and the coaches also met by themselves in executive session. Fitzgerald said the commissioner didn't admonish any coaches for the public spat that surfaced late this week.

"We work through everything together collectively with Jim," Fitzgerald said. "You’re always given a chance to vent and have things discussed. That's healthy. It allows us to get everything on the table."