ESPN College Football

Let's all go to the mail:

Mike from Chicago writes: I can't begin to explain how utterly confused I am as to your stance on Big Ten expansion. My question is why can't the Big Ten just sit on their hands while every other conference expands to 16 teams. According to Adam, "Leagues would completely lack intimacy and commonality, teams would play even less often and there would be filler teams everywhere." As a fan of the B1G and Wisky, I would be livid if going to 16 teams meant Wisconsin would play Iowa even less than we do now and instead we had to play a Maryland team. Even if the league did get a bigger TV contract, it would still have to split the money evenly with an additional 4 members. And how in the world would the national image of your conference improve if you added teams like Rutgers or Maryland? And Notre Dame? Seriously?!?! The only thing Notre Dame is the Holy Grail of is being consistently nationally irrelevant for as long as I can remember.

Brian Bennett: You make good points, Mike, and as we wrote, the Big Ten isn't really interested in expanding beyond 12 at this time. Unfortunately, there could be some more major changes in alignment, and "sitting on your hands" is usually not the wisest business strategy in a changing marketplace. What superconferences could mean is even more massive TV deals, and the Big Ten doesn't want to be left behind. I totally agree that there are not many attractive candidates for expansion, but the options could turn out to be really poor if the league isn't ready to pounce. For now, the Big Ten simply needs to monitor the situation and have contingency plans in mind, as I'm sure it does.

---

Victor from Dayton, Ohio, writes: I was reading your and Adam's article on possible B1G expansion and I had a thought. Adam mentioned the idea of trying to get NC. My question is, while they may not add much to the football side of the conference (similar to Rutgers and Maryland that you mentioned) wouldn't it nice to see a Spartan-Tarheel shoot out multiple times a year in basketball? I think it has the possibility to turn into the basketball version of football's U of M-OSU rivalry. It would also make the B1G probably the best basketball conference out there. Thoughts?

Brian Bennett: It would no doubt be great for basketball, but basketball hasn't mattered one iota in this entire expansion circus. If so, Syracuse would never have left the Big East. That's why I think a team like Virginia Tech, which is a little worse fit academically and isn't great in basketball, is much more attractive. It's all about football.

---

Jeremy from Transplanted Cornfield in West Virginia writes: Much has been made of the scheduling hiatus, and let's be realistic the only concern is for the marquee teams in the League. I realize that scheduling is done years in advance, but why not schedule League games 2 years out and use a Premier League inspired method? During a given year note the standings of the member teams and for the schedule two years hence match the top teams against each other. The biggest problem I see is in maintaining home-away locations evenly amongst the B1G, but I am sure that there a lot of smarter people than I who could work it out. Basically, we as fans get to see more "move the needle" games, and the League perception just may increase nationally. ... I think that if the B1G were to commit to the top 4-6 teams consistently playing each other, the quality of the teams would increase through being more battle tested. Your take?

Brian Bennett: It's an interesting idea, and while football schedules are often made years and years in advance, this is actually fairly workable given that teams already have dates for conference games booked. I do see a couple of problems with your scenario.

First of all, even two years out, it's not always possible to identify who the top teams will be. For example, if you were doing the schedule for 2011 back in 2009, there's no doubt at all you would have pegged Ohio State as one of the top teams. And yet the Buckeyes went 6-6. The same could be said for Iowa. Secondly, by putting so-called marquee teams together, you end up with the same potential problem of huge gaps between games for some teams. Your plan would avoid situations like Michigan State-Wisconsin missing each other for four years but not necessarily help, say, Illinois and Iowa play. There really is no perfect solution for an eight-game schedule in a 12-team league.

---

Dan from Tempe, Ariz., writes: Love blog! I find it interesting (and sad) that it seems inevitable that we will have four 16-team super conferences. If this is case, what do you think about the idea of doing away with non-conference games all together and play an entire regular season (12-game) against conference opponents, with the division winners playing in a conference championship, and the four conference champions playing in a playoff for the national championship? While I think this situation is far from ideal, it creates a de facto 8-team playoff (i.e. winners of each division play each other) and it would be hard to complain that a national champion is undeserving.

Brian Bennett: I really like the idea of full round-robin conference play. However, I think you lose something with no nonconference opponents. Games like Michigan-Alabama are what get us pumped up for the season. And if everyone played in their own conference until the playoffs, the sport would be in danger of becoming too regionalized. I'd much rather watch Ohio State play USC than make sure it faces Northwestern and Minnesota, for instance.

---

Rob NitLion from Morristown, N.J., writes: Brian, I'm very interested to hear your rebuttal to this theory. You recently wrote about the reasons that Urban Meyer is the most "hated" coach in the B1G (based on reader voting) without ever coaching a game. As a devoted B1G Blog reader, my theory, based on other mailblog and weekly chat questions, I think there has been an overwhelming feeling that Urban Meyer AND the Buckeyes have been hyped up "more than a tad" by you and Adam, based on Urban's track record and Ohio State's past dominance of the B1G, which has angered a lot of readers and thus led to this "hatred" of Urban Meyer. As a Penn State fan, I have no issue with Meyer as a coach, albeit I think he was lucky to have a few great players in his short time there, but I really think that a fair share of this reader sentiment has been produced through the many blog articles written by you and Adam that have made the Buckeyes instant favorites, somewhat rightfully so, but I do think that a majority of your readers have based their "hatred" on the overflow of Pro-Buckeye "propaganda". Brian, your witness...

Brian Bennett: If I may approach the bench ... Well, first of all, I certainly haven't made the Buckeyes "instant favorites." I have them ranked No. 25 in my preseason poll, behind four other Big Ten teams. (As for Adam's ranking, well, you'll have to talk to him.) I get that there has been a lot of hype about Meyer, not just from this corner but from all over the place. Which I think is justified, given Meyer's track record -- two national titles and an undefeated season at Utah cannot solely be attributed to luck and "a few great players" -- and Ohio State's vast resources. I would also argue, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that fans of other teams wouldn't be bothered by the hype nearly as much if they didn't believe most of it themselves, deep down. And the defense rests.

---

Eli from New York writes: "There's little doubt that Meyer is going to win at Ohio State, just as there's little doubt many won't like him because of it."How about a little wager: $5000 that he doesn't win the B1G in 2013? I'd wager for having the best record this year, but we all know you don't have to have the best record to win the league.

Brian Bennett: I wouldn't bet large sums on any one team to win the conference in 2013, both because there's still enormous parity in the league and a lot can happen -- injuries, suspensions, etc. -- between now and then. If you offered me a bet that Ohio State would win the league at least once before 2015, I'd definitely take it. I also believe the Buckeyes will be playing for a national title by then. What kind of odds can I get on that?

---

Trotter from Des Moines, Iowa, writes: Phil Steele doesn't have JVB on any of his 4 B1G teams ... OK? He has Keenan Davis as one of his top receivers. ... Hmm, QB's throw Receivers the ball still right? 3000+years last year is pretty good right? Unproven on the road, but c'mon! Out of all B1G QB's from last year coming back, JVB is the obvious first choice, no? Which QB would you take first in you and Adam's "fantasy" CFB teams?

Brian Bennett: I have a lot of respect for Phil Steele, and his preseason magazine is a must-have resource for any serious college football fan. But simply put, he blew this one. No way James Vandenberg shouldn't at least be on one of the top three teams. He's the best pure pocket passer in the league, hands down, and I think Iowa will lean on him heavily in lieu of a proven running game. Now, as far as fantasy goes, I'd still take Denard Robinson. Big running stats from a quarterback are immensely valuable in fantasy. Of course, given Adam's fantasy acumen, he'd probably draft an offensive lineman first.

---

Matt from Minneapolis writes: Minnesota came really close to pulling off some pretty big upsets last year against USC and Michigan State. With a team that looks to be improved from last year, do you see any scenario in which the Gophers pull off an upset against a team eyeing a conference championship? If so, what game would it be?

Brian Bennett: I would expect the Gophers to at least scare the bejeezus out of a league contender. How about the Nov. 3 home game against Michigan? Minnesota wasn't remotely competitive against the Wolverines last year and will be looking to atone for such a poor performance at the Big House. Michigan will be coming off two straight tough games against Michigan State and then at Nebraska and could be physically beat up. Not saying Minnesota will pull that upset, but I could see a close game.

---

Shawn J. from Scranton, Pa., writes: You questioned whether Rob Bolden made the right career move by staying at Penn State. It's doubtful that Bolden will ever play in the NFL. So any career move should prioritize his post-football plans. With that in mind, what's his best move? Keeping his full ride at a premier research university.

Brian Bennett: Sure, that's a totally understandable option, and being a backup at Penn State might be preferable to starting for an FCS school. We have no idea of what Bolden's priorities and personal goals are. But it has been my experience that most players want playing time, first and foremost. I'm not sure how much he's going to get with the Nittany Lions going forward unless he shows radical improvement.

---

Malcolm from Del Mar, Calif., writes: If Michigan's coaching staff does what they do best and get the two sides of the line playing close to last year's squads, would that make them the favorite in the B1G Legends Division?

Brian Bennett: It would make them at least the co-favorites. The lines are definitely the biggest worry spot. But don't forget that last year's team played great and still didn't win the division. And that was with a favorable schedule. This year's schedule is much more difficult, with road games at Nebraska and Ohio State, plus the always difficult Michigan State game.

---

Jim from Winchester, Va., writes: Which game, and what kinds of things will you see in the nonconference schedule that will make you think to yourself..."Nebraska's defense looks like it may sneak up on the BIG, and is actually pretty good."

Brian Bennett: I see what you did there, Jim. Making me agree with your point and only asking me when I will agree with it. Crafty move. Anyway, I'll be optimistic about Nebraska's defense if it shuts down its first two opponents. Southern Miss finished 14th in the nation last year in scoring more than 36 points per game, and even though the Golden Eagles will have a new quarterback and a more defensive-minded head coach, they still have plenty of weapons. Then Nebraska goes to UCLA, which resembles an offensive juggernaut the way I look like Brad Pitt. But the game is still on the road, and new coach Jim Mora will likely have some tricks up his sleeve. Strong performances in both those games will signal good things for the Huskers. Still, I'm way more interested in how they are going to handle Wisconsin and Ohio State to start Big Ten play.

The tireless Phil Steele, he of the eponymous and indispensable college football preview magazine, has come out with his preseason All-Big Ten teams. You can find them -- which include four teams for offense, defense and special teams -- on his blog here.

Some of Steele's choices were obvious ones, like Montee Ball, Rex Burkhead, Ricky Wagner and Taylor Lewan on the first-team offense, and John Simon, Kawann Short, William Gholston, Gerald Hodges, Chris Borland, Mike Taylor and Johnny Adams on the first-team defense.

Steele picked Michigan's Denard Robinson as his first-team quarterback, with Ohio State's Braxton Miller on the second team. Iowa's James Vandenberg doesn't appear on his top four teams, which is very surprising.

Receiver may be the hardest position to figure out this year in the Big Ten. Steele has Wisconsin's Jared Abbrederis, Iowa's Keenan Davis and Michigan's Roy Roundtree on his first team. He picks Ohio State's Jake Stoneburner as the top tight end in a year when that position could be stacked. Wisconsin's Travis Frederick, Michigan State's Chris McDonald and Nebraska's Spencer Long are the first-team interior linemen.

Steele likes Ohio State's Johnathan Hankins as a first-team performer on the defensive line. He goes with four linebackers, making room for Illinois' Jonathan Brown. Iowa's Micah Hyde joins Adams at first-team cornerback, while Michigan State's Isaiah Lewis and Ohio State's C.J. Barnett are the safeties.

Wisconsin leads the way with seven first-team picks, while Michigan State has the most players on all four teams, with 16. Ohio State has 15, including receivers Corey Brown and Devin Smith on the fourth team. Minnesota had only one player on Steele's top four teams -- Troy Stoudermire, who appears as the fourth-team cornerback and fourth-team kick returner.

As part of “College Football Live’s” 100 Days Till Kickoff countdown, we're taking a look at the top 10 players in the Big Ten for 2012. Please note that this list could look different when we do our Big Ten Top 25 players list later this summer.

But here's how they're ranked for the "College Football Live" event:

1. Montee Ball, RB, Wisconsin: After scoring 39 touchdowns and earning an invitation to New York for the 2011 Heisman Trophy ceremony, Ball returned to school for his senior year and very much earned the No. 1 spot on this list. His numbers could go down a bit this year as they would be nearly impossible to top. Yet Ball, who has focused on pass blocking and improving his strength this offseason, could be a better all-around back in 2012.

2. Rex Burkhead, RB, Nebraska: Still a bit underrated nationally, Burkhead gets plenty of respect in the Big Ten. He ran for 1,357 yards and 15 touchdowns last season without much of a passing attack to keep defenses honest. The senior approaches every carry like his scholarship check depends on it, which is why Nebraska fans embrace him.

3. John Simon, DE, Ohio State: New Buckeyes coach Urban Meyer gushed over Simon this spring for his all-out commitment on and off the field. Simon had seven sacks and 16 tackles for loss on a banged-up defensive front last year and should contend for Big Ten defensive player of the year honors in 2012.

4. William Gholston, DE, Michigan State: We mean this in the best possible way: Gholston is a freak. How else to describe a 6-foot-7, 275-pounder with the speed of an outside linebacker? Gholston can be downright unblockable when he's focused and using proper technique, something he showed in an impressive Outback Bowl performance against Georgia in January. If that's a sign of things to come, he could be an All-American.

5. Gerald Hodges, LB, Penn State: Hodges has become the latest member of Linebacker U. to seize stardom. He broke out last season with 106 tackles, including 4.5 sacks, as he anchored the middle of one of the best defenses in the country. Fast, strong and instinctive, he's got everything you want from the linebacker position.

6. Denard Robinson, QB, Michigan: There might not be a more exciting player in the country than "Shoelace," who's put together more heroics than a comic-book character the past two seasons. But his passing remains suspect, as evidenced by his Big Ten-worst 15 interceptions last season. The word out of spring practice was that Robinson had improved his fundamentals and looked sharp as a passer. If he can add accuracy to his other many talents, the sky is the limit for him and the Wolverines this season.

7. Kawann Short, DT, Purdue: Short thought about skipping his senior year and entering the NFL but decided to make a push for first-round status this season. He certainly has the ability to do so as a potentially dominant run stuffer in the middle of Purdue's defensive line. Short had 17 tackles for loss and 6.5 tackles in 2011 and will be the focus of every opposing offensive game plan this season.

8. Chris Borland, LB, Wisconsin: Bret Bielema says Borland might be the best middle linebacker he's ever coached. Which is saying something, since Borland didn't move to the middle linebacker spot until last season. Though a bit undersized, he makes up for it with natural instincts and underrated athleticism. Borland made 143 tackles last year and formed one of the best defensive duos in the country with fellow Badgers linebacker Mike Taylor.

9. Silas Redd, RB, Penn State: Redd carried Penn State's offense during the middle of last season and was as productive as any back during the month of October. He eventually wore down a bit under a heavy workload and because of some injuries, but he could be primed for an even bigger year in new coach Bill O'Brien's offense. Redd ran for 1,241 yards last season and figures to find the end zone more than the seven trips he made there a year ago.

10. Jonathan Brown, LB, Illinois: Brown burst onto the scene as a sophomore, posting 108 tackles and 19.5 for loss as a quarterback-seeking missile. He was a bit inconsistent, however, and he lost his cool when he kneed a Northwestern player in the groin, earning a one-game suspension. Now a year older and wiser, Brown should be one of the top defensive playmakers in the conference, if not the country.

During the course of spring practice, Big Ten bloggers Adam Rittenberg and Brian Bennett visited 11 of the 12 league schools, getting an up-close look at the players and coaches who will shape the 2012 season.

Now it's time for them to share their thoughts on what they saw and learned this spring, and you can follow along as they exchange emails. Check out the Leaders Division exchange here. They now turn their focus to the Legends Division.

Adam Rittenberg: Let's take a look at what I believe to be the stronger division in 2012. You spent a lot of time in the Mitten State last month, and while you didn't gorge yourself like you did in America's Dairyland, you got the money quote of spring ball from Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio, who said, "We're laying in the weeds. We've beat Michigan the last four years. So where's the threat?" How spicy is the Michigan State-Michigan rivalry getting, and how good do you think these two teams will be this season after visiting both campuses?

Brian Bennett: Oh, there was some serious gorging going on at Zingerman's in Ann Arbor and Sparty's in East Lansing. Good thing there's only one spring practice session per year.

Anyway, I went into the spring thinking Michigan and Michigan State were the two strongest teams in the league, and I didn't see anything to change my opinion. While the Wolverines are more focused on Ohio State and even Alabama, they know they have to end their losing streak against Michigan State. And the Spartans take serious pride in that four-game run while bristling at all the offseason accolades thrown toward Brady Hoke's team. Oct. 20 can't come soon enough, as far as I'm concerned.

If the two teams played right now, I'd definitely take Michigan State. Dantonio has done a terrific job of developing depth on both lines and all over the defense. There's not a deeper team in the Big Ten, and the Spartans' physical play has given Michigan fits. The Wolverines still need to figure some things out in the trenches, especially on the defensive line, but that's one area where Hoke and defensive coordinator Greg Mattison excel. I believe these two teams will be neck and neck all year for the Legends title.

Of course, there's another team lurking in the division, and that's Nebraska. You went to Lincoln this spring, and it sounded like the Cornhuskers are feeling mighty ambitious this season. Do they have the necessary tools to back up their lofty goals?

Adam Rittenberg: It was interesting to see a team openly discuss the national title, Brian, especially in a league like the Big Ten. Huskers safety P.J. Smith even went so far as to say a Big Ten title and a Rose Bowl championship would be "kind of disappointing." That's bold. Nebraska would have to skip a step or two to reach that point, but I can see where the confidence stems from. There's a greater comfort level between players and coaches in Lincoln, and also between the coaches and what they face in the Big Ten. Offensive coordinator Tim Beck was candid about the difficulty of preparing for so many new opponents, particularly since Nebraska's offensive and defensive systems are a little different from what we see in the rest of the league.

Quarterback Taylor Martinez received good marks from the coaches, and his focus on footwork could translate into a more consistent passing attack. Beck certainly wants to be a bit more balanced, and Nebraska returns pretty much everyone at wide receiver and tight end. We often hear the cliche that it's all about the quarterback, but it holds true with Nebraska. If Martinez actually makes strides as a passer -- he'll be operating in the same offense as the starter for the first time in his high school or college career -- the Huskers will put up points this fall. But after watching Martinez last season, it's fair to have some doubts about No. 3.

The defense expects to exploit a schematic advantage we heard a lot about last season but didn't see much on Saturdays. I like coordinator John Papuchis, and Bo Pelini made two good staff additions in D-line coach Rick Kaczenski and secondary coach Terry Joseph. They're all about details and accountability, and they believe they'll be able to replace star power with greater depth in certain areas. Nebraska also should be strong in special teams. Do the Huskers have a unit better than Michigan State's defense? Not right now. But Nebraska could end up being the division's most complete team by season's end.

Getting back to Michigan State and Michigan. Both teams lose tremendous leaders from 2011 (Kirk Cousins, Mike Martin, Jerel Worthy, Joel Foreman, David Molk, Ryan Van Bergen). Who do you see filling those roles this year?

Brian Bennett: That's a good question, and one that will have to be answered this summer. For Michigan State, Andrew Maxwell impressed me as a guy who can lead in a similar way as Cousins did; he'll just have to play well at quarterback and battle through adversity. The Spartans have some seniors on defense who can lead, like Anthony Rashad White and Johnny Adams, but they also have some highly respected juniors in Max Bullough and William Gholston.

But they are replacing some very valuable leaders, just as Michigan is doing. Denard Robinson has worked on becoming more vocal and sounded like a different guy in interviews this spring. There's no question he has the respect of his teammates. Craig Roh and Jordan Kovacs seem like natural leaders on defense, and offensive tackle Taylor Lewan says he wants to take on that role as well. But leadership can't be forced, and it remains to be seen if either team can find such strong captains as guys like Cousins and Martin were.

Speaking of question marks, I feel like Iowa and Northwestern are two of the bigger mystery teams in the league. Both have talent and potentially potent offenses, but they'll also need some players on defense to rise up out of the shadows. What did you take out of your visits to Iowa City and Evanston this spring?

Adam Rittenberg: Let's start off with Iowa, which underwent some major changes this spring with a new offensive coordinator (Greg Davis), a position coach promoted to defensive coordinator (Phil Parker) and several more assistants shuffling, arriving or being promoted. The players seemed to embrace the changes, and coach Kirk Ferentz basically said the team needed a fresh start even though he didn't want to lose his previous coordinators. There's a lot of excitement about Davis' offense, which will be more up-tempo than what we've seen in the past from Iowa. Quarterback James Vandenberg really seems to get it, but will he have enough weapons around him to execute? The running back curse struck again this spring with Jordan Canzeri's ACL injury. Iowa needs young and/or unproven players to step up there, and wide receiver isn't a deep group. It'll be a big summer for Keenan Davis.

The feeling I had coming out of Evanston is that Northwestern will be a younger team but potentially a better one. The Wildcats say goodbye to an accomplished senior class that featured some outstanding players like quarterback Dan Persa. But was it the most talented group? I don't think so. Northwestern has improved its recruiting efforts in recent years, and the team could begin seeing the benefits this year. There are a lot of new faces at spots like defensive back and defensive line. I was impressed with cornerback Nick VanHoose and end Deonte Gibson. The wide receiving corps should be one of the Big Ten's best, even if Kyle Prater isn't eligible until 2013. The Wildcats might not have many familiar names at receiver, but they boast incredible depth there. This team still has question marks -- secondary, pass rush, running back, quarterback -- but the talent level is getting a bit better.

Neither of us made it up to Minneapolis this spring, but we both talked with Gophers players and coaches. What was your sense of the second spring under coach Jerry Kill?

Brian Bennett: We swear it's nothing personal, Gophers fans. Both of us would have enjoyed a trip to the Twin Cities, but the schedule just didn't work out.

Anyway, I did sense more confidence from the Minnesota players and coaches we interviewed. That's not surprising, given that it's the second year for Kill's staff and more familiarity almost always brings a better comfort level. MarQueis Gray really started to come on late last season and appears to have made strides as a passer. He could be one of the league's top playmakers this year. Overall, the Gophers look to have a little more talent this year, thanks to some junior college imports, youngsters who got experience last year and Troy Stoudermire coming back at cornerback. The defense should have more speed, though it remains undersized. The big question for me is who will emerge as weapons alongside Gray, especially at receiver.

But I think that, with a manageable nonconference schedule, Minnesota has a chance to win five or more games this year and it will be much more competitive in Big Ten play than it was early last season. The Legends Division looks more balanced top to bottom than the Leaders and should be fun to follow all year.

The book is closed on spring football in the Big Ten, but what did the chapters reveal? Although no games are played during the spring, which fuels optimism for all 12 teams, the 15 practices provide clues for the upcoming season. The Big Ten saw few major injuries to key players, some good news (the NCAA declaring Michigan State WR DeAnthony Arnett eligible for 2012) and some potentially troubling signs.

It's time to revive the power rankings coming out of the spring. We see separation with the top two teams, while Nos. 3-5 are closely matched. The same holds true for Nos. 7-10.

Here they are ...

1. Michigan State: The Spartans' defense looks like the single best unit in the Big Ten entering the season. Spring practice only enhanced our opinion of Pat Narduzzi's group, which has no shortage of stars. While the passing game needs work, Arnett's presence should help, and the Spartans will rely more on their run game with Le'Veon Bell and an improved offensive line.

2. Michigan: Quarterback Denard Robinson and Fitzgerald Toussaint, who affirmed himself as Michigan's top tailback this spring, form arguably the Big Ten's most dangerous backfield tandem. If Michigan can fill some key pieces on both lines, where there was some shuffling this spring, it will be back in the BCS bowl mix and among the favorites to win the Big Ten crown.

3. Wisconsin: It seems hard to fathom, but Montee Ball appeared to take his game to an even higher gear this spring. The Badgers' star running back will fuel the offense again, although quarterback remains a question mark as Maryland transfer Danny O'Brien arrives this summer. Wisconsin still needs more playmakers to emerge on the defensive line and in the secondary.

4. Nebraska: Tough call on this spot, but the Huskers return their core pieces on offense from a 9-4 team. Footwork-conscious quarterback Taylor Martinez received good reviews this spring, and he should be more comfortable in Year 2 at the helm of Tim Beck's offense. Coach Bo Pelini thinks the defense will be improved and potentially deeper, although the Huskers lose a lot of star power on that side of the ball.

5. Ohio State: There were few dull moments in Ohio State's first spring under Urban Meyer, who began installing an offense unlike any seen in Columbus. After resembling a "clown show" early on, the offense made strides and quarterback Braxton Miller looks like a strong fit for the system. An improved defense, led by linemen John Simon and Johnathan Hankins, should buy the offense some time to get acclimated.

6. Penn State: New coach Bill O'Brien ushered in a historic spring in Happy Valley, and Penn State players for the most part embraced the many changes taking place. The Lions still don't have a quarterback, but they have an excellent running back in Silas Redd and an improved offense line that pleasantly surprised O'Brien this spring. Penn State's defensive front seven, led by linebacker Gerald Hodges and tackle Jordan Hill, might need to carry the team at times.

7. Purdue: Fourth-year coach Danny Hope thinks this is clearly his best team in West Lafayette, and with 18 starters back, it's easy to see why. The Boilermakers are one of the Big Ten's deepest teams at positions like quarterback, defensive tackle, running back and cornerback. Purdue must continue to absorb the new defense installed by Tim Tibesar and fill some key gaps along the offensive line.

8. Iowa: Although Iowa's changes this spring didn't make national headlines like the ones at Penn State and Ohio State, they were very significant. New offensive coordinator Greg Davis began installing a more up-tempo and multifaceted offense that seems to be clicking with senior quarterback James Vandenberg. Jordan Canzeri's ACL injury once again clouds the picture at running back entering the summer, and Iowa needs its young defensive line to grow up in a hurry.

9. Northwestern: The Wildcats showcased one of the league's top wide-receiving corps this spring, and if Kain Colter can improve his passing, the offense should surge. Defense has been Northwestern's bugaboo in recent years, and young players like end Deonte Gibson and cornerback Nick VanHoose stepped forward this spring. It's crucial for the defense to keep making progress if Northwestern wants to maintain its bowl streak.

10. Illinois: There's little doubt Illinois will be a defense-driven team, and the Illini look loaded in the front seven with players like end Michael Buchanan, who turned in a very strong spring, as well as tackle Akeem Spence and linebacker Jonathan Brown. An offense that flatlined late last season began learning a new system this spring and still lacks playmakers at running back and wide receiver. Running back Josh Ferguson's spring-game performance is encouraging.

11. Minnesota: The second spring of the Jerry Kill era brought greater comfort for both players and coaches alike. Quarterback MarQueis Gray made strides in his second spring session as the starter, although the Gophers are still looking for more weapons to surround No. 5. The defensive line should be an improved group after several lifeless seasons. Minnesota still needs to develop depth in the secondary and at wide receiver.

12. Indiana: After playing an insane number of freshmen in 2011, Indiana began to reap the benefits this spring. An influx of junior-college defenders, including linebackers David Cooper and Jacarri Alexander, also should boost a unit that needs all the help it can get. The Hoosiers have some nice building blocks on offense at both quarterback (Tre Roberson) and running back (Stephen Houston, Isaiah Roundtree), but they still have a lot of work to do before the season.

Some Big Ten chats are better than others, and today's was one of the better ones we've had in a while. Kudos to you for participating and asking good questions. Midseason form. Good to see.

For those who missed out on the fun, I've got you covered. Here's the full chat transcript.

Some highlights:

Mr. T. from Columbus: Don't you think the B1G gave up too easily in pushing for home games in the semifinals of the playoffs? The biggest thing people complain about in bowl games is that the Southern teams never have to travel. Well this was the opportunity for our conference to keep pushing to change that but instead they would rather keep their allegiance to the Rose Bowl.

Adam Rittenberg: Mr. T, I'm surprised the Big Ten didn't push a little harder. But the sentiment among Jim Delany an the ADs, one I believe to be correct, is that the national opposition would have been too strong to overcome. Is it worth fighting a losing battle? Perhaps it would have been, but the Big Ten also would have been viewed as a nuisance/obstructionist, etc. It sounds weird, but it's a lot less controversial nationally for the Big Ten to stump for the Rose Bowl than for campus sites. Won't be too much opposition from other leagues to having bowl sites.

Jason from Cali: Adam, do you think some of Delany's comment on changing bowl affiliation and requirement, moving from 6-6 to 7-5 for eligibility, statements are based on the fact that many of the B1G bowl games are agaisnt the SEC and he wants to change that?

Adam Rittenberg: No. Although a 6-6 Ohio State team played Florida last year, most of the Big Ten-SEC bowl matchups feature teams with 8 or more victories. So the increase in wins for bowl eligibility would impact the Big Ten's agreements with the Meineke Car Care Bowl (Big 12), the TicketCity Bowl (Big 12/Conference USA) and the Little Caesars Pizza Bowl (MAC) more than any of the Big Ten-SEC bowls. That said, Jason, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Big Ten reduce its SEC bowl matchups from three to two in the next cycle. Don't really see a need for the Big Ten to play three Florida bowls on the same day against the same league. A bit silly.

Adam from Toledo: Adam - tried to submit this a second ago but don't think it worked, so sorry if this is a repeat. I know not a lot of people are giving Michigan much of a chance to win their opener in Dallas against Alabama and Nick Saban. What I want to know is what exactly Michigan needs to do in order to have a chance at winning. Obviously Denard needs to make better decisions (and better throws) with the ball, but given Blue's lack of top-flight receivers, I don't think that alone will carry the Wolverines. What else can Michigan do to win?

Adam Rittenberg: Adam, it's imperative for Michigan to keep the score down. Alabama might have lost a bunch of stud players, but the Tide have other stars ready to step in. And they should be able to pass the ball pretty well this year. Michigan needs a big game from its corners -- the guys we were discussing earlier -- and it has to capitalize on scoring opportunities in Alabama's half of the field. I don't think Michigan can win this game with more than one turnover, and that's all on Denard. It's all about limiting mistakes and efficiency against a team like Bama. Also big for Michigan's new-look defensive line to handle Barrett Jones and the Alabama offensive front.

Steve from Philly: Would Penn State consider going to the ACC ever? I know it sounds crazy but PSU has ties to Pitt and Syracuse and could fit in nicely there.

Adam Rittenberg: That idea is out there, but I'd be surprised if Penn State made the jump. The Big Ten is a stronger overall athletic conference. It has an incredibly successful television network (BTN), and Penn State has seen the benefits for many of its programs. Penn State is not a basketball school, and the ACC always will be a hoops-first league. My take: If Penn State wants to play with Pitt and Syracuse so badly, it's an admission of where PSU fits into the national picture. If PSU wants to be big time, stay in the Big Ten and win more Big Ten football titles against Michigan, Ohio State, etc.

Brian from Detroit: Awhile back you said you thought Michigan State was a basketball school. Do you still think that? Or has Dantonio changed your mind?

Adam Rittenberg: It's interesting, Brian. When I posed that question to the blog last year, I got tons of emails from MSU fans saying it's a football school, end of story. I think there's a lot of truth to that, and Mark Dantonio's recent success has brought the football passion out of a fan base that had been knocked down too many times in the early part of the last decade. Does MSU basketball get more media coverage than MSU football? Without a doubt. Is Tom Izzo a bigger deal than Dantonio? Without a doubt. But I think Michigan State is one of those rare schools that has great passion for both major revenue sports.

Bren from Berkeley, Calif.: Adam, just say the facts. The SEC loses sleep at night at simple thought of playing in snow. You heard the stats in the NFL about southern team's records after Dec 7th. when playing in the north. You think Mike Slive for one second wants the fragile perception of his conference burst...?

Adam Rittenberg: I don't know if the SEC loses much sleep at night these days, Bren. But you're right -- of course the SEC doesn't want its teams to play in the north. The difference is, the SEC has support from other leagues in this aim (ACC, Pac-12, etc.). The fact is the most significant college games never have been played in the Big Ten footprint. Why the other leagues would want that to change makes no sense.

Thanks again for the questions, and my apologies to those whose questions weren't answered. Let's do it again soon.

There's a lot going on, even for May. Let's get to your emails and talk about it all.

Andrew from Brooklyn writes: I know you've been over this ad nauseum, but can you explain one more time, how [Jim] Delany and the ADs justify allowing the bowls to host semifinals? I can't think of a single advantage in such a situation for Big Ten institutions or their fans. 1. It takes tourism dollars out of the region. 2. It enriches the bowl committees, perhaps the most corrupt element in all of college sports (not only the indictment of John Junker, but also the excessive compensation of directors, the kickbacks involved in room guarantees, etc). 3. It puts Big Ten teams at a locational disadvantage. 4. It forces Big Ten fans to potentially travel long distances three weeks over the course of a month. Is this really just about a sentimental attachment to the Rose Bowl?

Brian Bennett: Well, there is one advantage: Bowls allow people to get out of the upper Midwest in the winter and enjoy some sunshine. But other than that, I agree with everything you wrote. I simply don't understand the illogical attachment to an outdated bowl system that is neither financially nor competitively advantageous for the league. Then when you see comments from Ohio State's Gene Smith saying he doesn't think teams should be playing in cold weather, well, frankly that's mind-boggling. (And even more so as the Big Ten says basically in the next breath that it would like to play a bowl game in New York City, well known for its tropical late December climate.)

I get that bowls are rewards for players, but this isn't Little League. On the plus side, improvements to the college football postseason have traditionally come at such a glacial pace that we should be happy that so much positive change is coming. Set up a good system now for selecting the four teams, and then the debate over where to play the games can be revisited in the future, especially if it becomes obvious that the bowl site situation is too much of a burden on fans.

---

Dan from Lincoln, Neb., writes: What are the chances that when all is said and done, the B1G will have nothing to show for all the posturing it has done during the playoff debates? We've given up helping fans not have to travel three times (twice to somewhere south) to see a team play the NC, given up on any advantage for the local team/area (financially, weather wise), and at this rate the Rose Bowl will go strictly to the four-team event. No wonder the SEC and Pac12 have just sat back and let the spoils fall in their lap...

Brian Bennett: Delany piqued interest with his comment that, "It will be demonstrably clear how flexible and how open the Rose Bowl has been in this process." I'm not sure what that means just yet, but the Big Ten had better come out with a good deal involving the Rose Bowl, given how much it has staked its future to that game. It appears as though the league's priorities have been protecting that game and securing a playoff model that rewards conference champions as much as possible. The ACC has come out in support of the same idea, which bolsters the Big Ten's case there. Ultimately, regardless of where the games are played or what the Rose Bowl's status is, the Big Ten's goal has to be getting teams into the Football Final Four (or whatever it ends up being called) as consistently as possible. The champions model no doubt benefits the conference in that regard, because it would be tough to omit a Big Ten champ most years.

---

Mike from Denver writes: With the upcoming Pac12/B1G series, I haven't seen anything anywhere regarding how the lineup will be set. Is there any possibility we can get a set-up similar to the B1G/ACC b-ball series where match-ups are set only a year in advance based on anticipated strength of the teams in the coming season? I know it is more difficult with football, but if they lock a date and designate home/away years in advance, why wouldn't it work?

Brian Bennett: Well, we know one matchup, as Northwestern-Stanford already have agreed to a series that will take place during the start of the agreement. (How smart do the Wildcats look, locking up one of the potentially more attractive Pac-12 opponents already?). I doubt we'll see the games be set only a year in advance, because football scheduling simply doesn't work that way. With games being held on different weekends and teams needing to fill the rest of their schedule, it becomes too impractical. Even with just a year lag time, you can't always accurately predict teams' strength. The best bet will be to create compelling matchups based on programs' name value. I'm pretty sure we'd all watch Ohio State-USC, Michigan-Washington, Penn State-Oregon (just to name some random potential examples) regardless of how good the teams in the game actually were.

---

Alex from Venice, Calif., writes: I was reading your Big Ten Spring Wrap piece, and I wanted to bring something up. I have to disagree with you about Michigan (or any team) being too modest when they say that their top goal is to win a Big Ten championship. You can't play in the National Championship without first taking care of business in your conference (unless, of course, you're in the SEC). The conference championship is something that is in your control. Of course schools want to play for the National Championship, but they know in order for them to do that, they must take care of business within their conference. Rich Rodriguez, shudder, was lambasted over stating that the Big Ten championship was their priority. He got the "why are you not aiming higher -- this is Michigan and we expect more!" His response was that in order to be in that discussion you better be tops in your conference. He was right, Brady Hoke is right and Bo was certainly right.

Brian Bennett: Alex, you make some good points, and I have no problem with Brady Hoke making the Big Ten title the main goal this year, especially given the Wolverines' recent Big Ten title drought. Winning a league championship is clearly the next step for the program to truly be "back." I just find it interesting that the league hasn't had a national champion since 2002 and hasn't been in the BCS title game since 2006, yet only Nebraska is really openly talking about getting to that level this year. The Big Ten needs to aim higher than just the Rose Bowl.

---

Peter from Seattle writes: Why is it that whenever Taylor Martinez's name is brought up, people also bring up his completion percentage and how low it is? Denard Robinson had a lower completion percentage and people don't talk about that being an issue every time his name is brought up.

Brian Bennett: Well, I don't know about "people." But we're always saying on this blog that Robinson has to improve his accuracy and cut down on the 15 interceptions he threw in 2011. Robinson's completion percentage in 2010 was actually pretty good. For comparison's sake:

Martinez 2010: 59.2 percent completions
Robinson 2010: 62.5 percent

Martinez 2011: 56.3 percent
Robinson 2011: 55 percent

Both players' percentages went down in 2011, but remember both were in the first year of new offensive systems. They should each improve upon that with an extra year in the respective systems.

---

Alex H. from Louisville writes: I appreciated the Spring wrap up article on the Hoosiers. Our football program is the easy target for kicking and it is nice to see fresh eyes on the product. If you didn't cover the Hoosiers much the last few years, we are to put it mildly "under construction." Last year was actually a huge year for us because we flushed 30 years of complacency out when the new staff ran everyone out. Some agree and some don't on this subject, but I do know that what we had been doing didn't work. Our coach indicated last week that there is still probably a few hanger-ons still, but he thinks he has flushed most of it. ... I really believe we have the ingredients finally to make noise in the Big Ten in the next 5 years with our best coaching staff, facilities, and Athletic Director that wants to win the right way. Perfect Storm???

Brian Bennett: I'm happy to get a Hoosiers question in the mailbag. Frankly, it doesn't happen very often. Anyway, I feel like the Indiana program was starting to turn into something under Terry Hoeppner, but his tragic death was just a terrible setback. After visiting Bloomington for the first time in several years, I was impressed by the facilities improvements and commitment the school has given to football at long last (that Big Ten Network money sure helps). The program seems like it now has the tools to compete, but it still must overcome the lack of tradition, a small fan base and the difficulty of recruiting head to head against bigger Big Ten teams. I like what Kevin Wilson is doing, and it would be a lot of fun to see Indiana become a factor. But there is much work still ahead.

---

Mike from Apple Valley, Minn., writes: Hey, Brian, barring major surprise, the Vikings will not be moving from the Twin Cities. Does that help or hurt the Gophers? On one hand, the Gophers would have had more attention and may attract more of a following in the area, look at any other Big Ten team not in an NFL market (about all of them). But on the other hand, it could hurt recruiting because there would have been one less amenity in the Twin Cities. Or is there something else I'm missing? Thanks!

Brian Bennett: Mike, we did an interesting series last summer looking at the challenges faced by college programs in NFL cities. I suggest you check it out. It's not always easy, but schools like USC, Miami, TCU and Washington have made it work. The Gophers are never going to get all the attention in their city or state because of the pro teams in the Twin Cities. But as you mentioned, the benefits of living in a big city with pro teams can help in recruiting as well. Ultimately, I think there are certainly enough fans who will support the program if it starts winning big under Jerry Kill and that players won't really care whether they're in a pro or college town. It all comes down to leadership and success.

ANN ARBOR, Mich. -- Michigan lost some invaluable leadership on the offensive line when center David Molk graduated. A somewhat unlikely figure is volunteering to fill that void.

"I definitely see myself as a leader," junior left tackle Taylor Lewan told ESPN.com. "I want to be one of the main guys that really helps through all the successes and all the bad things. I want that to be put on myself.

"I'm the left tackle, the blind side. They made a movie about it. So it's my job to be a leader."

Lewan has been a lot of things during his career so far with the Wolverines. A standout lineman who's a key cog in the entire offense? Yes. A goofball who keeps his teammates laughing? Sure. A thorn under the skin of opposing players and occasionally officials? Yep.

But leadership is something new for Lewan, who's trying to shed some of his old labels for new and improved ones. Those who know him best noticed a major difference this spring.

"Taylor has just gotten more serious," said defensive lineman Craig Roh, who graduated from the same Scottsdale, Ariz., high school as Lewan. "For example, he's doing a diet now, and every Sunday he goes grocery shopping so he can make his own food. That may not seem like much, but for a college guy that's a lot. I just see him concentrating on things that matter more."

There's much at stake this year for Lewan. He'll be blocking for a potentially highly potent offense led by Denard Robinson and Fitz Toussaint as Michigan likely begins the season in the top 10. And a great year could have Lewan positioned to enter the 2012 NFL draft.

In his first 2013 Big Board , ESPN.com's Mel Kiper Jr. pegged Lewan as the No. 2 tackle and No. 12 prospect overall for next year's draft. Kiper said the 6-foot-8, 302-pounder "will get the Jake Long comparisons all year in Ann Arbor" and has "elite length and athleticism for the position."

Michigan offensive coordinator Al Borges agrees with that assessment.

"If Taylor works hard, stays concentrated and maintains focus, he can be very, very good," Borges said. "That's really his story. If he's focused, there isn't anything we ask him to do that he can't do."

Staying focused and disciplined has been a challenge at times. In his first two years of starting, Lewan has too often been a magnet for yellow flags. He cut down his penalties in the second half of last year but still drew three personal fouls, most famously getting tangled up with Michigan State's William Gholston several times before Gholston finally tried to punch Lewan, earning the Spartans' defensive end a one-game suspension.

He has also served as the team's resident comedian, cracking jokes and using his outgoing personality to keep things light. But Lewan says he has learned now when to have fun and when to get down to business.

"I think it's really a maturity thing," he said. "I'm 20 years old now, but I came into college when I was 17. I don't want to put it all on that or anything, but it's really just maturing.

"When I'm here in the building, football is No. 1. It's kind of one of those switches you have to turn on. I turn off all the joking."

Much of Michigan's fortunes may depend on the health of Robinson and Toussaint. Safeguarding them is a job Lewan takes very seriously.

"I'd rather be the guy who gets injured and plays with a broken wrist or something rather than them, because they're the ones running the ball," he said. "I can play with pain, but I don't want them to have to. Every part of my game needs to improve so that doesn't happen."

Lewan hasn't become a total killjoy. This spring, he bought a tandem bike that he could ride to practice, and teammates clamored to join him on it. The sight of the 300-pounder and another hulking football player on a bicycle built for two caused a lot of double-takes around campus.

"He's still Taylor," Roh said. "He's just not as much of a clown."

A focused Lewan could stake a claim as the best lineman in the Big Ten in 2012. And that's no joke.

2011 overall record: 11-2
2011 conference record: 6-2 (2nd, Legends Division)
Returning starters: Offense: 6; defense: 8; kicker/punter: 2

Top returners
QB Denard Robinson; RB Fitzgerald Toussaint; WR Roy Roundtree; WR Jeremy Gallon; LT Taylor Lewan; RT Michael Schofield; DE Craig Roh; LB Jake Ryan; LB Kenny Demens; LB Desmond Morgan; CB J.T. Floyd; CB Blake Countess; S Thomas Gordon; S Jordan Kovacs.

Key losses
WR Junior Hemingway; WR Darryl Stonum; WR/KR Martavious Odoms; TE Kevin Koger; C David Molk; RT Mark Huyge; DT Mike Martin; DE/DT Ryan Van Bergen; DT Will Heininger.

2011 statistical leaders (*returners)

Rushing: Denard Robinson* (1,176 yards)
Passing: Denard Robinson* (2,173 yards)
Receiving: Junior Hemingway (699 yards)
Tackles: Kenny Demens* (94)
Sacks: Ryan Van Bergen (5.5)
Interceptions: Courtney Avery* and J.T. Floyd* (2)

Spring answers

1. Quarterback accuracy: Denard Robinson played one series in the public spring scrimmage, but coaches raved about his improved leadership, decision-making and accuracy throughout the spring. The latter two were major issues for Michigan last season. While it is unknown whether Robinson will truly be more accurate until Sept. 1 against Alabama -- Michigan closed all of its practices to the media this spring -- offensive coordinator Al Borges was very confident in Robinson’s potential for his senior season.

2. Cornerback has depth: Two seasons ago, cornerback was the biggest question on Michigan’s team because of youth, inexperience and a lack of talent. That is no longer an issue. The Wolverines have as many as six players they could feel comfortable with come the fall, and that doesn’t include incoming freshman Terry Richardson (Detroit/Cass Tech), the highest-ranked player in Michigan’s incoming signing class. Sophomore Blake Countess could turn into a star, and fifth-year senior J.T. Floyd is the most consistent corner the Wolverines have. They’ll be the likely starters.

3. A featured back is set: Borges made no hesitation: Redshirt junior Fitzgerald Toussaint is going into the fall as his top tailback -- a marked change from what the Wolverines endured last spring and through the first half of last season. Toussaint rushed for 1,041 yards and nine touchdowns last season, giving Michigan a dynamic dual running game with Robinson. With major questions at wide receiver and tight end, expect a lot of running from Toussaint and Robinson, especially early in the season.

Fall questions

1. Who is catching the ball: Michigan’s coaches spoke highly of Jeremy Gallon, Jerald Robinson and Roy Roundtree during the spring as their top three receivers, but Robinson has never caught a pass, Gallon has had one season of consistent productivity, and Roundtree saw his numbers plummet last season to 19 catches for 355 yards. Tight end isn’t much better, as the position group has two career catches. Denard Robinson’s two best safety valves -- Junior Hemingway and Kevin Koger -- graduated, so even if Denard Robinson is improved, he might need to hunt to find a reliable receiving option. Incoming freshman Devin Funchess (Farmington Hills, Mich./Harrison) could be an option at tight end.

2. Who is pressuring the quarterback: Michigan took its biggest hits on the defensive line, which saw three starters graduate -- Mike Martin was a third-round draft pick, Ryan Van Bergen signed as a free agent, and Will Heininger graduated -- and its fourth starter, Craig Roh, switch positions. Michigan insists it’ll be OK there. Will Campbell and converted end Jibreel Black will likely start inside, and either sophomore Brennen Beyer or sophomore Frank Clark will start at rush end. The success of Michigan’s defense last season relied on pressure the front four created. With an almost completely new group there, how they fare against opponents will be interesting to see.

3. Punting problems: Somewhere along the way last season, Will Hagerup lost his mojo, much like kicker Brendan Gibbons the year before. A strong-legged punter, Hagerup wasn’t connecting with the ball well and eventually lost his job to freshman Matt Wile. Now entering his junior year, Michigan hopes either Hagerup regains his form or Wile becomes more consistent. The Wolverines’ offense should be fairly prolific, but with a defense searching for pressure early on, it needs to be able to control field position with the punter.

Big Ten bloggers Adam Rittenberg and Brian Bennett will occasionally give their takes on a burning question facing the league. We'll both have strong opinions, but not necessarily the same view. We'll let you decide which blogger is right.

Given all the recent talk about a college football playoff, today's Take Two topic is this: Which Big Ten program is best equipped to win a national title in the next five years?

Take 1: Adam Rittenberg

As we've both written, the Big Ten doesn't appear to have a national title contender in 2012. Michigan and Michigan State might have the best teams to do it, but the Wolverines face one of the nation's toughest schedules, and Michigan State is replacing much of its offensive firepower from last year's Legends division championship squad. So we're looking at 2013 at the earliest. Ohio State likely will be a popular pick, as Urban Meyer will be in his second year at the helm and players will be used to his offensive system. The Buckeyes certainly have shown they can get to the title game. But I'm going with Michigan here.

Why Michigan? Because I love the consistent vision Brady Hoke and his staff have for the program. They know exactly where they're going -- as evidenced by the recruiting success so early in the calendar -- and they're taking steps to get there despite inheriting a roster that doesn't exactly fit what they want to do. By 2013, Michigan should have more of Hoke's top-level recruits in position to make a difference. Sure, quarterback Denard Robinson no longer will be wearing a winged helmet, but his presence, in a sense, is delaying Michigan from running the type of offense that Hoke, coordinator Al Borges and the rest of the staff envision. The Wolverines will be more of a true pro-style offensive team, and I see no reason why the defense won't continue to make strides with this staff in place. Does that mean Michigan will compete for a national title in 2013? Not necessarily, but the Wolverines will be closer to that point in 2013 and beyond.

You certainly can make a strong case for Ohio State as well. And Michigan State has favorable schedules in both 2013 and 2014. I wouldn't be shocked if the Spartans, who are rolling by the way, make a run one of those years. Nebraska has national championship aspirations, and Wisconsin coach Bret Bielema loves the team he'll have in 2013. But Michigan isn't far away, even if the Wolverines don't win 11 games again this fall because of the brutal schedule. While Michigan hasn't played for a crystal football in the BCS era, the wait could end soon.

Take 2: Brian Bennett

It may sound strange since they're ineligible for postseason play this season, but I believe the Ohio State Buckeyes are still the league's best bet to win a national title in the near future. This is a program that has never lacked for talent and has a lot of good young players in the system right now, plus some future studs at key positions on both lines coming in. Meyer knows how to win national championships; he has two more than every other Big Ten coach right now. Ohio State has everything in place to compete at the highest level, as evidenced by its three BCS title game appearances since 2003. Nebraska (2002) is the only other program in the league to make the championship game in the BCS era.

Meyer still has work to do to get the Buckeyes back among the nation's elite. Specifically, he has to recruit world-class athletes at the skill positions to run his offense effectively. But those players are easier to find than dominating defensive linemen, several of which he has already scooped up, and they can be plugged into the starting lineup more quickly than the guys in the trenches. That's why I believe Ohio State can contend for a title as soon as 2013, and definitely by 2014. The biggest difference for me between Ohio State and Michigan is that the Buckeyes will have an established veteran quarterback for the next three years in Braxton Miller, while the Wolverines will have to break in a new starter for Robinson next season.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Michigan, Nebraska, Penn State, Michigan State or Wisconsin break through and play for -- and possibly win -- a national championship in the next five years. But if I'm picking one program to do it, I'll take Ohio State.

Mel Kiper Jr. has revealed his first Big Board for the 2013 draft, and it looks very promising for the Big Ten and for one school in particular.

Michigan State is the only team with three players listed among Kiper's top 25 for 2013.

Here's the full Big Ten contingent:

No. 11: Johnathan Hankins, DT, Ohio State (underclassman)
No. 12: Taylor Lewan, OT, Michigan (underclassman)
No. 14: Johnny Adams, CB, Michigan State
No. 15: Kawann Short, DT, Purdue
No. 17: William Gholston, DE, Michigan State (underclassman)
No. 21: Le'Veon Bell, RB, Michigan State (underclassman)
No. 24: Ricky Wagner, OT, Wisconsin

A very interesting list indeed. While Kiper sees the Big Ten's drought of top-10 picks continuing for another year, he has seven players from the league in the top 25. Four of the selections are underclassmen, including Hankins, who Ohio State players and coaches raved about this spring. At 6-foot-3 and 335 pounds, Hankins is the type of defensive tackle who boasts the size and quickness combo that makes NFL personnel evaluators drool.

Kiper and Todd McShay have very different views of Wisconsin's Wagner, who McShay pegs at No. 2 overall in his 2013 rundown. Michigan's Lewan is getting a lot of love from the draft analysts and will enter the season with some lofty expectations.

While Gholston and Adams appear on a lot of mock drafts for 2013, Bell's inclusion is interesting. Bell has impressed me ever since his freshman year at Michigan State, and his size-speed combo projects well to the next level. But to see him pegged in the first round -- ahead of Wisconsin running back Montee Ball and others -- is noteworthy.

Kiper also runs down his top 5 seniors by position for the 2013 draft. Some interesting notes: Wisconsin's Ball is the top senior running back, while Michigan quarterback Denard Robinson is the No. 5 senior wide receiver. Ohio State's John Simon and Illinois' Michael Buchanan are the top two senior defensive ends.

Time to jump back into our series looking at the most indispensable players on each Big Ten team. Once again, this is not necessarily a listing of the best players on each team, but ones whose absence would be toughest to absorb because of their particular value or a lack of depth behind them.

We're selecting two players from each Big Ten squad, usually one on offense and one on defense, but not always. Today we turn our attention to the Michigan Wolverines:

OT Taylor Lewan, Jr.

That's right -- gasp, we're not picking Denard Robinson here. While it's true that Robinson is a special talent, one who can win games that seem lost, we think Michigan's offense could still operate at a decently high level without him, whether that means plugging in Devin Gardner or going with backup Russell Bellomy. Yes, maybe both lack the je nais se quoi of Shoelace, but the Wolverines would still have Fitz Toussaint to carry the ball. Replacing left tackle Lewan, however, is another story entirely. Not only is he potentially one of the best offensive linemen in the country, but Michigan doesn't have much depth on the offensive line. Losing their blind-side protector would not only hurt at that spot but also cause some discomfort from shifting others into unfamiliar positions. That's why we judge him the most indispensable player on Al Borges' offense this season.

Jordan Kovacs, S, Sr.

Here's another instance where maybe some other players on his side of the ball are bigger stars -- guys like Craig Roh, for instance, or possibly Blake Countess and J.T. Floyd in the same secondary. But Kovacs is the quarterback of the defense and a guy who has a knack for making big plays last year. He's the team's second-leading returning tackler, with 75 stops last season. And maybe most importantly, he brings senior leadership to a group looking to replace some very valuable leaders off last year's team. Add it all up, and that makes Kovacs indispensable.

The Big Ten has had some odd choices for preseason offensive player of the year -- Terrelle Pryor in 2009 -- but this year's pick should be obvious. Wisconsin running back Montee Ball won the award after the 2011 season, and he's back in Madison for his senior year. Ball, one of two Heisman Trophy finalists returning for 2012, should be the preseason pick, end of story. We'll save you the suspense about our preseason player rankings: Ball will be No. 1.

But the preseason pick for OPOY often doesn't mean much. In fact, the preseason pick hasn't won the postseason award since Ohio State quarterback Troy Smith in 2006. Smith, by the way, is the last Big Ten player to win the Heisman Trophy.

2007
Preseason pick: Michigan RB Mike Hart
Winner: Illinois RB Rashard Mendenhall

2008
Preseason pick: Ohio State RB Chris Wells
Winner: Iowa RB Shonn Greene

2009
Preseason pick: Ohio State QB Terrelle Pryor
Winner: Wisconsin RB John Clay

2010
Preseason pick: Ohio State QB Terrelle Pryor
Winner: Michigan QB Denard Robinson

2011
Preseason pick: Michigan QB Denard Robinson
Winner: Wisconsin RB Montee Ball

Ball will be the favorite, but he's far from a shoo-in. There are several players who should challenge the Wisconsin star this season, and we've listed four of them in the accompanying poll. Vote and let us know who you think has the best chance to beat Ball for the offensive player of the year award.

Nebraska running back Rex Burkhead, Penn State running back Silas Redd and Michigan's Robinson are obvious choices. Burkhead and Redd carried their respective offenses as times last season, and both logged more than 240 carries (Burkhead had 283, the second most in the league behind Ball's 307). Burkhead plays for a unit that should see more balance and more weapons develop this season, but he remains the top ball-carrying option. Redd, meanwhile, might once again be Penn State's only viable offensive threat if the quarterback situation doesn't improve.

While Robinson's inclusion undoubtedly will spark some snide remarks, the guy has won the award before and remains one of the nation's most exciting offensive players. He's entering his third season as Michigan's starter, and if he can cut down on interceptions and become a more consistent passer, he'll be in the mix for both league and national awards.

The fourth choice was tough, and I considered several candidates, including Ohio State QB Braxton Miller, Iowa QB James Vandenberg and Michigan RB Fitzgerald Toussaint. Any of them could contend for offensive player of the year honors, as could several others. But I've always thought Michigan State's Le'Veon Bell could be a potential superstar in this league. As Michigan State transitions back to a run-heavy offense behind an improved offensive line, Bell will have a chance to shine.

What say you? Be sure and vote in the poll.

The Big Ten hasn't produced a top-10 pick in the NFL draft since Michigan offensive tackle Jake Long and Ohio State defensive lineman Vernon Gholston went at No. 1 and No. 6, respectively, in 2008 (sorry, Nebraska's Ndamukong Suh doesn't count, played his entire career in Big 12).

The league's highest picks in the past four drafts have been Penn State's Aaron Maybin (No. 11 to Buffalo in 2009), Michigan's Brandon Graham (No. 13 to Philadelphia in 2010), Wisconsin's J.J. Watt (No. 11 to Houston in 2011) and Iowa's Riley Reiff last week (No. 23 to Detroit). Although the Big Ten's overall first-round numbers haven't been bad, and the league had 41 total players selected last week, its highest total since 2006, the lack of premier prospects is a bit of a concern.

But the top-10 drought could end in 2013, according to ESPN's Todd McShay.

My apologies for posting this a bit late, but McShay came out with his first mock draft for 2013, which he describes as an "extremely initial" version that "won't mean much by the time the summer is over."

Here's where he sees Big Ten players being selected next April.

No. 2: Wisconsin OT Ricky Wagner
No. 14: Michigan State DE William Gholston (underclassman)
No. 15: Michigan State CB Johnny Adams
No. 21: Purdue DT Kawann Short
No. 24: Illinois DE Michael Buchanan
No. 28: Ohio State DT Johnathan Hankins (underclassman)

It's an interesting list, albeit an early one. Wagner certainly will be a player to watch as he enters his third year as a starter for the Badgers. He has been a good player, earning honorable mention All-Big Ten honors in 2011, but whether he can take several steps to become one of the nation's best offensive linemen remains to be seen.

Gholston seems like a strong candidate to leave Michigan State after this season, where he'll be a top contender for Big Ten defensive player of the year honors. Hankins drew rave reviews from his teammates and coaches this spring, and can be a disruptive force with his size.

All the defensive linemen on McShay's list have high-level talent, and there could be more from the Big Ten (John Simon, Akeem Spence).

One player who doesn't appear is Michigan quarterback Denard Robinson, who many project to play wide receiver in the NFL. It'll be very interesting to see where "Shoelace" ends up next April.

The depravity and decadence of Derby weekend await me. But first: your emails.

Bryan from Chicago writes: Regarding your handicapping of the B1G race, I'm betting on all teams. With the odds you gave each team, if you add them up, the player has about a 33% advantage over the house! If you ever decide to open a casino, let me know and I'll be the first one in line. But, if I'm taking 1 team, betting with emotions I'm taking my Huskers -- hoping they can outscore a lot of teams this year. Betting with brains, I'm taking Wisconsin -- no Ohio State to worry about, gives them the easiest road to the title game and who knows once you get there, and 8-1 is a good payout.

Brian Bennett: In defense of my admittedly poor math skills, Indiana is much higher than the listed 99-to-1, but the toteboard can only handle double-digit numbers. And Ohio State's scratch threw off the odds. But I agree with you about Nebraska and Wisconsin being pretty good value plays. I'd add Penn State to that mix as well.

---

Brian from Newark, DE, writes: Am I the only person not completely overjoyed with this whole playoff deal? To me, it's a real stretch to call a two game tournament a playoff. There's four teams involved. Granted, that's double what the current system allows. But it's still not exactly opening the championship up like the basketball tournament does. All this really amounts to is one extra game for two teams. So can we stop calling it a playoff and start referring to it as what it really is: The one more game after the bowls so we can all make a little more money and appease the fans bowl?

Brian Bennett: Brian (great name, by the way, and correct spelling), I'm perfectly fine with the four-team format. It keeps the value of the regular season, keeps the season from dragging far into January and still opens the championship up to more teams. How many years have there been more than four legitimate national title contenders at the end of the year, anyway? I've never been in favor of a 16-team format because that's too many teams and not enough quality. An eight-teamer would be a lot of fun, and I think we will eventually see an expansion of any playoff system. But for now, while we can quibble with the details, let's rejoice that the sport is actually giving us something we want.

---

Zach from Lincoln writes: Why are we even listening to the "on campus semi-finals won't work" [sentiment]?? I understand they are worried about teams with small stadiums not being able to host large crowds, but how many times since the BCS model was created has 1 of those teams been #1 or #2? Zero is the correct answer. Also, even if one of these teams did eventually finish #1 or #2 doesn't the fact that college stadiums are in general larger than NFL stadiums make up for the fact that there could be a smaller venue every once in a blue moon?

Brian Bennett: Couldn't agree more with you, Zach. The capacity of the Superdome is just over 72,000, while Sun Life Stadium -- home of the Orange Bowl -- seats a little more than 75,000. There would be a whole lot more seats (and money to be made) with games at the Big House, Horseshoe, Bryant-Denny, etc. MGoBlog does a good job of breaking down the difference in capacity and how campus sites would have meant more, not less, seats during the BCS era in this post.

---

Josh S. ? @josh_sim writes: Re: Big 6. Won't voters change their voting patterns and work around the rules for best matchups?

Brian Bennett: That's a concern with any system, including the one we have now. Which is why we need to take this out of the hands of voters, especially one with obvious biases like the coaches themselves.

---

Roger from Denver, Colo., writes: Really, 25 [for Ohio State in your rankings]? Come on, Blue had the easiest schedule in the conference, barely beat an extremely down The Ohio State team and you have Blue ranked top 10 not to mention in ACC bowl game that they really lost but got a bogus call in their favor on a touchdown.

Brian Bennett: The mountain air might be getting to you, Roger. Fact is, Michigan went 11-2 last year while Ohio State was 6-7. Michigan brought back its coaching staff and arguably the most productive backfield in the league (Denard Robinson and Fitz Toussaint), while the Buckeyes will be going through a coaching transition and lack offensive playmakers. I like Ohio State to be much improved this season, and there's no question the team has talent. But given last year's results, I think a ranking at the bottom of the Top 25 is fair for this point in the year.

---

Dying for The Gophers To Be Relevant Again from Minneapolis writes: I find it interesting how people get excited about the new A.D. at Minnesota. Everyone is giddy over his fund raising abilities. Sure, raising funds is important for all programs, but winning is the key. Some would say that fund raising will help winning, I believe that winning will hep fund raising. Your thoughts?

Brian Bennett: An athletic director absolutely has to be able to do two things right: hire good coaches, and keep the money fountain flowing. Since Norwood Teague didn't hire Jerry Kill, the best thing he can do is make sure donations are coming in so the Gophers can keep up with facilities, salaries, etc. Winning solves a lot of ills, but ultimately that will be up to Kill and his staff to it make happen.

---

David from Houston writes: I just saw your 4/26 mailbag and the Wisconsin coach and AD answers concerning their non-conference scheduling. As a Badger, I'm calling "BS" on Bret Bielema. His answer of "people don't want to play here" may be right in some rare instances, but that is most definitely not what is going on with Badger scheduling. The real issues are this: 1) The Badgers will only play one road game per year (at least Barry was honest about that one). 2) Wisconsin is not willing to schedule more than one BCS opponent per season. They went through a nice stretch for 2001-2003 of playing two such schools, but that turned out to be an aberration. 3) They won't even do that if they think a future year's Big Ten Schedule is "too tough." See the 8-year postponement of the Virginia Tech games. ... The Pac-12 deal is nice, but this team is not going to then start scheduling 2 BCS foes each season. This will just take their one good game out of their hands, leaving them to deal with the 3 buy games each year.

Brian Bennett: David, I can understand your frustration as a fan in not getting to see great nonconference games at Camp Randall. At the same time, Wisconsin is not alone in only scheduling one BCS AQ school per year in its nonconference slate. In the Big Ten alone, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State and Purdue all only have one such opponent on their schedule this season. Indiana has none.

While I'd love to see the Badgers schedule more aggressively, it just doesn't pay many dividends for schools to do so. The Badgers went to the Rose Bowl the past two years and were a couple plays away from being in the national title mix both times. I hope the new playoff format rewards strength of schedule to encourage all teams to play better nonconference opponents.

---

Max from Madras, India, writes: Brian, what do you think is more detrimental to the season? QB competition and playing 4 guys in your spring game, a la PSU? Or pretty much knowing who your starter is going to be, and not having him for your spring game, a la MSU? Or at this stage does it really matter?

Brian Bennett: It's early enough to not really matter. Remember Wisconsin won the Big Ten last year, and its starting quarterback didn't arrive in Madison until the summer. But in the scenario you mention, I'd much rather be Michigan State. The Spartans know Andrew Maxwell will be their starter, and his injury wasn't serious. He's been in the program for four years, so playing in a spring game means very little. Penn State still doesn't seem to be settled at the position. Maxwell can confidently lead the offense all summer. I'm not sure any of Penn State's quarterbacks can do the same.

---

Paul from Orlando, Fla., writes: Last season, Nebraska had All Big Ten-caliber players at each level of the defense in Crick, David and Dennard. Although these players made major contributions in 2011, the defense ranked a mere 36th nationally in total defense; well outside the norm for a Pelini coached defense. It appeared, especially early in the season, that offensive coordinators could simply pick on the young guy lined up opposite Crick, David or Dennard and these players didn?t really impact their game plans. This spring Pelini has been vocal about how much he likes his secondary and expects the defensive line and linebackers to be a solid veteran group. Do you think having a veteran defense without any weak links and a potentially dominate group at one level of the defense can lead to a better 2012 defense despite the loss of such great players?

Brian Bennett: It's an interesting question, and one I've been thinking about a lot this season. In fairness to the 2012 Huskers, Crick, David and Dennard were never really all healthy at the same time. But a big problem, as you mentioned, was the obvious holes on that defense. Bo Pelini seemed optimistic this spring about the defensive play, but aren't all coaches optimistic in the spring? Still, I think this defense has a chance to be very solid. I just want to see a couple of players take the next step into becoming major difference-makers, whether that's a guy like Will Compton or Cameron Meredith or Daimion Stafford. You need special players to be a truly special defense.

---

Mr. Pewter from Farmland, Iowa, writes: I hate the new Cy-Hawk trophy. I am still going to rally around my family with a basket full of corn. Come with it now!

Brian Bennett: You keep raging against that machine.