ESPN College Football

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.

With college football still buzzing from last week's announcement of a Big 12/SEC champions bowl game, there is more talk about potential realignment and super conferences. Today's Take Two topic is this: What moves should the Big Ten make if the conference landscapes again start to shift?

Take 1: Brian Bennett

I don't think the Big Ten is very interested in expanding past its current 12 members, but Jim Delany and the league have to be ready to do something if the winds change. That could happen if a couple of ACC teams bolt for the Big 12 or somewhere else, creating some free-agent chaos. The problem for the Big Ten is that there are not a whole lot of really attractive schools who fit geographically, academically and culturally. Maryland and Rutgers would probably be the best two possible additions, but neither get your blood pumping. Maryland is a bit of a mess right now with its major sports, while Rutgers has never really accomplished anything in football. Neither makes the league stronger. Notre Dame remains the Holy Grail but looks far more interested in joining an expanded Big 12 if it ever is forced to give up its independence. Schools like Florida State and Clemson just don't mesh with the Big Ten. If the league needed to add, I think Virginia Tech might be a good target. While the Hokies may not be an ideal fit, they are highly competitive in football and open up some new areas of exposure for the conference. That would make bringing in Maryland and/or Rutgers more palatable. But let's hope it doesn't come to that, because the Big Ten is in really good shape right now with 12 teams.

Take 2: Adam Rittenberg

I agree that 12 is a good number for the Big Ten, and any further expansion, other than Notre Dame, would likely be a reluctant move for the league. But the Big Ten can't afford to sit on its hands while the realignment landscape remains so active. Let's make this clear: I hate the idea of 16-team superconferences. It's expanding for the sake of expanding. Leagues would completely lack intimacy and commonality, teams would play even less often and there would be filler teams everywhere. That said, the Big Ten likely can't afford to stay at 12 if both the SEC and the Big 12 go to 16 teams. Beyond Notre Dame, the Big Ten likely would be adding for the sake of adding. But unfortunately, that's the reality. In this case, Maryland isn't the worst option, although Maryland's athletic department is a mess right now. I think it would be important to stretch the boundaries -- every other league is doing so -- and look to the southeast. Georgia Tech is a potentially intriguing option, located in a major market (Atlanta) in SEC territory. The AAU factor remains extremely important to Big Ten presidents, despite Nebraska's loss of membership. AAU schools that make sense include Georgia Tech, Maryland, North Carolina and Virginia. While it's nice to think about the Big Ten having a larger presence in the New York market, there's a risk there because Rutgers doesn't bring you much. The more prudent move would be to look to the southeast.

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.

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.

In our most recent Take Two, we debated which position group was the strongest throughout the league. So on the flip side, today's Take Two topic is this: What position group in the league looks most in need of improvement after spring practice?

Take 1: Brian Bennett

The Big Ten had nine receivers drafted into the NFL over the weekend, and overall the league lost its top seven pass-catchers from the 2011 season. So there's no wonder that position looked a little weak across several campuses this spring. Only two players who caught at least 50 passes last year -- Wisconsin's Jared Abbrederis and Iowa's Keenan Davis -- return in 2012. Michigan State lost its top two wideouts in B.J. Cunningham and Keshawn Martin and is relying on wildly inexperienced players to step up there. Ohio State didn't have a player catch more than 14 passes last year, and new coach Urban Meyer criticized the receivers all spring, though Michael Thomas did have a strong spring game. Wisconsin missed Abbrederis (foot injury) this spring and is trying to find someone else to play with consistency at that spot. A.J. Jenkins basically was the passing game for Illinois last year, and now the Illini need more options in their new spread system after losing the first-rounder. Michigan needs to replace Junior Hemingway and is hoping Roy Roundtree bounces back after a subpar junior year stats-wise.

I could go on and on. Very few schools appear settled at receiver right now, and I'd be hard pressed to select a pair of preseason first-team all-conference performers there at this point. While receiver is one position where young players can often have a quick impact, it's also true that the league is lacking proven stars at that spot heading into the season.

Take 2: Adam Rittenberg

The league undoubtedly loses a lot at receiver, but I'm going with the guys throwing the passes, not catching them. Great quarterbacks can make adequate receivers good and good receivers great. It rarely works the other way around. The Big Ten doesn't lose as many standout quarterbacks as it does receivers, but the league says goodbye to three of its best in Wisconsin's Russell Wilson, Michigan State's Kirk Cousins and Northwestern's Dan Persa. Wilson energized Wisconsin's offense with his strong arm and athleticism, and while his accomplishments were overshadowed by those of teammate Montee Ball, he'll be sorely missed. While Danny O'Brien is a nice addition, he's not Russell Wilson. Cousins and Persa also leave significant voids in East Lansing and Evanston, respectively. While Kain Colter is a great athlete and Andrew Maxwell has been groomed for the spotlight, both men have a lot to prove.

The overall quality of quarterback play in the league needs a boost in 2012. Remember that the Big Ten failed to have a team ranked in the top 35 nationally in pass offense in 2011. Nebraska's Taylor Martinez, Illinois' Nathan Scheelhaase and Minnesota's MarQueis Gray must become a lot more consistent. Ohio State's Braxton Miller and Indiana's Tre Roberson must grow up. Michigan's Denard Robinson needs to cut down on his interceptions and add reliability to his repertoire. Iowa's James Vandenberg has to get a lot better on the road. Purdue and Penn State need a quarterback to separate himself from the pack. There are many more familiar names at quarterback, but if they don't make strides, the Big Ten once again will be grounded on offense.

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.

Today's Take Two topic is this: Last season, defensive tackle was clearly the strongest overall position group in the Big Ten. What position will be the best throughout the league in 2012?

Take 1: Brian Bennett

I'm tempted to go with linebacker, where some high-profile players and future stars are scattered throughout the conference. But my pick is running back.

There's some major star power at the position this year in the Big Ten, starting off with last year's Heisman Trophy finalist and record breaker, Wisconsin's Montee Ball. While Ball is the obvious choice for preseason offensive player of the year, he could get pushed by some other backs, including Nebraska's tough-as-nails Rex Burkhead, who ran for 1,357 yards and 15 touchdowns last season. Even with last year's No. 2 league rusher (Iowa's Marcus Coker) gone, the position is still stacked with guys like Penn State's Silas Redd, who we both think is primed for a huge season; Michigan's Fitz Toussaint, who ran for more than 1,000 yards despite not taking over lead rushing duties until the eighth game of the season; and Michigan State's Le'Veon Bell, who came on strong late last season and looks great this spring.

Purdue has some very capable runners in Akeem Shavers, Akeem Hunt and Doug Gentry, and Ralph Bolden is coming back from an ACL injury. Ohio State has a potentially strong group with Carlos Hyde, Jordan Hall, Rod Smith and freshman Bri'onte Dunn. Stephen Houston showed some good things for Indiana last year, and transfer Isaiah Roundtree had a big spring game. Minnesota is high on junior college import James Gillum. And don't forget James White at Wisconsin, who could start for most teams in the country.

Iowa, Illinois and Northwestern have some question marks at tailback. But overall, running back is where the Big Ten's bread will be buttered this season.

Take 2: Adam Rittenberg

A good choice, Bennett, as the Big Ten returns six of its top seven running backs and would have brought back all seven if not for Marcus Coker's transfer. But my experience covering this league has taught me to never overlook the defensive line. The D-line once again will be the Big Ten's strongest group in 2012.

Sure, the league loses standouts like Devon Still, Whitney Mercilus and Jerel Worthy. But you could substitute the names Aaron Maybin and Mitch King after the 2008 season, or Brandon Graham and Jared Odrick after 2009, or J.J. Watt and Corey Liuget after 2010. The Big Ten always finds ways to reload up front, and this year will be no different. There might not be as many familiar names as there are at running back, but that soon will change.

Let's start off with the top returning linemen, Ohio State's John Simon and Purdue's Kawann Short, both of whom earned first-team All-Big Ten honors in 2011. Both men will contend for All-America honors, and could be potential first-round picks in the 2013 class. Then you have a guy we're both excited about: Michigan State defensive end William Gholston. He's a physical freak, as you recently detailed, and has the potential to dominate games and become one of the nation's truly elite defenders in 2012. I'd also include Penn State defensive tackle Jordan Hill in this group of known commodities with the potential for very big things this season. Penn State's overall depth along the defensive line should be better this year.

Now for some lesser-known names who could have breakout seasons. Let's start at Illinois with defensive end Michael Buchanan and defensive tackle Akeem Spence. Buchanan is poised for a big year, as he showed in Illinois' spring game, while Spence is a next-level player who could follow Liuget's path this season. Speaking of defensive tackles, watch out for Ohio State's Johnathan Hankins, a very big man who can do very big things this season. The Buckeyes' heralded incoming freshmen should only bolster their line.

Michigan loses two standout linemen (Mike Martin and Ryan Van Bergen), but it's hard to imagine the Wolverines falling back much at all up front. Nebraska boasts good depth at the defensive end spot and could see a big year from a guy like Cameron Meredith.

While there are some question marks around the league, including an unproven line at Iowa, teams like Northwestern and Minnesota should be improved up front.

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.

Today's Take Two topic is this: What will be the impact on the Big Ten race from quarterback Danny O'Brien's transfer to Wisconsin?

Take 1: Brian Bennett

In my mind, O'Brien's arrival makes Wisconsin the Leaders Division favorite by a slightly more convincing margin. I already was leaning toward the Badgers repeating as division champs, mostly because Ohio State is ineligible to go to the Big Ten title game, because Penn State and Illinois are going through coaching transitions, because Purdue hasn't shown enough consistency yet and because Indiana is, well, Indiana.

The biggest concern about Bret Bielema's team, of course, was the quarterback spot, which lacked any real experience and was decimated by injuries. O'Brien immediately stabilizes the position and gives the Badgers a veteran presence. But while it's tempting to compare O'Brien's arrival to that of Russell Wilson -- after all, they are both ACC graduate transfers -- we shouldn't. Wilson was already a highly successful, well-decorated quarterback before he ever got to Madison; O'Brien has a career completion percentage of under 57 percent, and he threw 10 interceptions with only seven touchdowns last year. Yeah, you can blame the coaching and system change at Maryland for O'Brien's decline as a sophomore, but isn't he going to go through the same thing at Wisconsin?

Still, O'Brien doesn't have to be Davey O'Brien to help the Badgers win, as they just need someone to make a few plays downfield and manage the game while Montee Ball and the offensive line rule the day. Penn State was also heavily in the mix for O'Brien, but I feel like Matthew McGloin or one of the other quarterbacks can produce similar results in Bill O'Brien's offense, which will likely feature a lot of manageable throws to tight ends and receivers. So the Nittany Lions won't be much worse off. Yet there's no question that the defending Leaders champions just got a little bit better.

Take 2: Adam Rittenberg

Wisconsin might have been the default Leaders division favorite even if O'Brien didn't come to Madison, but his arrival solidifies the Badgers as the team to beat in a year where Ohio State can't reach Indianapolis. The quarterback situation would have been dire in 2011 had Russell Wilson not come aboard, and it might have been just as tenuous this season as only two healthy signal-callers (Joe Brennan and Joel Stave) are practicing right now in spring ball. Wisconsin faces some important road tests in 2012, namely trips to Nebraska, Penn State and Purdue. Having a quarterback with some experience on board could really help.

I agree that it's unfair and likely unrealistic to expect O'Brien to be just like Wilson. They're different players with different skill sets at different stages in their careers. Wilson had a stronger résumé, but unlike O'Brien, he didn't go through a coaching change at his previous stop. Although O'Brien could be closer to the quarterback we saw in 2010, I don't expect him to be the game-changer Wilson was in 2011. I do expect him to be just as sharp in picking up Wisconsin's offense. It would be a surprise if he didn't claim the starting job, just as it would have been a shock had Wilson not led the offense last fall.

Wisconsin can win the Leaders division in 2012 without a first-team All-Big Ten, NCAA record-setting quarterback. It likely could not win the division with a major liability under center. The Badgers have other areas to address, namely identifying a No. 2 and No. 3 wide receiver, an elite pass-rusher and more speed on the defensive side. But their biggest issue was quarterback depth, which is now addressed. O'Brien really could have helped Penn State as well, as the Lions might return the best defense in the division but need much more from their offensive field general. While you might be right about McGloin, I really think O'Brien would have given Penn State a little bit more in Bill O'Brien's offense. Although Penn State should by no means be counted out in the division, Wisconsin will enter the fall as the clear favorite.

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.

Today's Take Two topic is this: Which Big Ten team will lead the league in scoring in 2012?

Take 1: Adam Rittenberg

This is a fascinating question after some of the changes -- both coaching and personnel -- throughout the Big Ten entering 2012. Wisconsin has led the Big Ten in scoring in each of the past three seasons, finishing in the top six nationally in both 2011 and 2010. But the Badgers lose star quarterback Russell Wilson and have major questions at the position as spring ball kicks off. Although Wisconsin returns Heisman Trophy contender Montee Ball at running back and what should be another strong offensive line, I can't see the Badgers coming close to their record-setting offensive production from the past two seasons. I'm going with the Michigan Wolverines here. The biggest reason is obvious: Denard Robinson. He's simply electric and will be in his second season in the offense and his third as a starter in the Big Ten.

Although Michigan had its growing pains last season in transitioning to a new offense, the Wolverines still ranked 26th nationally in scoring (33.3 ppg) and scored 40 points or more in five of eight Big Ten contests. Robinson made more mistakes than he did the previous season but still accounted for 36 touchdowns (20 pass, 16 rush). Michigan also returns running back Fitz Toussaint, who blossomed during Big Ten play and should only get better with experience. Although there are question marks at receiver and at center after the loss of Rimington Trophy winner David Molk, Michigan has a chance to be a more fluid and efficient offense in Year 2 under coordinator Al Borges. While most Big Ten teams are dealing with a quarterback change or a coordinator change -- or both -- Michigan's continuity should pay off on the scoreboard this fall.

Take 2: Brian Bennett

Michigan is an interesting choice and one I strongly considered. The Wolverines should score a lot of points, though that opener against Alabama might bring down their season average. I'm tempted to go the safe route with Wisconsin, because we know Bret Bielema won't take his foot off the gas pedal when the Badgers are clicking. But I'm going a different direction and choosing Nebraska.

The Cornhuskers finished fourth in the Big Ten in scoring last year, but I see a major jump in 2012. The reason is similar to what you said about Michigan: familiarity. This will be the second year in offensive coordinator Tim Beck's system, so the players should be far more comfortable. Early reviews of quarterback Taylor Martinez's work on his fundamentals have been resoundingly positive. Nebraska left a lot of big plays on the table last year in the passing game, but a stronger, more experienced Martinez and an improved receiver corps led by Kenny Bell should help that area get better. And the Huskers still have Rex Burkhead and some emerging young playmakers like Ameer Abdullah.

Nebraska had to get used to the more physical style of defense in the Big Ten last year. This season, I see Big Red putting up some big scoring numbers.

The Big Ten had three head-coaching changes in the offseason, with new leading men stepping in at Ohio State, Illinois and Penn State. We already shared our thoughts on the new staffs at Illinois and Ohio State. We finish off the series by turning to Penn State, which wrapped up its staff recently with the addition of Charlie Fisher as quarterbacks coach.

Here's how the new Penn State staff looks:

Bill O'Brien -- head coach
Stan Hixon -- assistant head coach/wide receivers
Ted Roof -- defensive coordinator
John Butler -- secondary
Charlie Fisher -- quarterbacks
Larry Johnson -- defensive line
Charles London -- running backs
Mac McWhorter -- offensive line
John Strollo -- tight ends
Ron Vanderlinden -- linebackers

So today's Take Two topic is: How did O'Brien fare in putting together his first staff at Penn State?

Take 1: Brian Bennett

We can't evaluate how O'Brien did in a vacuum. He is the first new head coach at Penn State in nearly half a century, taking over a place where assistants hardly ever left under Joe Paterno. O'Brien also got a bit of a late start in assembling his assistants, as he was not hired until early January, and the uncertainty and controversy swirling in State College may not have made this opportunity attractive to all job candidates.

With all that in mind, I think O'Brien did a reasonably good job in putting this staff together. I thought it was a great move to retain Johnson and Vanderlinden, two excellent coaches who didn't deserve to get scapegoated for the Jerry Sandusky mess. They will be able to provide some institutional knowledge about a place that isn't familiar with much change. It would have been nice if O'Brien could have kept Tom Bradley as well, but he brought in a seasoned veteran in Ted Roof, who knows the Big Ten from his time at Minnesota. Roof was pushed out at Auburn and has moved around an awful lot in his career, but he does have a national championship ring and a wealth of experience. Same goes for McWhorter, another greybeard who helped win a BCS title at Texas. I like the mixture of experience (Hixon, Trollo and Fisher have seen it all in their long careers) and up-and-comers like London and Butler, the latter of whom O'Brien was able to lure away from a successful program at South Carolina.

Ultimately, whether this works or not will all depend on O'Brien, who was a surprising choice to replace Joe Paterno and who has never been a head coach before. He has an enormous legacy to follow, as well as some off-the-field challenges. He has a staff full of coaches he knows and has worked with in the past to help guide him through that journey.

Take 2: Adam Rittenberg

It's interesting to see what would have happened with the staff makeup had Penn State hired O'Brien a few weeks earlier. Perhaps we would have seen the same names, perhaps not. But O'Brien had to rush to get coaches in place to help finish off 2012 recruiting while he wrapped up the season with the Patriots. I love his decision to retain both Johnson and Vanderlinden. Johnson has been Penn State's lead recruiter and one of the best in the Big Ten, and both he and Vanerlinden provide continuity for a defense that has been consistently good to great in recent years.

The two most critical hires in my mind are Roof and Fisher. Roof's appointment generated some grumbling around Nittany Nation, as fans were skeptical about a coach who struggled his final season at Auburn before parting ways with Gene Chizik. Although Roof had success in the Big Ten at Minnesota in 2008, he'll be under the microscope. The good thing is he understands his job is to keep Penn State's defensive tradition alive, rather than overhauling what has been a good unit. I like the Fisher hire as he brings a lot of experience to a group that needs a significant upgrade. He'll work with O'Brien more than any other assistant, and they'll collaborate with tutoring the quarterbacks and shaping the offensive vision.

Overall, I think O'Brien did a nice job. My only two concerns here are whether he went with too many familiar names from his previous coaching stops and whether there's enough youth on the staff, which can be beneficial in recruiting. Penn State has no shortage of grizzled vets, but there's not much youth other than London and Butler.

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.

Today's Take Two topic is this: What's the future of the Rose Bowl as college football moves toward some type of playoff system?

Take 1: Adam Rittenberg

This is a huge question for the Big Ten, which is open to a playoff in college football and recently put forth a four-team proposal, while at the same time pledging its loyalty to the Rose Bowl. The Big Ten values the Rose Bowl relationship and doesn't want the game to be damaged by some type of playoff system. At the same time, the league is no longer taking an obstructionist position against a system that most college football fans want. If you want the Rose Bowl's take on the playoff push, check it out here. One big question is whether a playoff model would incorporate the major bowls in any way. I think the Rose Bowl, more than any other bowl, has the potential to survive and thrive independent of a playoff. It hasn't had the drop in interest (attendance, TV ratings, etc.) that other major bowls have had. The Rose Bowl remains part of the New Year's Day routine. It's an event.

A playoff would decrease the likelihood of the Big Ten champ and the Pac-12 champ meeting in Pasadena, but it wouldn't eliminate it. The chances of having one champion in the game remain fairly high, as recent history shows. In fact, we might see more Big Ten-Pac-12 matchups in Pasadena with a four-team playoff and a loosening of bowl selection procedures. You wouldn't see TCU or Texas at the Rose Bowl if the Rose could simply select the No. 2 Big Ten or Pac-12 team. An eight-team playoff has a greater chance to hurt the Rose Bowl, if the Rose isn't part of the playoff structure. Although the Rose can survive a few years of having the No. 2 Big Ten team face the No. 2 Pac-12 team, it can't have two 8-4 squads going at it every Jan. 1. So it really depends on the model.

Take 2: Brian Bennett

The model does make a difference, but I have concerns on just how relevant the Rose Bowl will remain in any playoff system. Don't get me wrong -- the experience, the setting and the tradition will always make New Year's Day in Pasadena special, and the Big Ten is correct in making this relationship sacrosanct.

But a four-team playoff in some way or shape sure seems to be coming in the very near future. I'm all for it and think it is the right way to preserve the importance of the regular season while also determining a truer national champion. But there's no denying this will have an effect on the Rose Bowl. If the bowls are made part of the semifinal and final rounds -- and I suspect this could happen given the strength of the bowl lobby -- then the Rose Bowl will either have to settle for non-traditional matchups or sit on the sideline. If home sites are used for the semifinals -- a great idea, by the way -- then the Rose will either end up taking Pac-12 and Big Ten champions who are not in the final four or second-place teams.

And let's face it: that four-team playoff will capture everybody's attention and will overshadow everything else. While reaching the Rose Bowl would remain an unforgettable experience for the teams involved, the rest of America would simply look at it as no better than the fifth-place game. People will still watch, because football is football and there's no better thing to do on New Year's Day. But in the long term, I think the magic of the Rose Bowl would erode with a playoff system. That's still a trade-off I'm willing to make.

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.

Today's Take Two topic is this: What has been the best assistant coaching hire in the Big Ten so far this offseason?

Take 1: Adam Rittenberg

It's not an outside hire but rather an assistant retained from the previous staff. Penn State's Bill O'Brien made an excellent decision immediately after getting the job in keeping defensive line coach Larry Johnson on staff. Johnson has been Penn State's lead recruiter for years and one of the best in the Big Ten. As Penn State goes through a transition and enters an uncertain future, having Johnson on staff to spearhead recruiting should really help. Johnson recruits the talent-rich Washington D.C./Maryland/Virginia area well and is a known name with Pennsylvania high school coaches. He also has a strong record as a position coach developing defensive linemen like Tamba Hali, Aaron Maybin, Jared Odrick and, most recently, Devon Still. Johnson can help maintain some continuity on Penn State's defense, which isn't the unit that needs a serious upgrade on this team. Every assistant is evaluated as both a recruiter and as a talent-developer. Johnson excels at both, and he also can help O'Brien and Penn State through a historic transition.

Take 2: Brian Bennett

That's a good choice, Adam, and certainly an excellent decision by Bill O'Brien. I'm going to go with a guy who wasn't part of a program before but made a stellar addition: Everett Withers at Ohio State. Urban Meyer promised to bring in a top-notch staff, and Withers is the headliner of that group. He was the interim head coach at North Carolina last season and before that led some extremely talented and productive defenses for the Tar Heels. Withers has been a defensive coordinator in the Big Ten before (at Minnesota) and is regarded as one of the top teachers of defensive back play in the country. He's also a good recruiter whose ties to North Carolina played a big role in the Buckeyes landing linebacker Jamal Marcus in this class. When paired with holdover Luke Fickell -- another great call by Meyer -- Withers should help Ohio State reclaim its Silver Bullets legacy as one of the top defenses in the nation.

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.

Today's Take Two topic revolves around the Big Ten's recently disclosed college football playoff proposal. The league's plan would take the top four teams from the BCS pool and stage semifinals at campus sites, with the championship game at a neutral site that might not involve the bowls. So the question is: Does this plan help the Big Ten in its quest to win a national title?

Take 1: Brian Bennett

First of all, I'm still recovering from the shock of learning that the Big Ten is open to a playoff. Those are words I wasn't sure I would hear in my (or Jim Delany's) lifetime. Credit the league for being more flexible than it is often credited for or portrayed as, and understand that the Big Ten wants to hop in the front car of this unstoppable playoff train rather than be run over by it. Playing semifinal games at home sites instead of using the bowls makes so much sense that I'm actually surprised that top college football officials would consider it. Not only does that keep the conferences from giving away such valuable property to shady bowl executives and losing money on hostage-like ticket guarantees, but it also keeps the importance of the regular season. Finishing No. 1 or No. 2 instead of No. 3 or No. 4 becomes far more important when you can gain home field advantage, and this plan also benefits fans and their travel budgets.

But would it help the Big Ten win a national title? I'm not so sure. Yes, getting a home game and forcing warm-weather teams to come up north would provide an advantage. Astute researchers have pointed out that, using the BCS formula as our history guide, Big Ten teams would only have hosted a semifinal game three times since 1998. All three of those times involved an Ohio State team which wound up playing in the BCS title game anyway. So while in theory a home-field and weather advantage could help the Big Ten, the truth is the league needs to get a lot better first just to bring that in play. And I believe that if a team is good enough to win a national title, it can do so anywhere, just like when Alabama beat LSU in Louisiana last month.

Take 2: Adam Rittenberg

Some excellent points, BB. I like the fact the Big Ten is no longer being the obstructionist conference in relation to a playoff. Instead, the league is being proactive about what many of us see as an inevitability in college football. The Big Ten is acknowledging the momentum toward a playoff and has put together one option. There will be many others from the other leagues, but this one keeps the Big Ten's main interests in mind. While I agree that great teams can win anywhere, Big Ten teams play at least one-third of their season in cold weather. Those teams practice in the cold and play in the cold, and they make adjustments to the weather. Come bowl time, it's back to sunshine and virtual road-game environments.

Will this help the Big Ten win a national championship? Not as much as oversigning would (rimshot). But it can't hurt. It provides at least the chance for the league to have nationally meaningful games on its campuses in the cold. I'd love to see SEC or Pac-12 teams play at Ohio State or at Michigan in late December. The weather is an advantage the Big Ten hasn't been able to exploit because of where the BCS bowls are located. Having these games in Big Ten stadiums would be great for the league and for its teams. History shows that these games won't happen every year and might not happen very often at all -- often preserving the traditional Rose Bowl matchup. But the mere possibility of having them should excite Big Ten fans if the plan is adopted nationally.

The Big Ten had three head-coaching changes in recent weeks, and new leading men have stepped in at Ohio State, Illinois and Penn State. We will be sharing our thoughts on the three new coaching staffs as they become complete. We already looked at Illinois' new staff, and Ohio State is next up on the rundown.

Here's the new Ohio State staff:

Urban Meyer -- head coach
Everett Withers -- assistant head coach/co-defensive coordinator/safeties
Luke Fickell -- defensive coordinator/linebackers
Tom Herman -- offensive coordinator/quarterbacks
Ed Warinner -- co-offensive coordinator/offensive line
Stan Drayton -- running backs
Tim Hinton -- tight ends
Zach Smith -- wide receivers
Mike Vrabel -- defensive line
Bill Sheridan -- defensive backs

So Today's Take Two topic is: How did Meyer fare in putting together his staff at Ohio State?

Take 1: Adam Rittenberg

Meyer set the bar high at his introductory news conference in November, saying he planned to "try to assemble the best coaching staff in college football." While I expected a little more star power in Meyer's hires, I like the cross-section of coaches joining Meyer in Columbus. He ended up retaining three assistants -- Fickell, Vrabel and Drayton -- and would have kept a fourth had Taver Johnson not left for a co-defensive coordinator spot at Arkansas. That number surprises me a bit, although keeping Fickell is huge, particularly from a recruiting standpoint. Withers is a veteran defensive coach who can take over the coordinator duties if and when Fickell leaves for a head-coaching position. Warinner seems like an excellent addition, and Meyer is close with Hinton, who also comes over from Notre Dame. The most intriguing hire by far is Herman, considered a rising star in the profession. Will he and Meyer revitalize the Ohio State offense? The unit certainly needs a shake-up, and it'll be interesting to see how Herman fares in a big-time, high-pressure job. This isn't Iowa State. The other big hire not on this list is strength and conditioning coach Mickey Marotti, who Meyer brought from Florida. Overall, this might not be a star-studded staff, but it's a very solid one.

Take 2: Brian Bennett

Several members of Meyer's staff at Florida went on to become head coaches. His first Ohio State staff included two guys who have already been head coaches, if only for one season each, in Fickell and Withers. They bring some real star power to the defensive side, and the only concern there is how two men who called all the shots themselves last year will react to working as co-coordinators. They'll have to check their egos at the door, but I think their respect for Meyer will allow them to do that. Vrabel moving to defensive line is interesting, and he'll have a wealth of talent to work with in returning guys like John Simon and Jonathan Hankins and the blue-chip recruits that are coming in, led by Noah Spence. Sheridan also brings a wealth of experience, including time as an NFL defensive coordinator. I agree with Adam that Herman is the wild card of the bunch. Meyer identified an up-and-comer rather than shooting for an established name, and Herman will be working with a higher caliber of athlete while also trying to blend his philosophy with the offensive-minded head coach. Best staff in America? Probably not, though that's a highly subjective description anyway. The important thing is that Meyer found a solid blend of veterans and young guns, program insiders and those with outside perspectives. This staff should help the Buckeyes emerge as a national powerhouse again in the very near future.

The Big Ten had three head-coaching changes in recent weeks, and new leading men have stepped in at Ohio State, Illinois and Penn State. We will be sharing our thoughts on the three new coaching staffs as they become complete. First up is Illinois, as head coach Tim Beckman finalized his staff earlier this week with the hiring of Tim Banks as defensive coordinator.

Here's the new Illinois staff:

Tim Beckman -- head coach
Tim Banks -- defensive coordinator/safeties
Billy Gonzales -- co-offensive coordinator/receivers
Chris Beatty -- co-offensive coordinator/quarterbacks
Luke Butkus -- offensive line
Steve Clinkscale -- cornerbacks
Keith Gilmore -- defensive line
Alex Golesh -- tight ends/specialists/recruiting coordinator
Tim Salem -- running backs/special teams coordinator
Mike Ward -- linebackers

So Today's Take Two topic is: How did Beckman fare in putting together his staff at Illinois?

Take 1: Adam Rittenberg

There were a few bumps along the way, namely Jon Tenuta's hiring as defensive coordinator and subsequent change of heart, but Beckman eventually got his staff in place. The youth of the staff certainly stands out, as six of the nine assistants are 40 years old or younger. This certainly could help Illinois on the recruiting trail, and by all accounts Beckman has added some strong recruiters to the mix. He made a good move in retaining Gilmore, who helped defensive linemen Corey Liuget and Whitney Mercilus become stars the past two seasons. Banks also comes in with a strong background, especially after helping the Cincinnati defense lead the nation in tackles for loss and rank second in sacks during the 2011 season. Although Mercilus departs, Banks inherits talented defenders like linebacker Jonathan Brown who can pressure the quarterback. This isn't the most experienced offensive staff, and it will be interesting to see how Gonzales and Beatty fare as co-coordinators. Illinois' offense fell apart late in the 2011 season, and the coaches need to get quarterback Nathan Scheelhaase and others back on track. Butkus is a former Illinois player with a famous name, but he'll be taking on a key position group by himself for the first time in his career. Salem is certainly the veteran on the offensive side, and he looks like a strong addition to help the running backs and also Illinois' special teams, which really struggled in 2011. I felt defensive coordinator would be Beckman's most important hire after Illinois lost Vic Koenning to North Carolina. Banks looks like be a strong addition. I'm really interested to see if the offensive staff can prove itself in Year 1.

Take 2: Brian Bennett

Youth is definitely the buzzword on this staff. Banks and Beatty are in their late 30s, Gonzales is 40, Butkus is 32 and Golesh graduated from Ohio State less than six years ago. They should be able to relate to the Illinois players and fare well on the recruiting trail. They should also bring a lot of energy, something that will be needed to keep up with the naturally caffeinated Beckman. While many of the assistants are young, they have some intriguing résumés. Gonzales worked for Urban Meyer at Florida and was part of two national title teams and nearly won another one this year at LSU. I know Beatty from my old beat on the Big East, and West Virginia people thought he was a promising up-and-coming young coach. Neither has called plays at the FBS level and will be asked to run Beckman's spread offense; even though Beckman has a defensive background, I'd expect him to be highly involved in the offense. Banks was a nice hire after turning around Cincinnati's defense in 2011. A lot of these assistants will have to prove themselves in some ways, whether it's in a new role or against tougher competition. Few seem to have strong connections or history in recruiting the state of Illinois, which will be a key for the program's long-term success. Beckman might not have brought in a lot of high-profile names, but a young, hungry staff might be just the thing to help him move the Illini forward.

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.

Today's Take Two topic is inspired by Justin from Baltimore, who writes: Would you rather lose assistant coaches or star players? If you are Wisconsin, would you rather lose five assistant coaches and have Montee Ball return for his senior season or would rather have kept the staff intact and seen Ball go to the NFL? If you are MSU, would you rather lose Jerel Worthy to the NFL and keep Pat Narduzzi as defensive coordinator or would you rather have seen Worthy stay for his senior season but lose Narduzzi to Texas A&M?

Take 1: Brian Bennett

As a general rule, I'd rather have the Jimmys and the Joes rather than the guys doing the X's and the O's. For example, Oklahoma State lost a star offensive coordinator last year when Dana Holgorsen went to West Virginia (you know, the guy who rang up 70 points on Clemson in the Orange Bowl). What did the Cowboys do? They hired Todd Monken from the NFL and went on to win the Fiesta Bowl, mostly because they still had Brandon Weeden and Justin Blackmon. Great players make coaches look good. I think the situation may be a little different with Wisconsin, which is losing a whole lot on the offensive staff and a tremendous playcaller in Paul Chryst. There is almost certainly going to be an adjustment period there. Having Ball will ease that transition, though maybe not as much as having Russell Wilson at quarterback another year would have helped. While I really like Narduzzi and think he is ready to be a head coach, I think another defensive coordinator could step in and succeed with that talented Spartans group, especially if Worthy were still around. There are a lot of good coaches out there who haven't had the chance to work with great players. That's because great players are harder to find.

Take 2: Adam Rittenberg

Some excellent points, BB. I definitely agree that the players often make the coaches. But in Michigan State's case, I actually think it was more important to retain Narduzzi than Worthy. Although he likely will soon depart for a head-coaching job, Michigan State showed by retaining him that it's willing to pay top dollar and retain a top assistant coach. Ohio State is paying more for assistant coaches. Michigan is paying more for assistant coaches. Michigan State needs to keep up and, in my mind, passed an important test by retaining Narduzzi. The Spartans also have recruited extremely well on the defensive side and should have enough depth to survive the loss of Worthy. The difference between Narduzzi and Chryst was Chryst left for a head-coaching position, while Narduzzi would have made essentially a lateral move for more money. So I think Michigan State had the better situation in the end. Regarding Wisconsin, while it's never easy to replace so many assistants, especially guys like Chryst and offensive line coach Bob Bostad, you don't often get to have a Heisman Trophy finalist back in the fold. Wilson was gone no matter what, and the offensive line would have had some turnover no matter what, but losing Ball could have really set back the unit with the quarterback situation so cloudy. Although Chryst and the others do great work, Wisconsin is so entrenched in what it does offensively and how it develops certainly position groups, namely offensive line. Bret Bielema has made good assistant coach hires in the past, and Wisconsin fans need to have some faith his track record will continue this time.

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.

Today's Take Two topic is inspired by user Lucas from NYC, who asked during Wednesday's Big Ten chat: Which is the more promising budding rivalry: Iowa-Nebraska or Wisconsin-Michigan State?

Take 1: Adam Rittenberg

Before the season, I would have said Iowa-Nebraska for sure. And it still might turn out to be the more heated rivalry in the long term. The schools are from bordering states, the teams are in the same division and the fan bases have a natural distaste for one another. But after seeing the way the season played out, I'm going with Wisconsin-Michigan State. The teams played two epic matchups, first in East Lansing and then in Indianapolis at the inaugural Big Ten championship game. The first Iowa-Nebraska game was pretty much a snoozer, although things will get spicier in the coming years. Both MSU-Wisconsin games featured wild swings and unforgettable plays, from the game-winning Hail Mary from Kirk Cousins to Keith Nichol, to Russell Wilson's desperation heave to Jeff Duckworth on fourth down. Not surprisingly, the two fan bases saw the game-deciding punt penalty on Michigan State's Isaiah Lewis in Indy a bit differently. Wisconsin fans can't stand their team repeatedly losing in East Lansing. Michigan State fans aren't too fond of Bret Bielema and remain steamed about the way the title game ended. Most important, both programs are on the rise in the Big Ten and becoming new powers in the league. Need more evidence? I present the Mitten State debate. It all adds up to an excellent budding rivalry between Michigan State and Wisconsin.

Take 2: Brian Bennett

Absolutely in the short term, Michigan State and Wisconsin is the more promising rivalry. The two teams have played six really good games since 2007, capped of course by the two thrillers this season. I'm already looking forward to next Oct. 27, when the Spartans and Badgers hook up again in Madison. Wisconsin looks like the overwhelming 2012 Leaders Division favorite, while Michigan State will certainly contend in the Legends and could repeat if it adequately replaces Cousins. So another Big Ten title game match next year is not out of the question. But here's the problem with getting too smitten by the Mitten Game: the two teams are not permanent cross-division rivals, so they're not guaranteed to play every year. A true rivalry needs annual repetition. Iowa-Nebraska has that, not to mention a fixed date on the calendar in Black Friday. The Hawkeyes have yet to turn this into an interesting series, but the apparent defection of Iowa defensive line coach Rick Kaczenski to the same position with the Cornhuskers could add a little hot sauce into the mix. Eventually, the neighboring state battle will become the bigger of the two. But for the near future, Michigan State-Wisconsin has the juice.

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.

Three SEC teams occupy the top three spots in the latest BCS standings, and that league looks well on its way to a sixth straight national title. Meanwhile, the Big Ten doesn't have any teams in the top 13 of the BCS standings and is now going on a decade without a national championship. Changes are coming to the BCS system, and one proposal -- which Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany reportedly supports -- is having the BCS only determine the No. 1 vs. No. 2 matchup. Some have said this, along with moves like a league title game and a nine-game conference schedule beginning in 2017, will hurt the Big Ten's chances of competing for national titles down the line.

So today's Take Two topic is this: Is the Big Ten positioned to play for and win a BCS crown in the near future?

Take 1: Brian Bennett

Yes. The SEC streak is impressive and intimidating, but I believe these things go in cycles. If Wisconsin hadn't given up two long pass plays at the end of the Michigan State and Ohio State losses, the Badgers would be right in the conversation for a title-game bid today. Ohio State beat Arkansas in a BCS bowl last year in SEC country (according to my memory, if not the official record book). Adding Nebraska, a championship game and eventually going to a nine-game conference schedule will make it harder for any Big Ten team to go undefeated, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. Wisconsin and Michigan State are on upward trajectories, Michigan is getting back to being Michigan under Brady Hoke, Nebraska has all the resources to return to the elite level and Ohio State won't stay down for long, especially if it hires Urban Meyer. Even with the population drain in parts of the Midwest, it's inconceivable that one or more of those teams won't jump up and put together a dominating season in the next few years. As we've seen this year, even a one-loss season does not preclude you from the national championship picture. The Big Ten Network ensures that the league will have a consistently large revenue flow so its teams can keep up in facilities and salaries. No matter what form the next BCS cycle takes, a truly worthy Big Ten team is not usually going to be left out of the title game. Beating an SEC team once it gets there is another story, but the Big Ten is as well-positioned to take on that superpower as any other.

Take 2: Adam Rittenberg

It's all about building enough depth at the top of the league year in and year out. Nebraska gives the Big Ten another horse in the running. If there are three or four potentially elite teams rather than just one or two, it increases the chances of having one squad make it through the gauntlet undefeated. The nine-game league schedule will make it tougher to get through unscathed. The same holds true for the title game, but to a lesser degree. The one criticism of adding Nebraska is that it doesn't give the Big Ten a boost in recruiting, like Texas A&M could for the already loaded SEC. Ultimately, Big Ten teams must find ways to expand their recruiting reach and bring in players from fertile recruiting regions like the Southeast and West. Keeping the best homegrown players is big, too, but there are more elite players in other regions. Wisconsin seems to be expanding its recruiting, which is a good sign. If teams like Michigan State and Iowa do the same, the Big Ten will be in better shape to compete for national titles. I'm very interested to see how Nebraska's recruiting strategy changes in the Big Ten. Ohio State recruits like an elite program and Michigan is getting there again with Hoke and Greg Mattison leading the way. From a revenue/resources standpoint, Big Ten teams are in good shape, and the Big Ten Network is a big reason why. While I'm skeptical that the Big Ten could have a run like the SEC has enjoyed, the key is building enough depth at the top so we're talking about multiple legitimate national title contenders every single season.