ESPN

Good news: We are just 100 days away from the start of college football.

To mark the occasion, we're pulling out a checklist today of things that Big Ten teams need to accomplish between now and the start of the season. It's not quite "The Final Countdown" (cue GOB Bluth), but we are inching ever so close to kickoff. Here's what needs to happen in the next 100 days:

1. Identify a starting quarterback at Iowa, Indiana, Michigan State, Penn State, Purdue and Wisconsin: It seems as if there are an unusually high number of Big Ten teams who don't know for sure who their starting quarterbacks will be in the fall. (You could also add Illinois and Minnesota to this list, though it appears likely that Nathan Scheelhaase and Philip Nelson, respectively, would have to lose the job in the summer.) Iowa had a three-man race this spring that will probably come down to Jake Rudock and Cody Sokol in training camp. There's very little separation between Cameron Coffman, Nate Sudfeld and Tre Roberson at Indiana. Connor Cook continues to breathe down the neck of incumbent Andrew Maxwell at Michigan State. Tyler Ferguson claimed the starting job at Penn State during the spring, prompting Steven Bench to transfer, but highly touted recruit Christian Hackenberg will push for immediate time. Purdue will likely decide between senior Rob Henry and true freshman Danny Etling. Joel Stave and Curt Phillips separated themselves from the Wisconsin QB derby this spring, while incoming junior college transfer Tanner McEvoy could expand the race this summer. All these situations should work themselves out in August, but no team wants to be dealing with an unsettled quarterback competition once the season starts.

2. Solidify the defensive front sevens at Nebraska and Ohio State: The Huskers and Buckeyes stand out as two of the top Big Ten contenders in 2013, but both have serious questions at defensive line and linebacker. The issue is more dire at Nebraska, which struggled there last year and is replacing all but one starter from 2012. Summer arrivals, including junior college star Randy Gregory, could make an immediate impact, and players coming back from injury such as linebacker Zaire Anderson and defensive tackle Thad Randle will need to play up to potential. Ohio State is less concerned about its defense after the spring performance of defensive ends Noah Spence and Adolphus Washington, but linebacker Ryan Shazier is still the only returning starter in the front seven. Curtis Grant must finally live up to his talent to provide help to Shazier, and someone must assume John Simon's leadership role.

3. Locate the next great receivers: A few Big Ten teams, such as Nebraska, Penn State and Indiana, don't have to worry too much about who will catch the ball this year. But just about everybody else needs to find playmakers in the passing game. The top of that list includes Iowa, which couldn't generate a downfield passing attack last year; Illinois, which needs receivers to make new coordinator Bill Cubit's spread system work; Michigan State, whose young wideouts must improve on last year's shaky performance; Minnesota, which doesn't have many proven weapons to surround Nelson; and Wisconsin, which still must find a complement to Jared Abbrederis. Ohio State coach Urban Meyer is hoping some incoming freshmen augment a very thin receiver group, while Michigan needs to replace the production of Junior Hemingway and Roy Roundtree. Purdue and Northwestern have lots of speedy options but could use the emergence of a true No. 1 target. Receiver was a weak spot as a whole in the Big Ten in 2012, and hopefully some players will improve through offseason voluntary passing drills.

4. Strengthen the running game at Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana and elsewhere: It's a cliché to say that you have to run the ball to win, but in the case of the Big Ten, that's always been true. That's why it's so vital for the Wolverines and Spartans -- who both expect to contend in the Legends Division -- to find answers in their rushing attacks. Michigan is replacing its entire starting interior offensive line after struggling to get a running game going outside of Denard Robinson last year. Fitz Toussaint is hoping to bounce back from a disappointing season and a leg injury, while hotshot freshman Derrick Green could get lots of carries right away. Michigan State's efforts to replace workhorse extraordinaire Le'Veon Bell this spring ended up with converted linebacker Riley Bullough emerging as the top back in a mediocre field. Three incoming freshmen will compete for time right away this summer. Indiana coach Kevin Wilson put a heavy emphasis on the running game this spring, hoping for more balance after his team led the league in passing and finished last in rushing last season. Iowa has depth for once at running back but needs to stay healthy there, as the ground game is the key to the Hawkeyes' entire offensive philosophy. Nebraska also can't afford injuries, as Ameer Abdullah and Imani Cross are the lone backs with any experience. Illinois averaged just 3.5 yards per carry as a team last year, a number that must improve. And while Purdue loved what it saw from Akeem Hunt this spring, he still must prove he can be an every-down back after attempting only 42 carries last season.

5. Mesh with new coaches: Wisconsin's Gary Andersen and Purdue's Darrell Hazell are the fresh faces among head coaches in the league, and while they did a great job of connecting with their players this spring, they still need to get their new systems fully in place. The Badgers will be using some new, 3-4 looks on defense, while Hazell wants a more physical and disciplined team than we've seen from the Boilermakers of late. Michigan State has a new offensive playcaller in Dave Warner, while Cubit was one of many staff changes at Illinois. Penn State's John Butler takes over from Ted Roof as the Lions' defensive coordinator. With only 15 spring practices so far to implement their styles, those new coaches have had to rely on a lot of classroom time and players learning on their own. That will have to continue this summer during voluntary workouts and then will intensify when preseason practice begins. For new coaches, it's a race against the calendar -- and the calendar says there are only 100 days until kickoff.

The Big Ten has released its conference schedule for the 2014 season, when new members Maryland and Rutgers join the league and play in the East and West divisions begins. The league hopes to release the 2015 schedule, which will flip the game sites of the 2014 slate, by June 1. There are still some dates of games to be worked out for 2015, as the Big Ten is working out several previously scheduled nonconference contests.

Remember, the Big Ten will play an eight-game league schedule in 2014 and 2015 before going to nine games in 2016. As is the case this fall, the 2014 season features an extra week, so each team has two open dates.

OK, let's dive in ...

DIVISION CROSSOVERS

East Division


Indiana: Purdue (home, protected game), Iowa (road)
Maryland: Iowa (home), Wisconsin (road)
Michigan: Minnesota (home), Northwestern (road)
Michigan State: Nebraska (home), Purdue (road)
Ohio State: Illinois (home), Minnesota (road)
Penn State: Northwestern (home), Illinois (road)
Rutgers: Nebraska (road), Wisconsin (home)

West Division


Illinois: Ohio State (road), Penn State (home)
Iowa: Indiana (home), Maryland (road)
Minnesota: Michigan (road), Ohio State (home)
Nebraska: Michigan State (road), Rutgers (home)
Northwestern: Penn State (road), Michigan (home)
Purdue: Indiana (road, protected), Michigan State (home)
Wisconsin: Maryland (home), Rutgers (road)

Well, Nebraska can't say the Big Ten was picking on Big Red with its initial crossovers in 2011 and 2012. The league has Rutgers hosting the Huskers and visiting Wisconsin. Maryland also must visit Madison, Wis., in its initial Big Ten go-round.

Minnesota gets the toughest 2014 crossover with Michigan and Ohio State, and Northwestern and Illinois also both will be challenged with their crossover games. Wisconsin is the only West Division team to play both new members, a pretty favorable draw for Gary Andersen's crew. Iowa also has a seemingly easier path than others with Indiana and Maryland.

NO PLAYS


Here's who each Big Ten team skips on its 2014 schedule ...

Illinois: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Rutgers
Indiana: Illinois, Minnesota Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Iowa: Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
Maryland: Illinois, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue
Michigan: Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Purdue, Wisconsin
Michigan State: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Minnesota: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan State, Penn State, Rutgers
Nebraska: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State
Northwestern: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan State, Ohio State, Rutgers
Ohio State: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin
Penn State: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Purdue, Wisconsin
Purdue: Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
Rutgers: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue
Wisconsin: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State

Parity-based scheduling doesn't start until 2016, and it's pretty obvious here as the Big Ten is losing most of its exciting crossover games. We won't see Ohio State, Michigan or Penn State playing Nebraska or Wisconsin in 2014 and 2015. Wisconsin and Michigan State, the pairing in the inaugural Big Ten title game, also won't play. That's too bad. I understand the need to build the brand in new markets with the new members, but those are a lot of good games to give up.

Northwestern, Illinois, Purdue and Maryland don't play either of the new members in 2014 (and 2015).

Rivalry weekend

As expected, the final weekend of the regular season will feature rivalries like Ohio State-Michigan and Indiana-Purdue, the only protected crossover game. The Wisconsin-Minnesota game moves back to this date, which I like a lot (battle for the frozen Axe), and Illinois will visit Northwestern on Nov. 29. The Heroes Game between Iowa and Nebraska will remain on its traditional Friday spot at Kinnick Stadium.

The only question here was what to do with East Division teams Michigan, Penn State, Maryland and Rutgers. The Big Ten opted to pair the two new members with a Nov. 29 game at Maryland's Byrd Stadium. That means ... drum roll, please ... the Land Grant series is back. Michigan State at Penn State, Nov. 29, with this on the line, in all its glory. Fired up.

Other notes

• The Big Ten season will kick off much earlier than normal as Rutgers makes its league debut against Penn State on Sept. 13. The game had been previously scheduled between the teams, and the league decided not to move it. The Scarlet Knights and Nittany Lions will kick off league play a full two weeks before any other squads. Three Big Ten teams -- Michigan State, Ohio State and Wisconsin -- won't kick off league play until Oct. 4. Blame the double bye.
• The Little Brown Jug rivalry between Michigan and Minnesota won't be an annual thing as the teams are in opposite divisions without a protected crossover, but the Wolverines and Gophers will kick off Big Ten play on Sept. 27 at the Big House. The Illibuck rivalry also resumes in 2014 as Ohio State hosts Illinois on Nov. 1.
• Not surprisingly, the Big Ten is splitting the Ohio State-Michigan trips to Maryland and Rutgers. Maryland hosts Ohio State on Oct. 4 in its Big Ten home debut, while Rutgers hosts Michigan the same day. The Big Ten wants to get its most visible members into the new markets.
• Wisconsin's and Iowa's overall schedules are very favorable. The Badgers miss the East Division powers and host Nebraska on Nov. 15 (night game, perhaps?). Iowa hosts Wisconsin, Nebraska and Northwestern and makes road trips to Purdue, Maryland, Minnesota and Illinois.
• Nebraska fans likely won't be thrilled with the schedule. Not only do they miss Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan, but the Huskers' Big Ten home schedule -- Illinois, Rutgers, Purdue and Minnesota -- isn't too appealing.
• One plus of the schedule is that most November games will take place in the division. The current setup had way too many crossovers down the stretch. Five teams -- Maryland, Michigan State, Iowa, Nebraska and Northwestern -- will play only division games in November. Ohio State and Illinois have two crossovers, while all other teams have one crossover in November.
• Michigan will play its three biggest rivals -- Notre Dame, Michigan State and Ohio State -- all on the road in 2014. The Wolverines no longer will have a home/road split with Michigan State and Ohio State.
• Illinois and Iowa are back in the same division and will play their first game since 2008 on Nov. 15, when the Hawkeyes visit Champaign.

That's enough for now, but we'll have more on the schedule in the coming days.

CHICAGO -- Indiana athletic director Fred Glass oversees a football program that has made one bowl appearance in the past 19 seasons.

The Hoosiers soon will take up residence in the Big Ten's East Division, which includes traditional powers Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State, as well as Michigan State. Like every other Big Ten team, Indiana also will begin playing nine conference games instead of eight beginning in 2016.

Although Indiana took a step last fall in Year 2 under coach Kevin Wilson, it has won six or more games just 11 times since 1967, when it shared the Big Ten championship and went to the Rose Bowl.

If given the choice between keeping the minimum wins requirement for bowls at six versus increasing it to seven, Glass seemingly has an easy decision.

"Perhaps the surprising answer is I'd probably favor going to seven [wins]," Glass told ESPN.com on Wednesday. "We're a program that's trying to build, and you might say it's in our best interest to stay at six, but there's something about enthusing your fan base with a winning season, being 7-5. Maybe that might help limit the number of bowls out there, too, so it's a real positive experience."

At last year's spring meetings, Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany came out in strong support of increasing the bowl requirement from six wins to seven.

"For us, it means redefining a successful year at 7-5 from the standpoint of a bowl season," Delany said last May. "We argued for 6-6. We've experienced 6-6. Now we're suggesting that it's in our best interest, the bowls' best interest as well as the other conferences that might benefit by these open slots to look at a 7-5 standard."

Ultimately, other major conferences weren't on board with the push to increase the requirement. The Big Ten had three 6-6 teams -- Michigan State, Purdue and Minnesota -- make bowl games in 2012 and four 6-6 teams (Ohio State, Illinois, Purdue and Northwestern) go in 2011.

"We think the bowl system would be better off with a 7-5 situation," Delany said Wednesday. "We thought for a while we were heading in that direction, but it's obvious that we're not."

The Big Ten's move to nine league games means a team would have to win at least three conference contests to reach the six-win minimum, giving it a little more credibility. Minnesota athletic director Norwood Teague said many coaches, especially "those building programs," are in favor of keeping the requirement at six victories.

But ADs still hope that seven can be the magic number some day.

"Seven wins is what you should have; always felt that," Ohio State AD Gene Smith said. "I still think we have too many bowls. I just think 6-6 is not the level, but I know that's not something that appears to be reversing at this time. I just don't want to be there again."

CHICAGO -- Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and the league's athletic directors are trying to strike a balance with their future bowl partners.

They don't want to tell bowl committees which teams they'll be hosting each winter, but they also don't want committees making selections without some clear guidelines in place. There have been too many bad matchups, too many repeat trips, too many empty seats and too many poor TV ratings numbers in recent years.

A shake-up to the process is coming for the next bowl agreement cycle, which will go from 2014-19, but how dramatic will be it be?

"We'll probably be somewhere in between selection and a conference placement," Delany said Wednesday. "So what we'll do is give a lot of conditions to each bowl, and they will have to get conference approval for the selection that they choose. The goal is going to be that we keep these games fresh and also that the bowls create the best possible lineup. I think there's been some fatigue as there's a lot of competition for discretionary spending. I don't think fans are going to be interested in going to the same region over and over and over again."

To prevent this, the Big Ten will require its bowl partners (except the Rose Bowl) to select at least five different teams during the six-year cycle. They'll be afforded only one repeat participant.

The Big Ten looked back at the last 18 bowl seasons, created six-year segments and looked at how the distribution would have worked if certain rules had been in place. The models estimated an average of nine bowl-eligible teams per season with two going to one of the bowls in the Playoff rotation (Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Cotton and Chick-fil-A Peach).

If the new policies had been in place, Wisconsin wouldn't have gone to Florida bowls (Capital One, Outback or Champs Sports) in six consecutive seasons, as it did from 2004-09.

"Obviously, you can go to the Rose Bowl as many times as you want," Delany said. "But other than that, we want to get different bowls, different teams into different environments as much as we can and still give them some control over the quality of team they're getting."

Delany said the Big Ten's full bowl agreement should be announced in the next two weeks after the league's presidents see what the ADs are recommending. Other than the tie-ins with the Rose Bowl and, in some years, the Orange Bowl, the Big Ten will have "at least six other relationships, maybe more."

Although Big Ten teams always have appealed to bowls because of their large, traveling fan bases, the league found itself in a stronger position for the upcoming cycle because of its newer members.

"I think our fans and our coaches and our players are in for a good treat," Delany said.

After Notre Dame finalized its arrangement with the ACC last fall, it decided to suspend its annual series against Michigan. It begs the question: What will become of Notre Dame's other two Big Ten rivalries against Purdue and Michigan State?

All three schools have decisions to make. The Big Ten's move to a nine-game conference schedule beginning in 2016 makes it harder for Purdue and Michigan State to play Notre Dame annually in a home-road alternation. For example, Michigan State's 2017 slate includes a home game against Alabama, a road game against Notre Dame and five Big Ten road games, limiting the school to just six home dates, one below its stated minimum to meet the budget. Purdue also says it needs to play seven home games per season, and its Notre Dame home-road schedule doesn't match up with when it will play five Big Ten home games and five Big Ten road games. "We're off cycle," Purdue athletic director Morgan Burke told The (Lafayette) Journal and Courier.

Notre Dame has its own scheduling concerns with guaranteed ACC opponents every year and a desire to play a true national schedule.

Although Michigan-Notre Dame gained the most national attention in recent years, both Purdue and Michigan State have more historic rivalries with the Irish. Purdue and Notre Dame first met in 1896 have played every season since 1946. Michigan State and Notre Dame first met in 1897 and have played in all but two seasons since 1959.

What will happen to these two series? We gave our takes on the three teams.

Adam Rittenberg on Purdue

The buzz around much of the Big Ten is to cut ties with Notre Dame altogether. The Irish didn't want to be in the Big Ten. They got a deal from the ACC they'd NEVER get from the Big Ten. So why should Big Ten teams keep playing Notre Dame? While it seems easy to tell Notre Dame what it can do with that Shillelagh, it's not so simple for a program like Purdue. In fact, I think the Boilers should do whatever they can to keep the Irish on the annual schedule as often as possible.

Purdue fans might skewer me for this, but Purdue needs Notre Dame more than Notre Dame needs Purdue. Why? National attention. When Purdue plays Notre Dame, the Boilers get the national spotlight. When Notre Dame visits Ross-Ade Stadium, ABC/ESPN immediately chooses the game for prime time. When else does that happen for Purdue?

The Notre Dame game resonates for Purdue fans. It fills the stands at Ross-Ade Stadium, which has looked like a ghost town on fall Saturdays in recent years. When Purdue beats Notre Dame, people pay attention. Sure, Purdue can add some other strong non-league opponents. I liked the Oregon series from a few years back. But playing Notre Dame and beating Notre Dame has tremendous value for Purdue, its program and its recruiting efforts.

Burke says Purdue can't have six home games for budgetary reasons. Well, Michigan had six home games last year, so it can happen from time to time. I'm OK with Purdue taking a short break from Notre Dame here and there, but the Boilers would be foolish to completely cut ties with their in-state rival. This series is good for Purdue fans and good for the program. Purdue should fight to keep it going.

Brian Bennett on Michigan State

Much like with Purdue, there is a lot of history in the Megaphone series between Michigan State and Notre Dame. That includes 75 all-time meetings, the so-called Game of the Century in 1966 and, more recently, the Little Giants miracle of 2010. Only four years since 1949 have the two schools not played during the fall. It's a great series and one that should be kept if possible. Now here comes the but ...

... But the two schools are already scheduled to take two-year breaks after every four games between now and 2032, with the first two-year hiatus starting next season. So playing Notre Dame every single year is already a moot point. With the coming nine-game Big Ten conference schedule and the Spartans' agreements to play high-profile nonconference opponents like Oregon (2014 and '15) and Alabama (2016 and 2017), athletic director Mark Hollis has some tough decisions to make. Michigan State will face a very difficult road in the stacked East Division during Big Ten play as it stands. Does it make sense to play the Irish along with another strong program in the nonconference schedule? No, probably not.

The Spartans should try to work things out to where they can play Notre Dame in years when they don't have other marquee nonconference opponents while taking on those other high-profile teams during breaks with the Irish. Michigan State fans wouldn't really miss the Golden Domers that much when they're playing a team like Oregon or Alabama instead. The Spartans should strive to keep Notre Dame on the schedule frequently, but not so much that they handicap their own seasons in the process.

Matt Fortuna on Notre Dame

Much like a team in a conference, Notre Dame has eight annual games from 2014 on that will be set for the foreseeable future: USC, Stanford, Navy and five against ACC opponents. The Irish have already canceled their series with Michigan from 2015 on, leaving the status of the Michigan State and Purdue series up in the air.

Both of you make fair points: The Boilermakers, frankly, need Notre Dame more than Notre Dame needs them, and the Spartans already have quite the nonconference slate on-deck in the coming years.

Where does this leave the Irish?

Some will argue that the program gets whatever it wants, whenever it wants and, like Adam alluded to, should be left alone. But there is no denying that this program moves the needle, especially when playing Big Ten teams.

Every Notre Dame game at a Big Ten stadium since its Sept. 20, 2008, tilt at MSU has been in prime time, save for a 2009 game at Michigan ... which just began playing home night games in 2011, the only two of which were scheduled against Notre Dame.

But there is history to be saved in these series, and efforts from all sides should be made to keep these two, along with the Michigan one, going on a rotating basis. Notre Dame has played Purdue 84 times, which is the same number of times it has played rival USC (which it is keeping on the schedule for West Coast exposure) and only two fewer times than it has played Navy (which it is keeping for history).

Notre Dame's cancellation of its series with the Wolverines was a matter of necessity for the Irish, who needed to create as much scheduling flexibility as possible. The program's series with MSU already has scheduled two-year breaks for 2014-15, 2020-21 and 2026-27. And if the Purdue series does not match up with when the Boilers will play five Big Ten home games and five Big Ten road games, I'm sure smart men like Burke and Jack Swarbrick can get creative, though the onus should fall primarily on Burke.

The irony should not be lost: In keeping with a true national schedule and bringing its brand to different parts of the country, Notre Dame cannot abandon its Midwestern home.

You learned earlier this week that Big Ten programs continue to rake in record television revenues from the league. Not surprisingly, several Big Ten programs are among the nation's leaders in overall athletic revenue from 2012, according to USA Today's annual database.

As the excellent database shows, Big Ten programs make more and also spend more than most in the NCAA.

Ohio State and Michigan rank No. 2 and No. 3, respectively, in both revenue and expenses, trailing national leader Texas. Penn State (No. 8), Wisconsin (No. 11), Iowa (No. 15) and Michigan State (No. 17) also rank in the top 20 nationally in revenue. The 11 Big Ten schools that reported figures -- Northwestern doesn't have to as a private institution -- all rank in the top 35 nationally.

Of the 13 athletic departments that generated more than $100 million in revenue last year, four are in the Big Ten (Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Wisconsin).

Here's the breakdown of where Big Ten programs rank in both revenue and expenses:

Ohio State

Total revenue: $142,043,057 (No. 2)
Total expenses: $124,419,412 (No. 2)

Michigan

Total revenue: $140,131,187 (No. 3)
Total expenses: $115,200,187 (No. 3)

Penn State

Total revenue: $108,252,281 (No. 8)
Total expenses: $107,389,258 (No. 5)

Wisconsin

Total revenue: $103,803,040 (No. 11)
Total expenses: $102,275,206 (No. 8)

Iowa

Total revenue: $97,902,974 (No. 15)
Total expenses: $104,658,746 (No. 7)

Michigan State

Total revenue: $93,946,707 (No. 17)
Total expenses: $88,100,432 (No. 18)

Minnesota

Total revenue: $83,619,526 (No. 23)
Total expenses: $83,619,526 (No. 22)

Nebraska

Total revenue: $81,631,252 (No. 26)
Total expenses: $77,037,282 (No. 27)

Illinois

Total revenue: $78,708,250 (No. 29)
Total expenses: $76,740,736 (No. 29)

Indiana

Total revenue: $72,973,954 (No. 31)
Total expenses: $69,915,060 (No. 33)

Purdue

Total revenue: $70,624,394 (No. 35)
Total expenses: $68,056,269 (No. 36)

Seven Big Ten programs reported subsidies -- Wisconsin ($7,127,453) and Minnesota ($6,961,066) were the highest. Future Big Ten member Rutgers had the second highest subsidy ($27,996,056) behind UNLV.

Of the seven programs that reported no subsidies, four of them -- Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State and Purdue -- are in the Big Ten. Michigan also reported a relatively small subsidy.

Speaking of Rutgers and Maryland, Rutgers ranks 41st in revenue ($64,038,720) and 42nd in expenses ($64,038,720), while Maryland ranks 39th in revenue ($68,142,660) and 35th in expenses ($68,109,639). Both programs have endured recent financial woes.

From the USA Today story:

Rutgers, for instance, spent $28 million more than it generated -- a deficit it covered with about $18.5 million from the school and $9.5 million in student fees. This constituted a slight improvement over 2011, when Rutgers spent $28.5 million more than it generated.

A few more notes on Big Ten revenues and expenses:

• Iowa obviously spent more than it made last year, but there's a good explanation as the school is making long overdue upgrades to its football facilities. Iowa spent $33,354,212 on facilities in 2012, a significant increase from $21,863,477 in 2011.
• Wisconsin also saw an increase in facilities spending to $21,291,110, up from $18,428,436 in 2011. That number will go up in 2013 as Wisconsin completes its renovations for the student-athlete performance center.
• Penn State's overall athletic donations fell from $34,286,648 in 2011 to $25,504,557 in 2012, but football-specific donations soared last year. Penn State also had a fairly big increase in coaches' salaries from $25,641,656 in 2011 to $31,505,317 in 2012.
• While most Big Ten programs remained fairly steady in coaches' salaries, Minnesota had a sizable drop from $27,349,587 in 2011 to $20,284,450 in 2012.
• Michigan had the biggest increase among Big Ten schools in revenue from ticket sales, going from $41,668,589 in 2011 to $52,369,702 in 2012. Most Big Ten programs remained fairly steady in ticket sales, although Illinois, despite its plummeting football attendance, went from $16,533,261 in 2011 to $20,456,244 in 2012.

The Big Ten's prime-time schedule for 2013 is now complete as the Big Ten Network on Monday announced it will broadcast 12 games under the lights this coming season.

Here's the full prime-time slate from BTN:

Aug. 29


UNLV at Minnesota, 7 p.m. ET
Indiana State at Indiana, 7 p.m. ET

Aug. 30

Western Michigan at Michigan State, 8 p.m. ET

Aug. 31

Wyoming at Nebraska, 8 p.m. ET

Sept. 7

Syracuse at Northwestern, 6 p.m. ET
Southern Miss at Nebraska, 6 p.m. ET
Navy at Indiana, 6 p.m. ET

Sept. 14

UCF at Penn State, 6 p.m. ET
Washington vs. Illinois (at Soldier Field, Chicago), 6 p.m. ET
Western Michigan at Northwestern, 9 p.m. ET

Sept. 21

Missouri at Indiana, 8 p.m. ET

Oct. 19

Wisconsin at Illinois, 8 p.m. ET

Last week, ESPN/ABC announced its six picks for prime-time games featuring Big Ten teams. In case you missed 'em, here they are ...

Sept. 7

Notre Dame at Michigan, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

Sept. 14

Notre Dame at Purdue, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

Sept. 28

Wisconsin at Ohio State, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

Oct. 5

Ohio State at Northwestern, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

Oct. 12

Michigan at Penn State, 5 p.m. ET, ESPN or ESPN2

Oct. 26

Penn State at Ohio State, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

The complete schedule features a record 18 Big Ten games in prime time, three more than the league's previous high set in 2011. The slate features 13 non-conference games and five league contests. You'll notice immediately that there are once again no November night games, even though the Big Ten is now open to them. Check the blog at 3:30 p.m. ET for more on this, but the extra week in the 2013 schedule was a major factor in the Big Ten's television partners selecting prime-time games only in August, September and October. The two biggest Saturdays for night games are Sept. 7 (four games) and Sept. 14 (four games).

Remember that there could be additional prime-time games for Big Ten teams in road venues, as the other leagues and their television partners control kickoff times.

Eleven of the 12 teams made the Big Ten's prime-time schedule, as Iowa is the lone squad absent from the rundown. Here's the breakdown of prime-time games:

Illinois: 2 (one home, one neutral)
Indiana: 3 (all home)
Iowa: 0
Michigan: 2 (one home, one road)
Michigan State: 1 (home)
Minnesota: 1 (home)
Nebraska: 2 (both home)
Northwestern: 3 (all home)
Ohio State: 3 (two home, one road)
Penn State: 3 (two home, one road)
Purdue: 1 (home)
Wisconsin: 2 (both road)

Some thoughts on the Big Ten's prime-time schedule:

• Northwestern and Ohio State look like the big winners here. The Wildcats-Buckeyes game on Oct. 5 will be one of Northwestern's most anticipated home games in years. Plus, Northwestern gets its first two home contests at night, which should boost attendance at a time where school isn’t in session and when the weather is still typically very nice. Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith got his wish of two home night games and only one on the road after having the reverse (two road, one home) a lot in recent years. Penn State fans also have to be happy with two home night games, and while the 5 p.m. kickoff time might not be as appealing as 8 p.m., Nittany Nation still will have plenty of time to, well, prepare.
• Indiana's openness to night football continues to pay off with BTN games. Although the matchups aren't always appealing (i.e. Indiana State), Indiana has made night games a much bigger part of its fans' experience in recent seasons, which has helped attendance. The Missouri game at night makes a lot of sense as Indiana takes on a Big 12 foe in a window with no other Big Ten games (to this point, at least).
• Purdue's rival Indiana gets a night game against Notre Dame, but the Boilers haven't been as aggressive about night football, which irks a portion of their fans.
• It would be nice to see more conference games at night, as the prime-time schedule is incredibly front-loaded this season. But as I'll explain more in the no-November-night-games post, the 14-week schedule with two open weeks per team really thins out the conference slate in some weeks. ABC/ESPN and BTN both need games to fill the mid-afternoon window (3:30 p.m. ET), which the Big Ten continues to value as much or more than other leagues.
• Nebraska fans were bummed out not to see their Huskers on the ABC/ESPN prime-time schedule, but at least they get two home games under the lights on BTN. The Huskers' schedule before November simply isn't very appealing, and while Nebraska had some good November prime-time game possibilities, it just didn't work out this year. The Week 3 game against UCLA almost certainly will go into the 3:30 window.
• It's always a bummer to have no prime-time games at Camp Randall Stadium, one of the nation's best settings for night football. But Wisconsin's home schedule, especially before mid November, isn't overly appealing. The Badgers are the only team playing two road night games in Big Ten play (Ohio State, Illinois).
• Michigan State opens with a Friday night home game for the third consecutive season (Youngstown State in 2011, Boise State in 2012). But the Spartans once again aren't on the prime-time slate during Big Ten play.
• There's no hard cap on the number of night games Big Ten teams can play in a season, but three seems to be the acknowledged maximum. I've been told teams don't want to play more than one-quarter of their games in prime time, which translates to three contests.

Western Michigan freshman forward Darius Paul announced on Twitter on Saturday that he will follow in his older brother Brandon's footsteps and transfer to Illinois.

Darius Paul, a 6-foot-8, 220-pound forward, was the MAC Freshman of the Year averaging 10.4 points and 5.7 rebounds last season. He decided to transfer because of a coaching staff change and the desire to play at a higher level, according to his mother.

Darius also had offers from Florida, Iowa State, Marquette, Miami (Fla.), Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada and others since receiving his release from Western Michigan. He will have to sit out next season per NCAA rules and will have three years of eligibility remaining.

Read the entire story.

My hometown is already packed full of visitors and C-list celebrities in anticipation of the Kentucky Derby on Saturday. If you've never been, well come on down and enjoy the party. I've got a spare guest room.

When you live in Louisville, horse racing and handicapping are about all you can think of this time of year, in between bites of Derby Pie. So, like last year, I've imagined what the Big Ten 2013 program would look like if the championship chase were more like a horse race. I think the odds would go a little something like this (like the Churchill Downs toteboard, our odds only go up to 99-to-1),:

Ohio State: Even

Despite being scratched from last year's race by NCAA probation, the Buckeyes are the odds-on favorites this time around. They've got big-time winners both at trainer (Urban Meyer) and on the reins (Braxton Miller), and their schedule looks like they should get a clean trip.

Michigan: 5-to-1

The Wolverines are switching running styles this year, ditching the spread for a more traditional passing offense led by Devin Gardner. No need for blinders, as Taylor Lewan has the blind side locked down. Still, this entry hasn't had enough first-place finishes in its recent past performances.

Nebraska 6-to-1

The Huskers have been like one of those tantalizing horses in the program with a huge Beyer speed figure that always disappoints when you put the big money on them. Expect them to be a major pace-setter because of their early schedule, but that defense will determine whether they can make a long-awaited trip to the winners' circle.

Wisconsin: 10-to-1

Pretty good value here for a three-time defending champion of the Run for the Rose Bowl. Still, the Badgers are operating under new connections this time around (new coach Gary Andersen) and will have to prove they can track down Ohio State in the Leaders Division.

Northwestern 12-to-1

Another good option for those seeking value, as the Wildcats might be the wise-guy pick after last year's 10-win season. The problem is the potential of a very bumpy trip with that schedule (Ohio State and Wisconsin as crossover opponents). And there will be a lot of jostling in that Legends Division.

Michigan State: 20-to-1

Some bettors like to look for the bounce factor, meaning they seek out otherwise successful horses who are coming off one bad outing. The Spartans look like the best bounce candidate following last year's 6-6 season, which came after two straight double-digit win seasons. They have a more favorable post position (er, schedule) this time, but their early works suggest some lingering questions about the offense.

Minnesota: 50-to-1

We've reached the real long shots now. Jerry Kill has shown that his charges take off in their third year of training, and the Gophers have turned in some encouraging works. Still, they'll need to run a perfect race to factor in the money.

Indiana: 65-to-1

This would be a Giacomo-level upset. An exotic pick, at best. But with the Hoosiers' ability to score points, they could pull off a shocker if everyone else falters.

Purdue: 75-to-1

Handicappers got burned by picking Purdue as their sleeper last year. The Boilermakers might be even more of a mystery horse this year with a new trainer in Darrell Hazell. Still looks like an also-ran, but don't forget that they seem to run neck-and-neck with Ohio State lately, for whatever reason.

Iowa: 80-to-1

Failed to fire last year, and the speed figures aren't pretty. If you're betting the Hawkeyes, you're basing it on the pedigree of Kirk Ferentz. Should show more fight this time, but might be too much of a plodder to hit the board.

Illinois: 99-to-1


Stumbled out of the gate, no rally, didn't factor in 2012. Equipment changes on offense (new coordinator Bill Cubit's spread system) should help. But Tim Beckman has a lot of work to do to show he's not saddling another nag.

Penn State: Scratched

DQ'd by the NCAA. (Now accepting future wagering on 2016).

So there's how I'd write the program. What kind of odds would you give to each team, and who would you put money on in 2013?

Since news of the Big Ten division realignment first broke, some Nebraska fans have fretted that they are entering a new Big 12 North.

The comparisons at first glance seem valid. Michigan and Ohio State seemed poised to dominate the league from the Big Ten West the way Texas and Oklahoma did in the Big 12 South for several years. Meanwhile, Nebraska is the headliner in the other, seemingly weaker division -- again.

But does the comparison really have any legitimacy? Let's examine some history.

The Big 12 staged a conference championship game from 1996 until 2010. During that time, the South won the title games 11 times to just four by the North. Four of those wins by the South, however, were decided by three points or fewer.

The real issue for the North was the alleged lack of depth at the top. Nebraska appeared in the championship game six times in 15 years, joining Colorado (four), Kansas State (three) and Missouri (two). However, Texas and Oklahoma gobbled up 13 of the 15 championship game spots for the South.

Just how bad was the rest of the North outside of Nebraska? Here are the records during that span for the other teams in the division, and their bowl bids:

Kansas State: 120-67 (.642 winning pct), 11 bowls, 2 BCS appearances
Missouri: 104-79 (.568), nine bowls
Colorado: 93-90 (508), nine bowls, 1 BCS appearance*
Kansas: 78-97 (.446), five bowls, 1 BCS appearance
Iowa State: 70-109 (.391), six bowls

Totals: 465-442 (.513), 40 bowls, four BCS appearances

*Colorado's 1997 wins were vacated by the NCAA.

Let's see how that compares with the Big Ten West by examining the teams' records during that same time for Nebraska's future division:

Wisconsin: 134-58 (.698), 14 bowls, 3 BCS appearances
Iowa: 108-76 (.587), 11 bowls, 2 BCS appearances
Purdue: 99-85 (.538), 10 bowls, 1 BCS appearance
Northwestern: 88-94 (.484), seven bowls
Minnesota: 85-97 (.467), nine bowls
Illinois: 64-111 (.366), four bowls, 2 BCS appearances


Totals: 578-521 (.526), 55 bowls, five BCS appearances

There are some similarities here, but the new Big Ten West ranks better in winning percentage, bowl appearances (nine per team, compared to eight per team for the Big 12 South) and BCS bids. Wisconsin trumps Kansas State as the most consistent winner, especially since the Wildcats' success has been so heavily dependent on one man (Bill Snyder). Missouri and Iowa and Purdue and Colorado have very similar résumés, although Colorado fell on some hard times toward the end, and it took a while for Missouri to really get going. Illinois is comparable to Kansas in that it has had a couple of banner seasons and a lot of bad ones.

The problem with the Big 12 North wasn't a lack of good teams, as Kansas State, Missouri, Kansas and Colorado all had their moments. It was a lack of consistency by most everyone outside of Nebraska and, to a lesser extent, Kansas State. The same will likely be true in the Big Ten West. While Wisconsin and Nebraska should field good teams year in and year out, it will be up to Purdue, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern and Minnesota to remain consistently competitive and not fluctuate wildly from year to year. If, say, Iowa can return to getting into the annual mix for BCS bowls, or if Northwestern can build off last year's 10-win season, then the West will be more than just Nebraska and Wisconsin.

Then, even if Michigan and Ohio State turn the Big Ten East into a new Big 12 South, the West won't have to suffer those Big 12 North comparisons.

You've waited for it, and the Big Ten prime-time schedule for the 2013 season is finally here. Well, at least the first part of it.

ESPN/ABC has made its six prime-time picks for the upcoming season. One game already had been announced: Notre Dame at Michigan on Sept. 7.

Here's the full Big Ten prime-time schedule on ESPN/ABC:

Sept. 7: Notre Dame at Michigan, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

Sept. 14: Notre Dame at Purdue, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

Sept. 28: Wisconsin at Ohio State, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

Oct. 5: Ohio State at Northwestern, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

Oct. 12: Michigan at Penn State, 5 p.m. ET, ESPN or ESPN2

Oct. 26: Penn State at Ohio State, 8 p.m. ET, ABC or ESPN or ESPN2

Final TV designations will be made in the fall.

The Big Ten Network soon will announce its prime-time schedule for the fall, most likely next Monday. The Big Ten had 14 prime-time games last season, and you can expect about the same total this year.

Some thoughts on the list:

• Although the Big Ten is now open to night games in November, none appear on this list. ESPN/ABC was able to fill its six-game allotment before the end of October, featuring two games involving Notre Dame and four Big Ten matchups. An ESPN platform will televise a Big Ten matchup in prime time five of six straight Saturdays from Sept. 7 to Oct. 12. There are certainly some appealing games in November that could be played at night, but the networks chose to pass this time around. So if you're upset, blame TV.
• Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith has been vocal about the fact the Buckeyes typically play two road games at night and just one at home. Smith wants more night games at The Shoe -- so does coach Urban Meyer -- and he gets his wish as Leaders Division foes Wisconsin and Penn State both visit Ohio Stadium at night. Not surprisingly, the Buckeyes make more ABC/ESPN prime-time appearances (3) than any other Big Ten team, as they also visit Northwestern.
• Speaking of Northwestern, the Wildcats have to be thrilled with an ABC/ESPN prime-time game at Ryan Field. Pat Fitzgerald's crew could/should be 4-0 and coming off of a open week when Ohio State comes to town for Northwestern's Big Ten opener. It will be the most anticipated Northwestern home game in recent memory.
• I really liked the late-afternoon/early evening kickoff for Ohio State-Penn State last year at Beaver Stadium. Penn State gets another of these as Michigan comes to town on Oct. 12. Could a whiteout be on tap? Let's hope so.
• The ABC/ESPN prime-time slate features most of the Big Ten teams projected to contend for a championship -- except one. Nebraska has to be a little disappointed to be left out, although the Huskers' schedule in September and October -- when Big Ten prime-time games are typically played -- is very dull. A Week 3 matchup against UCLA likely will be a late-afternoon kickoff.
• Love 'em or hate 'em, Notre Dame remains a major national TV draw. The Irish will play a night game at a Big Ten stadium for the fifth consecutive season and two road night games against the Big Ten for the second time in three years.

What do you think of the ABC/ESPN prime-time schedule?

The Big Ten on Sunday announced new divisions (East and West) for the 2014 season and a move to a nine-game conference schedule beginning in 2016. The league also is adopting a more aggressive approach to nonconference scheduling for the College Football Playoff environment -- at least one game per year against a major-conference school and no FCS games -- that it hopes to have in place by 2016.

ESPN.com caught up with league commissioner Jim Delany on Sunday to discuss some of the key issues.

On the approach to realigning the divisions for a 14-team league ...

Delany: We started into it in November soon after [the additions of Rutgers and Maryland]. We included Rutgers and Maryland in all of our discussions, culminating in the review today by the presidents. We met six times. Early on, we decided that we wanted to prioritize geography. We've got a conference that goes from the Atlantic Ocean to the Colorado border and from the Canadian border in some cases to the mid South. Therefore, we thought geography was a good way to bind the conference together. We also wanted to preserve as much tradition as we could, and we do that through the protection of the rivalries. Before, we had 12 of the 13 trophies protected. This time, we have 10, and the three that are not will occur at least once every four years. Likewise, if you're a student-athlete, you'll have a chance to play everybody at least once in a four-year cycle, even though it's a bigger conference. The presidents and athletic directors were on board, too, with the idea of playing as much as we can. That takes our conference schedule from 48 games to 63 annually, so you have over a 30 percent increase in conference games, but only a 16 percent increase in conference membership.

We wanted to strengthen our schedules by playing each other more, but also by monitoring and asking that everybody schedule at least one comparable opponent. We were at about 20 percent of our games against BCS [automatic-qualifying conferences]. That moves that to a minimum of 33 percent, so one in every three years will be against a BCS opponent. And then we made a decision not to play others from divisions [FCS] where they have fewer scholarships. We think it's good for the fans, we think it's good for the players. It strengthens our schedule from the perspective of the postseason and it binds the conference together in a powerful way.

It turned out sort of the way we started, which was number one, respect geography, number two, preserve rivalries and then competitive balance.

On competitive balance as a lower priority this time around ...

Delany: It was a third principle. It was the first one in our last go-round. We seeded everybody 1 through 6, and we had four schools, based on 20-year history, who we all thought were No. 1 seeds (Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Nebraska). So we split them, and then we split Iowa and Wisconsin, and then we split Northwestern and Michigan State. This time around, with two new members on the East Coast, we changed our thinking, we adapted to a new set of circumstances and we put competitive balance third. The only way we could have seriously engaged there was to move Ohio State, Penn State or Michigan, based on the 20-year history, into the West. We weren't willing to do that. So we'll see.

We look at the SEC over the last 25 years, and they started off in a period where [East division members] Georgia, Florida and Tennessee dominated, and then in the last decade, LSU, Alabama and Auburn [from the West division] have been stronger. So we expect it to go back and forth. We look at Nebraska and Wisconsin as elite programs. We think Iowa has played in big-time BCS games. We see Northwestern with 10 wins, and we see new leadership at Minnesota, Illinois and Purdue, and it's hard to predict. But we think there's a lot of parity in the Big Ten. We've had nine different teams go to the Rose Bowl in the last 24 years. We've had six or seven teams play in BCS bowls, so we think we can handle it. Obviously, we won't know for a decade exactly how that plays out.

On why Ohio State, Penn State or Michigan couldn't move to the West, or Michigan State, a team a lot of fans have brought up as one that could create more balance ...

Delany: If you were going to balance the bracket, you would have to [move] Penn State, Michigan or Ohio State, and all three felt strongly that this should be geographic. Both Michigan and Ohio State felt like they should be in the same division. In the case of Michigan State, they have a very strong football program, but when we looked at them last time, they were what I would describe as a 3 seed. And Purdue was a 4 seed. Moving a 3 seed over wasn't really going to be the answer to competitive balance anyway. In the case of Purdue last time, they'd been to a lot of bowl games, they'd been to the Rose Bowl, they've had good years, a little down in the last couple years but still bowl-eligible. Michigan State's a good football program, but it wasn't going to make things equal competitively. It may have had an effect. It depends upon what you think Michigan State and Purdue will do over the next decade.

On crossover schedules and rotations ...

Delany: The strong majority view was that we not have assigned crossovers, so we could play each other as much as we could over a long period of time. Obviously, Indiana and Purdue have the Bucket game, it's historic and we wanted to preserve that. It made Purdue comfortable going West, Indiana comfortable going East and it preserved that tradition. An awful lot of our rivalries could be taken care of through divisional play. If you look at the schedules, what you'll see is over time, the crossovers rotate. In the first 18 years, you're going to see a lot of competition between teams at the top of either division. We call that a bit of parity-based scheduling. You'll see Wisconsin and Nebraska and Iowa playing a lot of competition against Penn State, Ohio State and Michigan. But it will eventually rotate. BTN did some surveys. We didn't rely on them but we followed the results. We had 62,000 people who participated. By and large, this aligns with what we think is fan-friendly in terms of regionalization, protection of rivals and so on. About 80 percent of fans were supportive of nine or 10 games.

On the possibility of 10 conference games and the need for teams to play seven home games per year ...

Delany: It was fully explored. A negative of the nine is the 5-4 [home games vs. road games]. But we're able to get the 5-4 to be identical in each division, so the people you're playing against are all playing five or four. The 10 would have been nice, but we were having difficulty seeing 28 nonconference games and being able to accomplish what we wanted with major matchups. While we explored it, we felt we'd have a much harder time getting to seven home games. A lot of these budgets are predicated on it. We thought it was a reach. Who's to say in the future where we might go, but right now, we thought nine was the right place to be.

On the new scheduling principles Big Ten teams want to adopt ...

Delany: We're shooting for 2016, but we have some contractual issues. People are going to try to make it work. The conference is going to try to help as much as we can and coordinate and communicate to other conferences who have a desire to upgrade schedules. You're only talking about three or four weeks, and then you're pretty much going to conference play. Everybody's looking for improved schedules. I think they will be. And the committee we finally establish will have guidelines in that direction. We're not saying everybody has to play the same schedule, but if you're a Top 10-type program, we want you to be scheduling a Top 10-type program. If you're in the middle, we understand that.

For the most part, [the FCS games] were wins, and in a lot of cases, they weren't good matchups. They're good football teams, but it's hard to compete when you're 25 scholarships less. We think it's a balanced package. We think it's progressive with what's happening in the future. All in all, we feel pretty good about it.

On division names and Legends/Leaders going away ...

Delany: We're East and we're West. It's pure geography. Last time, we were a combination of competitive balance and geography being last. Those names weren't available to us last time, so we didn't have much discussion on it. It's just a reflection on each division.

People can have the discussion [on Legends and Leaders] now or in the future, but for us, it was a good-faith effort. If they weren't accepted, and I take it to some extent, they weren't, but among the athletic directors and presidents, it was pretty cut and dried that if you go with geography, geographic names are the right way to go.

The Big Ten presidents and chancellors on Sunday approved the new East-West division alignment in football for the 2014 season, as well as a nine-game conference schedule beginning in 2016.

Legends and Leaders are gone, as the league made geography it's top priority in aligning the new divisions. Here's how they'll look when new Big Ten members Maryland and Rutgers join the conference ...

Big Ten East: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers

Big Ten West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin

The Purdue-Indiana game will be the only annual protected crossover in the new alignment. The initial alignment featured protected crossovers for every Big Ten team.

"Big Ten directors of athletics concluded four months of study and deliberation with unanimous approval of a future football structure that preserved rivalries and created divisions based on their primary principle of East/West geography," commissioner Jim Delany said in a prepared statement. "The directors of athletics also relied on the results of a fan survey commissioned by [Big Ten Network] last December to arrive at their recommendation, which is consistent with the public sentiment expressed in the poll."

Delany told ESPN.com that geography was the top priority in aligning divisions, followed by preserving rivalries and then competitive balance, which had been the driving force behind the initial alignment. The athletic directors met six times to discuss divisions and scheduling since Maryland and Rutgers joined the league in November.

The Big Ten will keep an eight-game league schedule for the 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasons before joining leagues like the Pac-12 and Big 12 with nine. In 2014 and 2015, teams will play six division games plus two crossover games. Beginning in 2016, teams will play six division games and three crossovers.

Beginning in 2016, the East division teams will play five Big Ten home games and four Big Ten road games in even-numbered years (2016, 2018, 2020, etc.). The West division teams will play five Big Ten home games and four Big Ten road games in odd-numbered years. The Big Ten last played nine league games during the 1983 and 1984 seasons.

The new alignment preserves 10 of 13 rivalry trophy games through division play or the Purdue-Indiana crossover, but all 13 games will take place at least once every four years. Also, while Purdue-Indiana is the only protected crossover, the league will have cross-division rotations.

"In the first 18 years, you’re going to see a lot of competition between teams at the top of either division," Delany said. "We call that a bit of parity-based scheduling, so you’ll see Wisconsin, Nebraska and Iowa playing a lot of competition against Penn State, Ohio State and Michigan. But it will rotate. Early on, we feel this gives the fans what they want."

The Big Ten approved a nine-game league schedule in August 2011, but went back to eight after forming a scheduling partnership with the Pac-12. When the partnership fell apart last summer, the Big Ten decided to keep an eight-game league schedule, which will remain for the next three seasons.

The division names discussion was a brief one.

"It's pure geography," Delany said. "Last time, we were a combination of competitive balance and geography being last. So those names weren't available to us last time. We didn't have a lot of discussion on it."

We'll have more reaction from Delany and others on the divisions/scheduling announcement, so stay tuned ...

As expected, Big Ten officials on Sunday approved new East-West divisions for 2014 and a nine-game conference schedule beginning in 2016.

As with any big decision, some benefit more than others. With that in mind, we take a look at the winners and losers of the Big Ten's new plan going forward:

Winner: Wisconsin

The Badgers have won three straight Big Ten titles, so they hardly need much of a break. But there's no denying that life almost certainly will be easier for Wisconsin in the West than it would have been in the East. It won't have to compete with Michigan, Penn State or Ohio State for division titles and will have only one traditional power (Nebraska) on its side. Plus, the Badgers will be grouped with traditional rivals Iowa and Minnesota.

Loser: Michigan State

Many, including me, thought that putting the Spartans in the West made sense to balance out the divisions. But competitive balance wasn't the priority this time around for the Big Ten. So now Michigan State will have to knock heads with Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State every year just in its own division. And the Spartans already have Alabama and Notre Dame on the 2016 schedule, which is shaping up to be a murderer's row.

Neutral: Nebraska

On the one hand, the Huskers will play in what sure looks like the easier division. On the other hand, Nebraska fans didn't think they'd be leaving the Big 12 only to not play Michigan, Ohio State or Penn State every year. Some Big Red supporters are worried the Big Ten West will turn into another version of the Big 12 North. The good news is that the Big Ten is sure to schedule crossover games between the Huskers and the Eastern powers as much as possible.

Winner: The Big Ten's coffers

The nine-game schedule begins in the fall of 2016. Not coincidentally, the Big Ten's current TV contract expires after the 2015-16 academic year. The league will have 63 conference games to offer to network executives for the next contract instead of the current 48. That's what those in the business call "inventory," and now the Big Ten has more to sell, as well as the additional large markets that Rutgers and Maryland bring.

Losers: The Little Brown Jug and Illibuck rivalries

No division alignment could have saved every one of the Big Ten's trophy series. The two most notable victims in the East-West split are the annual Little Brown Jug game between Michigan and Minnesota, and the Illibuck series between Ohio State and Illinois. The Michigan-Minnesota rivalry has some cool history to it, but with only three Gophers victories since 1968, it hasn't exactly been competitive. Few will miss the Illibuck game, either.

Winner: The Game

The Michigan-Ohio State game will naturally be continued on the last weekend of the regular season, and now it could often be a critical matchup for the East Division title. Maybe more importantly, this new alignment prevents the Big Ten's top rivalry from being restaged a week later in the conference championship game. Although some would love to see the two teams play a rematch in Indianapolis, the rivalry will be stronger if it remains a once-a-year affair. This is the last year that the Buckeyes and Wolverines could potentially meet in back-to-back weeks.

Losers: The Big Ten's bottom tier

Bad news for teams like Indiana, Maryland and others that will hope to sneak into a bowl at 6-6: Life is about to get rougher. The Big Ten's scheduling model now leaves only three nonconference games, and FCS opponents will be taboo beginning in 2016. For a team like Purdue, which wants to play Notre Dame every year, there's not much margin for error. Even if you schedule three non-league patsies, you have to win at least three Big Ten games, which won't be easy in years when your team has five road conference contests. Indiana, for example, will also have to contend with Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan State every year.

Winner: Our memories

No more need for mnemonic devices to remember which teams are in which division (M's and N's, plus Iowa ...). Now, anyone with a basic understanding of geography can instantly figure out who's where. If nothing else, the new alignment is simple and blessedly easy to comprehend.

Losers: Big Ten haters

Get your Legends and Leaders jokes in this year. Those oft-ridiculed names are going away after the 2013 season, and thankfully so. They made for easy punch lines by Twitter comedians and other critics of the league. Big Ten haters will have to work a little harder when East and West come aboard.

Winner: The SEC

The Big Ten joins the Pac-12 and Big 12 as major conferences playing nine conference games, and the ACC will have five of its teams playing eight conference games plus Notre Dame every year. The SEC remains at eight games. Playing more conference games is great for fans and TV, but it also means more losses throughout the league and makes it harder for teams to go unbeaten -- the Big Ten champ will have to run a gantlet of 10 conference games, including the title game. The SEC will continue to benefit from the perception that its teams beat one another up during league play while also playing fewer conference games. That could have big ramifications on the selection process for the upcoming College Football Playoff.

Unless you've been living in a world without ESPN, the Internet or sports talk radio, you're well aware that the NFL draft begins Thursday night.

What will the weekend hold for Big Ten products? Who will be the top pick from the league? Which players should be garnering more buzz? Big Ten bloggers Adam Rittenberg and Brian Bennett try to answer those questions and more in this blog debate:

Brian Bennett: Adam, another NFL draft is nearly upon us. What better way to spend 96 hours of a spring weekend than listening to analysts describe a player's upside? At least we won't have to read any more 2013 mock drafts after Thursday afternoon.

But let's get down to Big Ten business. According to our colleagues with the good hair -- Mel Kiper Jr. and Todd McShay -- the league very well might not produce a first-round pick for the first time since the AFL-NFL merger. Last year, the first Big Ten player taken was all the way down at No. 23. What's going on here? Is there that big of a talent shortage in the conference, or is this just a blip? And do you think any Big Ten players hear their names called on Thursday night?

Adam Rittenberg: I think we can match them follicle for follicle, don't you? The Big Ten's draft downturn has been a trend for a number of years. First, the league was falling out of the top 10 consistently. Then, it started to only see selections in the final 10-12 picks. Now it might fall out of the first round entirely. So, yes, there is a talent shortage at the very highest levels and especially at certain positions. The three we've written about most often are quarterback (last first round pick: Kerry Collins), cornerback and wide receiver. I still think the Big Ten produces a wealth of great linemen on both sides of the ball, as well as its share of quality running backs. But the running back position isn't valued nearly as high in the first round as cornerback and quarterback.

I thought the Big Ten still would have a first-round pick even after Michigan LT Taylor Lewan announced he would return in 2012. But now I'm not so sure. Ohio State DT Johnathan Hankins and Purdue DT Kawann Short both could hear their names called, but it's far from a guarantee.

What do you think this year's draft says about the state of the Big Ten?

Brian Bennett: I think you hit on several of the reasons, and I'd add in the population and demographic shifts as another. Of course, if Lewan came out as expected, he'd probably be a top-15 pick. And if the NFL were to do last year's draft over, I'm pretty sure Russell Wilson would go in the first round, right?

Still, the downturn in top-level NFL talent, at least from a draft perspective, has to trouble the conference and offers a possible explanation as to why the Big Ten has struggled on the big stage of late. I believe that the way Urban Meyer and Brady Hoke are recruiting will mean more elite players will be entering the pros in the near future, but we shall see.

Let's talk about this year's prospects. Who do you think will be the first Big Ten player selected this weekend? And which Big Ten product do you think should be the first one taken?

Adam Rittenberg: As much as I'd love to see Wisconsin RB Montee Ball work his way into the first round, I think the first pick will be either Short or Hankins. Both are potentially great NFL defensive linemen, but I think Short has a little more versatility to his game and can be an effective pass-rusher in addition to his run-stuffing duties. Short wasn't healthy for a chunk of last season, which led to some erratic play, but he has the ability to dominate inside. So does Hankins, but he's more of a space-eater than a difference-maker on the pass rush. I think Short should be the first Big Ten player taken, and I think he will be.

You mention Wilson, who was arguably the biggest steal of the 2012 draft. Which Big Ten player will fill that role this year? Who are the value picks out there from the league?

Brian Bennett: Wilson slipped in last year's draft because of concerns over his height. And I think there may be a similar thing going on with Ohio State's John Simon. He's viewed as a tweener because he's only 6-foot-1, but there's no questioning Simon's motor, heart or leadership. As long as he can stay healthy, he'll be a productive player for a long time in the NFL.

Penn State's Jordan Hill is another guy who's shorter than the prototype for a defensive lineman but who also makes up for it with his performance and drive. I also believe Nebraska's Rex Burkhead is being undervalued, though running backs aren't the commodities they once were at the next level. A knee injury hurt Burkhead's stock, but he showed at the combine what kind of athlete he is. And I think Michigan State cornerback Johnny Adams, who was looked at as a first-round draft pick not that long ago, could be had at a good price this weekend.

Which players do you think are being undervalued? And what do you see as the draft fate for Michigan's Denard Robinson?

Adam Rittenberg: You bring up some really interesting names, BB, especially Burkhead, who, if healthy and in the right system, could be a very valuable NFL player. Simon is another guy who needs to be in the right system and must overcome measurables that aren't ideal for the NFL at defensive end or outside linebacker. I wouldn't forget the group of Illinois defensive linemen -- Michael Buchanan, Akeem Spence and Glenn Foster, who wowed the scouts during pro day in Champaign. It's easy to dismiss them because they played on a terrible team, but all three have been on the NFL radar for some time -- especially Spence and Buchanan -- and have the talent to succeed at the pro level.

Ohio State tackle Reid Fragel is another guy who could be a great value, although his stock seems to be rising quickly. He started his career as a tight end but really thrived last year at the tackle spot.

Robinson will be one of the weekend's top story lines. He's clearly a work in progress as a receiver, but you can't teach that speed and explosiveness. Robinson is a risk-reward guy, but I'd be surprised if he's still on the board midway through the third round.

The Big Ten sends a fairly small contingent of underclassmen to this year's draft. How do you think those players pan out?

Brian Bennett: Michigan State has three of 'em in Le'Veon Bell, Dion Sims and William Gholston. I think there's a chance that some team reaches for Bell in the first round, and he's got the body to be a very good NFL running back for a long time. Sims also presents an intriguing option for teams, especially with the increased use of tight ends in the pro passing game. Despite Gholston's impressive physical traits, he didn't test that well in Indianapolis and had a questionable motor in college. Teams could shy away from him.

You mentioned Spence from Illinois, a guy whose stock seemed to climb as he showed some great strength in workouts. Hankins will be a second-rounder at worst. Then there's Wisconsin center Travis Frederick, who posted a slow sprint time at the combine. But how many times do centers need to sprint? I still think he'll be a good player, and one who shouldn't fall past the second round.

This is getting to be as long as the draft itself, so we should probably start wrapping things up. Any final thoughts on the Big Ten's outlook this weekend?

Adam Rittenberg: The big story lines for me, other than whether the Big Ten has a player drafted in the first round, are where running backs like Ball, Bell and Burkhead land, the Denard Watch, how the underclassmen fare and where the potential sleepers we outlined above end up. This won't be a transformative draft for the Big Ten because it lacks elite prospects at the positions we mentioned earlier, especially cornerback and quarterback. But there are always a few surprises along the way. As a Chicago Bears fan, I'm always interested to see if a Big Ten player ends up at Halas Hall.

What Big Ten story lines intrigue you heading into the draft?

Brian Bennett: You mentioned most of the big ones. I'll also be interested to see if any team takes a chance on Penn State's Michael Mauti and whether Iowa's James Vandenberg gets drafted after a disappointing senior year. I predict the Big Ten keeps its first-round streak alive -- barely -- and that Robinson stays in Michigan when the Detroit Lions draft him in the fourth round.

And then we can all put the 2013 NFL draft to bed -- and start studying those 2014 mock drafts.