<
>

Big Ten Wednesday mailbag

Welcome to another installment of the Big Ten mailbag, where you ask intriguing questions, I provide middling answers and we all try to fill the void between signing day and the start of spring practice.

John S. from Lindale, Georgia, writes: Hey Brian, in that Brady Hoke's recruiting classes were pretty highly rated, is it not possible that Michigan's new staff couldn't reasonably be expected to get the team to more than eight or nine wins next year? Seems like all the early projections for next year have a best-case scenario of no more than eight or nine wins. Thanks!

Brian Bennett: I've actually been surprised with some rosy projections for the 2015 Wolverines by fellow ESPN types in the past couple of days. Our Football Power Index has Michigan ranked 28th in the preseason, K.C. Joyner wrote that the Maize and Blue could win 10 games and challenge Ohio StateInsider in the East Division and Brad Edwards picked Michigan to make the Rose BowlInsider.

Um, guys, have you been watching the same Michigan team as I have? You know, the one that lost its best defensive player, best receiver and starting quarterback from last season? Jim Harbaugh deserves respect, but with a really murky quarterback situation and questions on the offensive line, at receiver and at running back, I just don't see 2015 being a banner debut season.

Yet as you mention, John, the cupboard is not entirely bare. The players Hoke and his staff recruited were ranked high for a reason, and Harbaugh and his guys are known for developing talent. That should equate to better results quickly, but maybe not this year. If Michigan can go 8-4 or better this fall, Harbaugh will have done a very good job.

Brian Bennett: Most coaches believe there should be changes made in recruiting. But good luck trying to get them all to agree on specific changes. This isn't just a Big Ten phenomenon, either. At the American Football Coaches Association national convention in Louisville last month, several of the nation's top coaches met and talked about whether there should be an early signing date and other changes. As one coach told me, "We talk about the same things every year, and nothing ever happens." It's a minor miracle that an early signing date in mid-December has a chance of coming about, though I believe the date should be earlier.

The reason why it's hard to get every coach on board with the same idea is that different schools have different agendas. Moving up official visits to a prospect's junior year would greatly help some Big Ten programs like Nebraska and Wisconsin. But ones like Ohio State and Penn State, which are much closer to rich talent bases, don't really need it. Jim Delany's job is to listen to what his coaches want. They may never come to a complete consensus, but I believe Big Ten coaches share many of the same principles and concerns about the accelerated recruiting calendar.

Brian Bennett: Austin Ward covered the Scarlet Knights' revolving door of playcallers in Wednesday's morning links. You want consistency with your staff, and it's tough on players who have to adjust to new terminology and a new way of doing things year after year.

Change isn't necessarily bad, though, and plenty of first-year offensive coordinators have done well. Michigan State's 2013 season is a prime example of that. What Rutgers has going in its favor is that the basic system hasn't really changed much since Greg Schiano's tenure began. Under Kyle Flood, the Scarlet Knights still run a pro-style set that new coordinator Ben McDaniels seems well-groomed to oversee. At some point, you'd like to see some continuity there for the players' sake, but Rutgers' success on offense this season probably depends a lot more on who's playing quarterback than who is calling plays from upstairs.

Brian Bennett: It doesn't hurt that the Hawkeyes are in the much more wide-open West Division, and they went into the final two weeks of last season with a solid chance of making it to Indianapolis before coming up short in their final two home games. In my view, it still all starts with the running game. Iowa has been mediocre at best at pounding the rock the past couple of seasons. As much as I admired Mark Weisman's story, the fact that no one could really beat him out as the primary ball carrier for two years speaks volumes.

Sure, it would be nice if Iowa developed a big-time passing game with loads of athletic receivers, but that's not all that realistic given the program's access to talent and Kirk Ferentz's philosophy. I think this program needs to rediscover some of the toughness that helped it get to major bowl games earlier in Ferentz's tenure and be more like what Wisconsin and Minnesota are, where opponents know it's going to be a long, physical day when you play them.

Brian Bennett: I can appreciate that coaches live in a bubble and devote all their energy and resources toward trying to get a large group of people all pulling in the same, successful direction. The best coaches are often control freaks who control every message their team receives, so of course they would view the media as being part of it.

Naturally, though, that's not the role journalists are supposed to fill. I never see what I write as "negative" or "positive." Rather, I look at it as simply "what is." If a team is winning, the coverage will seem positive, and the opposite is true if a team is losing. Beckman and his staff perhaps deserve a bit more credit for pushing last season's team to six wins and a bowl. But true positivity around the program only stems from winning more games.