Big Performance Turnarounds in Year 2

How many currently active head football coaches were lucky enough to witness a major change in on-field performance by the second year of their program?

I compiled a list of the top current and active college head football coaches in the land and recorded their career record to-date at that school, winning percentage at current school, and their team records in Year 1 and Year 2. I then looked for the largest delta in number of victories between Year 1 and 2 for each coach.

I counted 22 individual cases where the new and currently active head football coach demonstrated:

A. A greater number of football victories from year 1 to year 2 (+1 win or more)

AND

B. The ability to get to a post-season bowl in Year 2

This approach excludes some pretty good coaches and some good football teams (like an LSU, Tulsa, Boise State) that may have had a brilliant 11-2 record in year 1 and a good 10-3 record in year 2, as an example. They’d be excluded from the count because they did not technically “improve” in the win column the second year.

Also, what I am showing only takes into consideration active head coaches at their current head coaching positions, not past jobs the coach might have held. Therefore, Rich Rodriguez’s 3-8 to 9-4 miracle work between 2001 and 2002 at West Virginia is excluded here because his current job is at Michigan.

Here's what I found (sorted by highest delta in year 2 victories):

Coach	Team	Year 1	Year 2	Year 2 Win Delta
Jim Tressel	Ohio St.	2001: 7-5 Lost the Outback Bowl	2002: 14-0 Won the Fiesta Bowl (NC)	7
Bobby Stoops	OU	1999: 7-5 Lost Independence Bowl	2000: 13-0 Won Orange Bowl (NC)	6
Pete Carroll	USC	2001: 6-6 Lost Las Vegas Bowl	2002: 11-2 Won Orange Bowl	5
Mark Richt	Georgia	2001: 8-4 Lost Music City Bowl	2002: 13-1 Won Sugar Bowl	5
Bobby Bowden	FSU	1976: 5-6	1977: 10-2 Won Tangerine Bowl	5
Bronco Mendenhall	BYU	2005: 6-6 Lost Las Vegas Bowl	2007: 11-2 Won Las Vegas Bowl	5
Nick Saban	Alabama	2007: 7-6 Won Independence Bowl	2008: 12-2 Lost Sugar Bowl	5
Urban Meyer	Florida	2005: 9-3 Won Outback Bowl	2006: 13-1 Won BCS NCG	4
Gary Patterson	TCU	2001: 6-6 Lost Galleryfurniture.com Bowl	2002: 10-2 Won Liberty Bowl	4
Chris Ault	Nevada	2004: 5-7	2005: 9-3 Won Hawai'I Bowl	4
Mark Mangino	Kansas	2002: 2-10	2003: 6-7 Lost Tangerine Bowl	4
Butch Davis	UNC	2007: 4-8	2008: 8-5 Lost Meineke Car Care Bowl	4
Dan Hawkins	Colorado	2006: 2-10	2007: 6-7 Lost Independence Bowl	4
Joe Paterno	PSU	1967: 5-5-0	1967: 8-2-1 Tied Gator Bowl	3
Skip Holtz	ECU	2005: 5-6	2006: 7-6 Lost Papajohns.com Bowl	2
Brian Kelly	Cincy	2007: 10-3 Won Papajohns.com Bowl	2008: 11-3 Lost Orange Bowl	1
Kyle Whittingham	Utah	2005: 7-5 Won Emerald Bowl	2006: 8-5 Won Armed Forces Bowl	1
Jeff Tedford	Cal	2002: 7-5	2003: 8-6 Won Insight.com Bowl	1
Ralph Friedgen	Maryland	2001: 10-2 Lost Orange Bowl	2002: 11-3 Won Peach Bowl	1
Charlie Weis	ND	2005: 9-3 Lost Fiesta Bowl	2006: 10-3 Lost Sugar Bowl	1
Steve Spurrier	S.Carolina	2005: 7-5 Lost Independence Bowl	2006: 8-5 Won Liberty Bowl	1
Tom O'Brien	NC State	2007: 5-7	2008: 6-7 Lost Papajohns.com Bowl	1

It’s kind of interesting to take note which coaches faced the fire of year one and survived the hate storm long enough to tell about it. Some coaches never faced any such fire their first and second year out.

There were three cases where a national championship was won in Year 2: Ohio State (Tressel 2002), Oklahoma (Stoops 2000) and Florida (Meyer 2006).

I'll revisit the list again at the conclusion of the 2009 football season in January 2010.

Lead Running Back Performance: Calvin Magee vs. Fred Jackson

In the previous post I highlighted some of the past coaching experience of Michigan’s current quarterback coach, Rod Smith. I wanted to explore this a little bit because the quarterback position is by far the most important on the field offensively and Michigan has a lot of youth at that position. Coaching up these kids requires experience, patience and a lot of knowledge.

Now I wish to take a closer look at the achievements of Michigan’s offensive coordinator, Calvin Magee, as well.

Both Calvin Magee and Rod Smith previously held assistant coaching jobs under South Florida head coach Jim Leavitt, but were not coaches at SFU at the same time.

While Magee’s role is today offensive coordinator for the Michigan Wolverines, we need to bear in mind that for most of his career Magee's main expertise appears to have been coaching running backs and as running game coordinator at South Florida and West Virginia.

I took a brief look at Magee’s years as Running Backs Coach and Running Game Coordinator at both schools and found some interesting statistics about the players he coached during this period. I then wondered what that past experience might mean for Michigan’s leading ground gainer from last year, Brandon Minor, as well the future stable of Michigan running backs.

In addition, I wanted to consider Calvin Magee’s experience of coaching team leading rushers and compare that success with the past achievements of Michigan’s current running backs coach, Fred Jackson.


Year Zero at South Florida: The Running of the Bulls
When Calvin Magee became the Running Backs Coach for Jim Leavitt at South Florida in 1997, the program was in its very infancy. It must have been interesting to join a brand new college football program and be part of the team of architects that would build it brand new from the ground up. Magee coordinated the running game for South Florida for 4 years under then offensive coordinator Michael Canales, and as such Magee played a very important role is establishing SFU’s winning football foundation.

Magee’s first year on the job was a tough one however. South Florida’s first ever quarterback was a former South Carolina Gamecock recruit named Chad Barnhardt. Canales had South Florida running a spread offense from the very beginning. It was a very young team that would finished 5-6. Jim Leavitt said of the first season, "This should be the worst team you ever see here at South Florida. We only have two seniors, everyone's back." The first and best tailback on the Bulls team in 1997 was Rafael Williams. Williams played running back for SFU for 4 years under Magee's direction, and was the leading rusher for the team 3 of those 4 years. In 1999 Dyral McMillan was the team's leading rusher.

Under Magee’s instruction, South Florida’s first running backs were good enough to be quite dangerous. They achieved high yards per carry (5.2 average ypc over 4 years), which is a common characteristic of more run-centric, spread option teams. It’s also what one might expect to see anyway versus competition the likes of Kentucky Weslyan, Citadel, Western Kentucky and Cumberland! The other stat that jumps off the page is the 1999 season, when Magee coached Bulls tailback Dyral McMillan, the first ever 1,000 yard rusher for SFU with 9 TDs. Interestingly, McMillan’s millennial rushing statistics that year coincided with the first starting dual-threat quarterback in SFU history, freshman Marquel Blackwell.

Name	Year	School	Class	Rush Att	Yards	Yds/Carry	TDs	Record
Rafael Williams	1997	South Florida	Fr.	139	729	5.2	7	5-6-0
Rafael Williams	1998	South Florida	So.	98	586	6.0	6	8-3-0
Dyral McMillan	1999	South Florida	Sr.	181	1017	5.6	9	7-4-0
Rafael Williams	2000	South Florida	Sr.	167	704	4.2	4	7-4-0
Total				585	3036	5.2	26	27-17-0

In 2001 Magee left South Florida to join Rich Rodriguez’s new staff at West Virginia to coordinate the Mountaineer running game and serve as an offensive coordinator. Unlike the first year at SFU, Magee inherited a talented crew of bite-sized and lightning-fast tailbacks to work with including senior Cooper Rego (5-9, 190 lbs) and sophomores Avon Cobourne (5-9, 190 lbs.) and Quincy Wilson (5-10, 210 lbs) from outgoing head coach Don Nehlen.

Unfortunately, 2001 was West Virginia’s own "Year of Infinite Suffering" as the team tried in vain to overcome a slew of offensive turnovers (19 interceptions) from the quarterbacks (Lewis, Jones and Marshall), an inexperienced offensive line (only 1 returning starter from 2000 bowl team), and a veteran defense trying to understand just what the hell new defensive coordinator Todd Graham (future Tulsa head coach!) was trying to do with the linebackers. The Mountaineers finished a disappointing 3-8-0 on the season. Yet, despite the embarrassing losing season, Magee did a good job maintaining production with the running game. The Mountaineers' best tailback, Avon Cobourne, rushed for 1,298 yards (4.9 ypc) and 9 TDs. This was marked improvement Cobourne over his 2000 numbers (893 yards at 4.5 ypc).

In 2002, Rodriguez and Magee agreed to adjust their strategy. The quarterback position would now be occupied by a barely seasoned sophomore named Rasheed Marshall (played 5 games in 2000). The tailback spot remained in great shape, however. Cooper Rego had graduated, but Cobourne and Quincy Wilson returned and a star freshman Jason Colson would join the fray as well. Clearly, Rodriguez had had quite enough of the ridiculous interceptions from the year prior. Balanced attack be damned! Rodriguez and Magee would focus on taking greater advantage of a slightly more experienced and improved offensive line, and a quicker, more mobile quarterback (Marshall). The results turnaround in 2002 was staggering. Cobourne alone rushed for 1,710 yards (5.1 ypc) and 17 TDs! This meant, of course, that approximately every 20th carry, Mr. Cobourne would cue the Mountaineer marching band and proceed to perform a nice little jig with friends in the opponents end zone. Perhaps more surprising was that Magee coached Quincy Wilson to contribute as well with a shocking 901 yards (6.4 ypc) and 6 TDs!

Calvin Magee was a very successful running game and offensive coordinator at West Virginia. The team's record as well as the statistics of the lead running backs under his charge prove this:

Name	Year	School	Class	Rush Att	Yards	Yds/Carry	TDs	Record
Avon Cobourne	2001	West Virginia	Jr.	267	1298	4.9	9	3-8-0
Avon Cobourne	2002*	West Virginia	Sr.	335	1710	5.1	17	9-4-0
Quincy Wilson	2002*	West Virginia	Jr.	140	901	6.4	6	9-4-0
Quincy Wilson	2003	West Virginia	Sr.	282	1380	4.9	12	8-5-0
KayJay Harris	2004	West Virginia	Sr.	165	959	5.8	10	8-4-0
Steve Slaton	2005	West Virginia	Fr.	205	1128	5.5	17	11-1-0
Steve Slaton	2006	West Virginia	So.	248	1744	7.0	16	11-2-0
Steve Slaton	2007	West Virginia	Jr.	198	1335	6.7	14	11-2-0
Total				1840	10455	5.7	101	71-30

Looking at the aggregate statistics of team leading rushers at SFU and WVU, Calvin Magee’s instruction of running backs under his charge lead us into familiar territory:

About 19 rushing attempts per game and about 5.7 yards per carry.

See below:

Name	Year	School	Class	Rush Att	Yards	Yds/Carry	TDs	Record
Rafael Williams	1997	South Florida	Fr.	139	729	5.2	7	5-6-0
Rafael Williams	1998	South Florida	So.	98	586	6.0	6	8-3-0
Dyral McMillan	1999	South Florida	Sr.	181	1017	5.6	9	7-4-0
Rafael Williams	2000	South Florida	Sr.	167	704	4.2	4	7-4-0
Avon Cobourne	2001	West Virginia	Jr.	267	1298	4.9	9	3-8-0
Avon Cobourne	2002	West Virginia	Sr.	335	1710	5.1	17	9-4-0
Quincy Wilson	2002	West Virginia	Jr.	140	901	6.4	6	9-4-0
Quincy Wilson	2003	West Virginia	Sr.	282	1380	4.9	12	8-5-0
KayJay Harris	2004	West Virginia	Sr.	165	959	5.8	10	8-4-0
Steve Slaton	2005	West Virginia	Fr.	205	1128	5.5	17	11-1-0
Steve Slaton	2006	West Virginia	So.	248	1744	7.0	16	11-2-0
Steve Slaton	2007	West Virginia	Jr.	198	1335	6.7	14	11-2-0
				2425	13491	5.6	127	93-38

* = In 2002, West Virginia had two tailback rushers with over 900 yards.

Comparing Calvin Magee with Fred Jackson

Fred Jackson began his coaching career at Michigan in 1994 under then head coach Gary Moeller. Jackson's responsibility was coaching running backs for the Wolverines. Just like Magee, Jackson had some pretty awesome material to work with in Tyrone Wheatley.

So how does Magee's work compare to what Michigan fans have observed from Fred Jackson? The answer is that Michigan running backs have historically performed extremely well under Fred Jackson too. A great many Michigan fans I speak with rave about Mike Hart this and Mike Hart that. I understand. He's in everyone's short term memory. I realize that Mike Hart's numbers probably lie about how mentally and physically tough he was on the field. But Fred Jackson did a great job coaching explosiveness and vision with not only Mike Hart, but especially Chris Perry, Anthony Thomas and Tim Biakabatuka. Their stats bear this fact out for all to see:

Year	Running Back	Attempts	Yards	YPC	TDs	Record
2009	?
2008	Brandon Minor	103	533	5.2	9	3-9
2007	Mike Hart	265	1361	5.1	14	9-4
2006	Mike Hart	318	1562	4.9	14	11-2-0
2005	Mike Hart	150	662	4.4	4	7-5-0
2004	Mike Hart	282	1455	5.2	9	9-3-0
2003	Chris Perry	338	1674	5.0	18	10-3-0
2002	Chris Perry	267	1110	4.2	14	10-3-0
2001	BJ Askew	199	902	4.5	10	8-4-0
2000	Anthony Thomas	319	1733	5.4	18	9-3-0
1999	Anthony Thomas	301	1297	4.3	17	10-2-0
1998	Clarence Williams	146	646	5.4	0	10-3-0
1997	Chris Howard	199	938	4.7	7	12-0-0
1996	Clarence Williams	202	837	4.1	2	8-4-0
1995	Tim Biakabatuka	303	1818	6.0	12	9-4-0
1994	Tyrone Wheatley	210	1144	5.4	12	8-4-0
Total		3602	17672	4.9	160	133-53

So who has been the better running backs coach, Magee or Jackson?

In my view, Jackson is still coaching away and has many more career coaching stats to pad this fall with the likes of Brandon Minor and Carlos Brown. But comparing the aggregate lead back stats of the two coaching during their long careers, this is what I’ve found:

Running Backs Coach	Years	Schools	Att/Game	Yrds/Game	YPC	Winning Pct
Calvin Magee	12	South Florida, West Virginia	19	103	5.6	0.710
Fred Jackson	15	Michigan	19	94	4.9	0.707

Fred Jackson has coached many more players into the NFL draft compared to Magee. Magee’s work with reduced running back talent versus much easier competition has yielded predictably better yards per carry and winning percentage during his career coaching ball carriers than Jackson. Interestingly, the average number of carries per game is identical at 19 for both coaches.

So what does this mean? To me it says that the Michigan Wolverines offense, particularly the running game, is in very competent hands with Calvin Magee and Fred Jackson. These too have a tremendous level of successful coaching experience and knowledge combined, which is very encouraging for the future of the Michigan program.
Both have done a good job of focused improved production from their running backs.

Frankly, I am surprised that more top-rated high school running back recruits don't make Michigan a first consideration for their football career at the next level.

2009 Big Ten Team Predictions

Kick off of the 2009 college football season is only 103 days away.
Time for ridiculously early football team predictions that make for great reading amusement in the merry month of May! Here we go:


Penn State
Penn State finished a spectacular football season in 2008 under Joe Paterno, who now enters his 44th year as Nittany Lion head coach. Penn State finished 11-2-0 overall, losing first a nightmarish evening away game to Iowa by a last second FG, and then experiencing a blowout loss at the hands of the USC Trojans in the Rose Bowl. Offensively, Penn State returns only 5 starters in 2009, including explosive senior QB Darryl Clark and star TB Evan Royster. Royster is durable hellion, who rushed for a staggering 1,236 yards and 12 TDs and a 6.5 ypc in 2008. With Clark under center in the spread offense, Penn State steamrolled the competition for 5,426 yards total offense last year. Unfortunately, the offensive line and receiving positions have been hit by graduation and must be reloaded. Wideouts Graham Zug and Brett Brackett must step up their game to replace the the firepower provided by the Butler, Norwood, Williams combo last fall. The TE position is very talented with Andrew Quarless and Mickey Shuler both returning. PSU loses 3 OL starters to graduation including all-star center AQ Shipley. Penn State may field the best defense in the entire Big Ten conference. Leading tackler Aaron Maybin is gone, but the Lions return 7 starters plus star LB Sean Lee comes back into the lineup. The Penn State schedule is covered in frosting and pretty little sprinkles called Akron, Syracuse, Temple and Eastern Illinois. The Lions miss Wisconsin and Purdue on the conference slate. If PSU can rebuild the offensive line and find some decent receivers, then it should be another very happy season in Nittany Valley.
2008 Result: 11-2
2009 Bakery Basket Opponent: Eastern Illinois
2009 Falling Anvil Opponent: Ohio State
Likely Outcome: 10-2, 6-2



Ohio State
In 2008 the Ohio State Buckeyes started the season slow, due to injuries, but seemed to improve as the year wore on right up to the Fiesta Bowl finale loss to Texas. The Buckeyes finished 7-1 in conference play and 10-3 overall. Offensively, QB Terrelle Pryor will run the show in 2009. Despite losing Beanie Wells, Brian Hartline and Brian Robiskie to graduation and the NFL, there is more than sufficient talent to reload at every position, thanks to consecutive top 10 recruiting classes by head coach Jim Tressel and staff. The Ohio State offensive line has disappointed at times over the last three years. This year’s group should be much better with Browning, Brewster and Cordle returning, plus Michigan transfer Justin Boren at guard, and Andy Miller possibly playing at tackle. Replacing a power back like Beanie Wells would be a nightmare for most college football programs. Not for Ohio State. The Buckeyes return with tailbacks galore including Daniel “Boom” Herron, Brandon “Zoom” Saine, as well as incoming 5 star freshman Jamaal Berry from Miami, FL to drive OSU opponents “nuts”. Perhaps the biggest reason to watch the Buckeyes this fall is defense because they return 7 starters from a very good unit. Indeed, both LBs Marcus Freeman, and James Laurinaitus may be off to the NFL, along with talented CBs Donald Washington and Malcolm Jenkins, but the Ohio State front four of Worthington, Larimore, Gibson and Heyward may be one of the best in the Big Ten if not the nation. Despite the losses of Washington and Jenkins, the Buckeye secondary has depth and experience. The non-conference schedule will be a challenge - sort of. Toledo and New Mexico State are both dead on arrival opponents. But games versus Navy and USC might at least be interesting viewing. In conference play, the Buckeyes miss both Michigan State and Northwestern. OSU may very well blast through the first 9 games with little if any damage. However, the last three games might be the toughest: At PSU, Iowa, and then at Michigan.
2008 Result: 10-3
Bakery Basket Opponent: New Mexico State
Falling Anvil Opponent: at Penn State, USC, and (dare I say it?) at Michigan
Likely outcome: 9-3, 6-2



Michigan State
There’s a lot of excitement in East Lansing these days following a 9-4-0 season under Mark Dantonio, who is 16-10 so far and entering only his third season. MSU’s 2008 season had a similar start, middle, and end. All were punctuated by disappointing defeats to rather tough opponents. California, Ohio State, Penn State and Georgia all defeated the Spartans in rather convincing fashion. There were high points, however, including glorious wins against Notre Dame, Iowa, in-state rival Michigan and Wisconsin. Things appear to have changed for MSU football in the sense that the psychological problems under John L. Smith seem to be over. The Spartans played tough all year, competed in every game, and never quit regardless of the score. Dantonio deserves credit for this improved team discipline. In 2009, the Spartans return 6 starters on offense, but lose their leading passer (Bryan Hoyer, 2,400 yards) and leading rusher (Javon Ringer, 1,637 yards). Candidates at QB include talented veterans Kirk Cousins and Keith Nichol (an Oklahoma transfer). At running back AJ Jimmerson must pick up the slack for NFL-bound Ringer, or make room for talented 4-star freshmen recruits Edwin Baker and Larry Caper. Defensively, Michigan State still fields a good level of talent and experience, including four outstanding linebackers in Greg Jones, Eric Gordon, Adam Decker and Ryan Allison. The Spartan DL must be rebuilt, however, around star DE Trevor Anderson. If the Spartan defense can anchor the team long enough for the offense to gel, this should be another successful season for Michigan State. In non-conference play, the Spartans will play cupcake-extraordinaire and APR-challenged Montana State, followed by at Notre Dame, Central Michigan and Western Michigan. In conference play, the Spartans miss Ohio State and Indiana, and get to play Twisted (Big?) Sister school Michigan in the Green House.
In 2008, Michigan State’s schedule was the 15th toughest in the land. This year it looks to be even tougher.
2008 Result: 9-4
Bakery Basket Opponent: Montana State
Falling Anvil Opponent: if not Michigan, then at Illinois
Likely outcome: 9-3, 6-2



Iowa
If there’s one team in the Big Ten that could really surprise people, it would be the Iowa Hawkeyes. And if we find ourselves so surprised come October time-frame, it will be because head coach Kirk Ferentz discovered another spectacular running back on his roster to replace the incredible Mr. Shon Greene. Candidates this fall include Jewel Hampton, Paki O’Meara, Jeff Brinson and Sioux City sensation Brandon Wegher. The good news from 2008, other than the encouraging 9-4-0 finish and a bone-crushing bowl victory over Steve Spurrier’s South Carolina Gamecocks 31-10, is that the Hawkeyes found a great QB to lead the team in Ricky Stanzi. This was important following the departure of former starter Jake Christiansen. Stanzi, in turn, has a group of reliable receivers coming back in ‘09, including star TE Tony Moeaki, WR Marvin McNutt, plus a receiver with arguably the coolest combo-name in all of college football: Derrell Johnson-Koulianos! Most Iowa fans are excited about this coming season, and maybe they have a right to be. Normally, 8 returning starters on offense and 7 returning starters on defense after a 9-4-0 season are good reasons for more than standard optimism. But Iowa simply must find the antidote for stupid losses. For example, yes, Iowa found a way to beat hated rival Iowa State 17-5 last fall in Iowa City, but then lost inexplicably to Pitt by one lousy point. Then the Hawks proceeded to lose to Northwestern by 5 pts at home, to MSU by 3 points on the road, and to Illinois again by 3 points on the road. This same Iowa team then found a way to pull out a rabbit against unbeaten No. 3-ranked Penn State on national television. It’s all rather silly. And not a little bit annoying. This year the Iowa Hawkeye football schedule is going to be merciless. Yes, Northern Iowa and Arkansas State make nice punching dummies. The Hawks drop Illinois and Purdue on the conference slate. But Iowa must run the gauntlet on the road: at Penn State, at Wisconsin, at Michigan State and at Ohio State. Oh, and did I mention the road game at hated Iowa State? The ingredients are certainly there for a very successful season. A Big Ten title is not out of the question here. But if the Hawkeyes do wind up with less than 8 wins it will be because the coaching staff failed to adequately replace tailback Shon Greene and address the problem of “closing the deal”.
2008 Result: 9-4
Bakery Basket Opponent: Arkansas State
Falling Anvil Opponent: at Iowa State and then at Ohio State
Likely outcome: 8-4, 5-3



Illinois
The Fighting Illini really disappointed in 2008 coming off a 9-4 season and a Rose Bowl visit in 2007 to a 5-7 result in 2008. Tough non-conference road losses to Missouri 42-52 and Western Michigan 17-23 prevented the Illini from bowl contention. In 2009 Illinois will feature 8 returning starters on offense including the most prolific passing attack in the league, led by QB Isaiha “Juice” Williams and WR Arelious Benn. The ground attack will be led by tailbacks Daniel Dufrene and Jason Ford. Ron Zook’s spread formation offense features a battalion of dangerous receivers including Arelious Benn, Jeff Cumberland, Will Judson, AJ Jenkins and Chris Duvalt. Defensively, the Illini return 6 starters including tackling machine Martez Wilson. Illinois finished 9th in the Big Ten against the score allowing 27 points and over 350 yards per game. The guy handling Illinois scheduling should receive a public wedgy on campus. In non-conference play, the Illini must again confront Missouri, followed by powered sugar-coated Illinois State, and an ill-advised road matchup from hell vs. Brian Kelly’s Cincinnati Bearcats. The Illinois close the year versus the rabid rogues from Fresno State. In Big Ten play, Zook’s Illini will miss Iowa and Wisconsin, which is kind of a good thing. With Williams personally responsible for over 3,800 yards and 138 points, the Illini offense has all the firepower it needs to be great this year. The missing ingredient for Illinois' success remains to be the defensive unit, which finished 9th in the league in 2008.
2008 Result: 5-7
Bakery Basket Opponent: Illinois State
Falling Anvil Opponent: at Cincinnati (Yep. And you heard it here first.)
Likely outcome: 7-5, 5-3



Minnesota
Remember when the Minnesota Golden Gophers football team was ranked nationally until November 1, 2008, and then they were defeated in embarrassing fashion by Northwestern 17-24 at home in the Metrodome on national TV? What followed was a painful 5 game death spiral culminating again in defeat, this time at the hands of Big 12 opponent Kansas 21-42 in the Insight Bowl. The Gophers finished the season 7-6. It’s painful to look back and wonder how in the hell a 7-1-0 football team could fall apart and lose 5 straight football games, 3 of which were played at home and/or against substandard opponents. But with the 2008 season now safely in the rear view mirror, it’s also kind of scary to think about what this team might become now that Brewster’s Gophers enter ‘09 with the most returning starters in the league (18). The Gopher offense will be directed by 32 year old offensive coordinator Jedd Fisch who favors pro-set over spread formations. On the field the offense appears to be in great hands with star QB Adam Weber, who has a bucket load of talented targets to throw too like WRs Eric Decker, Ben Kuznia, Brandon Green and TE Jack Simmons. The running game is bolstered by the return of tailbacks DeLeon Eskridge and Shady Salamon. The big question mark has to be the Gopher defense. Former DC Ted Roof has left Minnesota for Auburn. The new DC will be Kevin Cosgrove, for whom Nebraska fans have an overwhelming amount of affection. Cosgrove will have 8 players back on the defensive unit, but minus leading tackler Deon Hightower. Key returnees include DTs Garrett Brown, Eric Small and LB Nathan Triplett. Minnesota’s recruiting classes under Brewster have been impressive so far, so it should not surprise anyone to see more contributions from younger players on offense and defense this fall. The 2009 Gopher football schedule is certainly more masculine than in years past. Air Force is the inaugural opponent for the new TCF football stadium in Minneapolis (I’d like to personally send a huge thank you University of Minnesota and it’s supporters for finally leaving that antiseptic Metrodome! May the Twins soon follow!). California will be a tough non-conference visitor to the new stadium this fall. Game outcomes against Syracuse and South Dakota State will likely be settled in the first 7 minutes of play. In Big Ten play, the Gophers must come to grips with the fact that the two weakest teams in the conference right now, Michigan and Indiana, will not be on the schedule. Normally, coming off a 7-6 season with 18 returning starters is highly encouraging in Big Ten football. Minnesota should be able to move the ball well offensively, but defensively the Gophers have to start stopping people. Minnesota will not have 4 non-conference creampuff games to help attain bowl eligibility. Instead, the Gophers must earn eligibility through Big Ten play.
2008 Result: 7-6
Bakery Basket Opponent: South Dakota State
Falling Anvil Opponent: California
Likely outcome: 7-5



Wisconsin
Badger head coach Bret Bielema is 28-11 after 3 years at Wisconsin. Bielema badly needs a solid performance from his Badgers this fall. The bad news is that half of Wisconsin’s 22 starters are gone from the 7-6 team of a year ago, and this unfortunately includes the loss of leading rusher PJ Hill, who accounted for 1,161 rushing yards, and talented receiver Travis Beckum. Good news can be found in the return of starting QB Dustin Sherer and talented speed merchants John Clay and Zach Brown at tailback. WR David Gilreath and TE Garrett Graham both return as the leading receivers for the team, plus wideout Nick Toon is poised to have a break out season for the Badgers. The Wisconsin offensive line will again be huge, experienced and talented, so expect continued emphasis on the running game and ball control in 2009. Defensively, DC Dave Doeren has his work cut out for him with only 5 returning starters this fall. He must find a player to replace LB Jaevery McFadden who led the team in tackles. The Badger defense held opponents to 322 yards per game, which wasn’t too bad. But scoring defense knocked the Badgers to 8th in the league, giving up 25 points per game. The schedule looks pretty favorable for Wisconsin this fall. Northern Illinois and Fresno State will be tough contests, but games versus Wofford and Hawai’i will allow UW’s 2nd and 3rd string guys plenty of playing time. Someone should buy the UW scheduling manager a brewski because the Badgers miss Penn State and Illinois on the conference slate.
2008 Result: 7-6
Bakery Basket Opponent: Wofford (Yes, this is really happening.)
Falling Anvil Opponent: at Ohio State
Likely outcome: 7-5, 3-5



Northwestern
The Wildcats finished 5-3 in the Big Ten and 9-4 overall, and almost shocked the world in a close loss to a tough Missouri Tiger squad in the Alamo Bowl. This year Pat Fitzgerald’s squad returns 13 starters: 5 on offense and 8 on defense. Offensively there are huge shoes to fill with QB CJ Bacher, TB Tyrell Sutton and all of the best Wildcat receivers: Ross Lane, Rasheed Ward and Eric Peterman all graduated. The QB spot will likely be occupied by Mike Kafka who earned a lot of playing time last fall. Kafka is an elusive runner but the jury is still out on his passing skills. Freshman Dan Persa will certainly be on Kafka’s heels during fall practice, and freshman Evan Watkins might get a serious look as well. Jeravin Mathews and Stephen Simmons are capable replacements for Sutton at running back. WRs Andrew Brewer and Jeff Yarbrough have good hands and speed to help spread the field. Defensively, Northwestern loses three outstanding players including the team’s leading tackler, LB Prince Kwateng. Linebacker Malcolm Arrington and devastating nose tackle John Gill have also graduated. The 2009 defense will be bolstered by the return of DE Corey Wooten and LB Quentin Davie. The Wildcat secondary may be one of the most experienced in the conference with Brad Phillips, Brandon Smith and Sherrick McManis all returning. The Wildcat schedule is friendly to say the least. Northwestern misses both Ohio State and Michigan, and will play a list of easy opponents in Towson, Eastern Michigan, Syracuse. Only Miami (OH) might cause Northwestern to work up a sweat. The Wildcat schedule is so full of marshmallowy goodness that it should surprise no one to see Pat Fitzgerald’s team entering Spartan Stadium 5-1 or better on October 17. The latter half of the schedule is brutal, however, particularly the last 4 Wildcat opponents, PSU, at Iowa, at Illinois and Wisconsin.
2008 Result: 9-4
Bakery Basket Opponent: Towson (This is an abomination unto the Lawd.)
Falling Anvil Opponent: at Michigan State
Likely outcome: 6-6, 2-6



Michigan
A 3-9 record in college football happens to Indiana, Purdue and Northwestern. It doesn’t happen to Michigan. In 2008, the Wolverines officially joined the company of marquee programs like Alabama, USC, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Notre Dame and Ohio State by racking up a sub .500 season in football. Michigan’s last losing football season was in 1967, when the head coach was named “Bump”, Pontiac made the coolest cars in the world, and a guy named Johnson was in the White House. In 2008 Rich Rodriguez came on the scene in Ann Arbor and changed just about everything, except the winged helmets and the fight song. Coaches were fired, practice and workout regimes were revamped, the offense was completely changed, and many players left the team. When the smoke finally cleared, Michigan’s record string of 41 straight seasons of gridiron success was ash. The incredible streak of 33 straight bowl game appearances since 1975 also ended. Few Wolverine football fans understand how a traditional and perennial football power like Michigan could go from 9-4 and a butt whipping of power-house Florida in the Capital One Bowl January to be 3-9 a year later 10 months later.

So what happened to Michigan? Let’s review some facts: Entering into the 2008 football season, Michigan returned 2 starters from the 2007 offensive squad, which was a preseason national championship favorite. That incredibly talented ‘07 team with Mike Hart, Chad Henne, Mario Manningham, Jake Long, and Adrian Arrington finished 10th in the Big 10 in total offense (10th in yards per game and 9th in scoring)! Michigan’s 2 returning offensive starters were nominal contributors in 2007: WR Greg Mathews and TE Carson Butler. On defense, Michigan returned only 5 starters from a unit that finished 3rd in total defense (3rd in yards per game and 5th in scoring) in 2007. Michigan’s 2008 schedule was also the 17th toughest in the land. Before kickoff against Utah, preliminary indications were not encouraging.

In 2008 defense was to serve as anchor for the young, inexperienced offensive unit. Instead, the reverse was true. The Michigan offense was the anchor, and it would bust right through the hull as the UM defense tried in vain to bail out the incoming water with a spoon. Injuries plagued the UM backfield almost to a man. Steven Threet, Nick Sheridan, Brandon Minor, Sam McGuffie, Michael Shaw and Carlos Brown were all hurt repeatedly during the season, missing several games, and rarely at 100% health. The offensive line was inexperienced and playing a game of musical chairs with the coaches to find the right fit. To make matters even worse, the Wolverine football team seemed determined to find new ways to turn the ball over and make critical mistakes that placed the UM defense into the most precarious of circumstances possible week after week. Michigan’s offense was perpetually stuck in reverse, averaging a conference low 20 points per game and 290 yards per game total offense. Michigan’s 3rd down success rate was the worst in the league at 27%, placing it in the elaborate company nationally of teams like Toledo (3-9) and Tennessee (5-7).

The Michigan defensive unit, on its 3rd defensive coordinator in just 4 years, played predictably awful. While the Wolverines finished second in the league with 29 sacks in 2008, it gave up an astonishing 29 pts (10th in the Big Ten) and 367 yards per game (9th in the Big Ten). With jaw-dropping defeats to Toledo by a missed FG at home and a 35 point loss to hated rival Ohio State in the Horseshoe, it’s difficult to imagine things getting much worse for Michigan.

2009 holds some measure of promise, however. First, Rich Rodriguez has demonstrated (at least historically) a positive record in year 2 of almost every coaching assignment he has ever had. Rodriguez has managed to land 2 straight solid recruiting classes for the Wolverines in 2008 and 2009. Rodriguez also successfully signed UM’s first class of new preferred walk-on players for the 2009 season, which should help fill out the roster. In 2009 Michigan returns 10 starters on offense and 5 on defense. While UM fans should expect another year of excruciatingly inconsistent play at QB, “inconsistent” should be a major step upward from 2008. As for the quarterback position, 4-star freshman recruit Tate Forcier from San Diego, CA, is the likely starter under center. Forcier has good foot speed, excellent field vision, and surprising throwing accuracy. He enrolled in January and should have a solid grasp of the offense by fall practice in August. The other QB for Michigan might be another freshman, Denard Robinson, who possesses the foot speed of Marvel comic characters, and excellent throwing credentials from operating a spread offense in high school at Deerfield Beach, FL. Veteran UM QB Nick Sheridan also returns to compete in the fall. The entire Wolverine offensive line returns and should play considerably better, with greater depth, experience and competition than ever before as each UM OL player must learn to play multiple positions. The Wolverine backfield is quite good with Brandon Minor, Carlos Brown, and Michael Shaw all returning, and a talented crop of underclassmen behind them. Martavious Odoms, Terrance Robinson, Greg Mathews, Kevin Koger and JR Hemingway bless the Wolverines with both speed and good hands at receiver positions.

As previously stated, defensively Michigan will have its 4th defensive coordinator in 5 years in Greg Robinson. Robinson was the former HC at Syracuse, and was a successful DC at both UCLA and the Denver Broncos. The Wolverines return leading tackler Jonas Mouton at LB as well as All-Big Ten candidates DE Brandon Graham and LB Obi Ezeh, and senior Stevie Brown moving from safety to LB. The Michigan secondary played poorly in 2008, but has some experience returning with Donovan Warren, Michael Williams and Boubacar Cissoko. Troy Woolfolk and the two freshman Vlad Emilien and Justin Turner are likely to see early action.

Western Michigan and Notre Dame will be tough non-conference opponents, but both face Michigan in the Big House. Eastern Michigan and Delaware State should serve as confidence-building wins. In conference play, missing Northwestern and Minnesota probably doesn’t advance Michigan’s cause very much. To become bowl eligible Michigan must find a way to dramatically reduce turnovers, improve special teams play, not to mention score an incredible amount of points just to keep a thin defensive unit off the field. The lack of depth and experience at quarterback, DL, LB and secondary are all worrisome combinations that don’t bode well for Rodriguez in year 2. However, there should be just enough talent and experience offensively that the Michigan team can fully concentrate on defeating opponents on Saturday afternoon, rather than defeating itself. As fragile as the Michigan team might be this fall, opponents would be wise not to take the Wolverines too lightly.
2008 Result: 3-9
Bakery Basket Opponent: Delaware State
Falling Anvil Opponent: Notre Dame, at Wisconsin
Likely outcome: 7-5, 4-4



Indiana
Indiana finished 1-7 in conference play and 3-9 overall in 2008. Unfortunately, it’s very difficult to imagine Bill Lynch’s 2009 squad improving on that result. On the positive side, Indiana returns 16 starters for 2009, 8 on offense and 8 on defense. Defensively, a cast of good players return, including DEs Jammie Kirlew, Greg Middleton and Ryan Marrando and leading tackler on the team LB Matt Mayberry. The secondary is fortified with the experience of CB Chris Adkins, FS Joe Kleinsmith. Indiana gave up an embarrassing 35 points and over 432 yards per game, but the defense should improve with a year of more experience under its belt. Offensively, however, Lynch has to be concerned. Starting QB Kellen Lewis, who passed for 1131 yards, 6 TDs, 8 INTs and rushed for 500 more, has been kicked off the football team. Tailback Marcus Thigpen, who led the team in rushing with 631 yards and 7 TDs has graduated. Replacing Thigpen will be a running back-by-committee arrangement using the services of Bryan Payton and Demetrius McCray. The all-important quarterback role in the Hoosier spread offense will be manned by Ben Chappell, who also passed for over 1000 yards, threw 3 TDs, 4 INTs and rushed for 3 TDs himself last year. The non-conference schedule offers the Hoosiers little relief. Eastern Kentucky and Akron are probable wins, but cue the scary music once Western Michigan and Virginia come on deck. The Hoosiers do not play Michigan State or Minnesota. Indiana is going to show some slight improvement defensively in 2009 given their increased experience along the DL and secondary. Offensively, I expect the Hoosiers to play at least as well as last year with Chappell under center. I do think Indiana will beat rival Purdue in Bloomington come November, but that may not be enough for Lynch and staff to keep their jobs.
2008 Result: 3-9
Bakery Basket Opponent: Eastern Kentucky
Falling Anvil Opponent: at Penn State
Likely outcome: 3-9, 1-8



Purdue
Dan Hope takes over for Joe Tiller as head coach of the Purdue Boilermakers in 2009.
Purdue finished 2-6 in conference play and 4-8 overall in Tiller’s final season. Tiller didn’t leave the cupboard bare, but the Boilermakers do lose a lot of fire power with only 5 starters returning offensively. Hope must somehow make do without the services of QB Curtis Painter, TB Kory Sheets and WR Greg Orton. Joey Elliott is the heir apparent at QB while Caleb TerBush and Justin Siller may serve as capable backups. The absence of Sheets at running back provides opportunity for talented Jaycen Taylor (recovering from knee injury), Ralph Bolden and freshman Al-Terek McBurse to deliver the mail. WRs Keith Smith and Aaron Valentin are fast and dangerous targets that produce well in games. Defensively, Purdue returns 7 starters including LBs Joe Holland and Chris Carlino. The Purdue secondary may be one of the most experienced and eldest in the Big Ten with 4 senior starters returning, including Dwight McLean, Torri Williams, David Pender and Brandon King as starters. The Boilermaker schedule is a mixed bag of sadomasochism. Sure, the Boilermakers open up versus Toledo in Ross-Ade Stadium. But then some numbskull went and scheduled Oregon, Northern Illinois and Notre Dame in succession. Purdue successfully dodges both Penn State and Iowa in conference play.. The interesting observation will be Purdue’s play down the stretch and whether the team can avoid key injuries. Tiller’s finale as Purdue head coach came in the form of a 62-10 drubbing of their rival, the Indiana Hoosiers, in West Lafayette for the Old Oaken Bucket. That humiliation is unlikely to stand.
2008 Result: 4-8
Bakery Basket Opponent: Toledo
Falling Anvil Opponent: at Indiana
Likely outcome: 2-10, 0-8



It hath been foretold!

Academic Performance Rates Released for Big Ten Football Programs

The Academic Performance Rates of NCAA athletic programs have been released, including college football programs. The NCAA appears to be kicking ass and taking names. Just ask Minnesota, Mississippi or Montana State football progams.

College football coaches either deliver good academic performance, or pay they're going to pay the price.

The NCAA grades teams athlete by athlete, awarding one APR point per semester for staying at the school and another for maintaining academic eligibility. The association has determined that programs should hit 92.5% of their possible total, an APR of 925 that it says projects a 60% graduation rate.

Teams falling beneath a 925 are subject to initial scholarship cuts. Those falling beneath 900 face a stricter sequence of penalties: a warning the first year, scholarship and practice-time cuts the second year, postseason sanctions the third year and the school's relegation to restricted NCAA membership the fourth year.

To escape, a team must show "meaningful improvement" in its APR, plus meet at least one of three additional criteria: have a projected graduation rate better than that of the school's overall student body, prove a lack of resources or post an APR that's better than the bottom 10% of all teams in that sport.

As far as Big Ten football is concerned, Minnesota got nailed with 3 scholarship losses this year. Purdue, scoring a 926 APR, escaped sanctions by a butthair.

The two best teams on the Big Ten gridiron last fall, Penn State and Ohio State, demonstrated the top two APR scores in the conference respectively.

The Big Ten's Eventual Expansion to 12 Teams

The Big Ten Conference consists today of 11 universities:

Indiana
Illinois
Iowa
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northwestern
Ohio State
Penn State
Purdue
Wisconsin

Eleven teams is an odd configuration. In college football, each Big Ten teams plays 8 conference games and 4 non-conference games. This means Big Ten teams miss at least 2 conference opponents on their schedule in any given year. The odd configuration does not allow the Big Ten to be divided into even divisions, nor does it allow for a conference title game at season's end. Adding a 12th team would even things out in the Big Ten and allow for the revenues a conference title game would afford.

Positives of Adding a 12th team

The main benefit of adding a 12th team would be to even out the Big Ten Conference into 2 divisions, and provided for a 13th football game the first week of December to decide the conference champion. A 12th team might also allow for an extra 9th conference game, with 3 non-conference games. The new 12-team Big Ten conference football schedule would likely still involve "missing" two conference opponents each season, unless the league wished to play 10 conference games and 2 non-conference games. This is possible to organize, but most Big Ten teams and coaches would be against it since no other 12-team football conference runs such a gauntlet.

Another positive of adding a 12th team for the Big Ten might be in securing more regional strategic advantage in recruiting. Depending on the caliber of the 12th team, recruiting competition would likely increase tremendously for all Big Ten teams in that region, and also for any Big Ten opponents in that same region, i.e. Big East, MAC and Independents will find increased competition as Big Ten conference schools wade in their territory for more athletes.

Adding a 12th team in football would probably increase the Big Ten's competitiveness in post season play. Traditionally, the Big Ten conference has to have one of the worst post-season records in all of college football. There are many factors that might contribute to this poor performance in bowl games. One obvious factor is the absence of a 13th game in Big Ten play. Other schools practice an additional week for their conference title game. At the BCS-level games, the Big Ten conference football teams do not get this extra week and extra game of preparedness.

Finally, adding a 12th team would likely aid not only football, but also other marquee, money-generating athletics like basketball to a strengthen the conference's power in national competition both on the field and with recruiting.

Drawbacks of Adding a 12th team
The cost of adding a 12th team might include sacrificing some tradition in scheduling. If the Big Ten were divided into North and South divisions, it's possible that for an 9 game conference schedule, some traditional rivalries would have to be forgone. One need only look to the Big 12 where Nebraska and Oklahoma were instructed to play in two separate divisions. The season-ending rivalry game disappeared, the teams meet occassionally during mid-season of the schedule, and the Cornhusker-Sooner rivalry has all but died. Interestingly, Oklahoma's other major rival, Texas, plays in the same division as OU (South) and plays the Sooners every year without exception. The UT-OU rivalry has always been one of the nation's best in college football, but it's reached white-hot levels in the Big 12 over the last 10 years.

Situations like Nebraska-Oklahoma could be overcome by intentionally scheduling such rivalry games each year in the Big Ten, such as Indiana-Purdue, Michigan-Ohio State and Wisconsin-Minnesota, Michigan-Michigan State, even if the two teams might meet a second time in the conference title game. At the same time, it's entirely possible that previous Big Ten rivalries might "die on the vine".


Nebraska vs. Oklahoma. Great Rivalry Successfully Destroyed By the Big 12 Conference.

Another drawback might be that any new 12th team may not be as attractive academically, or athletically in other sports besides football. Any additional 12th team must add significant value to the Big Ten conference as a whole. The new school should also be a natural fit from a proximity and regional point of view.

Candidates
Oh God. Here we go. There are many candidates for a 12th Big Ten team. Very few make sense from an athletic tradition and regional proximity point of view. Some candidates make an incredible amount of sense, but are just not going to happen....ever.

I will discuss below several candidates for the 12th team, why they make sense, why they don't and the likelihood of them joining the Big Ten to form a new "Big Ten + 2 Conference".

1.) The Notre Dame Fighting Irish

Why Notre Dame Makes Sense:
You cannot talk about a 12th team for the Midwest-centric Big Ten without mentioning Notre Dame. There is a massive amount of athletic tradition at Notre Dame on the gridiron, on the basketball court and in athletics as a whole. Two other Big Ten schools reside in Indiana (Indiana U. and Purdue). Why not Notre Dame?

In football, the Fighting Irish are all but a Big Ten team, scheduling regular season contests against Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue (and curiously none against Indiana!?). Notre Dame's athletic tradition and the midwest location of South Bend make the Fighting Irish not only a natural candidate, but a preferred choice.

Why Notre Dame Doesn't Make Sense:
Because Notre Dame doesn't want anyone telling them what to do. Want examples? In basketball, Notre Dame is part of the Big East conference. In football, Notre Dame is an independent, right alongside 2 other remaining independents Army and Navy. Secondly, the Irish have a large national following, including their own lucrative and directly negotiated TV contracts with NBC for football. Assuming Notre Dame football earns bowl eligibility, the Irish get paid a pretty penny for bowl appearances. Although the Big Ten conference has been rather weak in football in recent years, Notre Dame would be up against increased competition each season. That said, Notre Dame is 58-36-1 vs. the Big Ten since 1978 (.616). If past performance is any indicator of future results, the likelihood of bowl eligibility as a member of the Big Ten might very well increase for the Irish. However, the good news about not being bowl eligible when you're affiliated with an athletic conference is that your school receives some of the spoils that Penn State earned in the Rose Bowl and Ohio State earned in the Fiesta Bowl. As an Independent, unless you earn it yourself by getting bowl eligible, you don't get jack.

Likelihood Notre Dame Joins the Big Ten?
Never. The Notre Dame Fighting Irish will never join the Big Ten, so let's just remove any such thought from our brains and move on to the next candidate, shall we?

2.) The Pittsburgh Panthers

Why Pitt Makes Sense:
Penn State is already in the Big Ten. The next logical choice, if not Notre Dame, has got to be Pitt. Pittsburgh fields a respectable athletic program in all sports, but especially football and basketball. There is a long dormant rivalry between Pitt and Penn State that would be recharged by Pitt's introduction. Pitt is regionally proximate to the other schools and would increase Big Ten football and basketball recruiting success in the talent-rich states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland.

Why Pitt Doesn't Make Sense:
Pittsburgh's football program has lost it's luster considerably since the early 1980s and has had difficulty recovering. Penn State's program has outgrown them and performed far better nationally than the Panthers have. Then Pitt joined the Big East and sunk further into mediocrity, making mini-regional rivalries become more important such as the matchup with conference foe West Virginia. Pitt's basketball success in recent years has been noteworthy and it will be interesting to see whether it can continue given the high level of competition in the Big East.

Likelihood Pitt Joins the Big Ten?
Of all of the available and realistic candidates, Pitt really does make the most sense and should join the Big Ten conference.

3.) The Syracuse Orangemen



Why Syracuse Makes Sense:
Regionally proximiate. Strong basketball tradition. Some good football history (Art Monk, Bill Hurley, Joe Morris, Donovan McNabb) , although, aside from a major upset of Notre Dame last year, Syracuse has been the armpit of college football. Syracuse has played a few intersectional games with Big Ten opponents over the years like Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State and Iowa, but there are no established mini-rivalries, not even in basketball. Syracuse' success in football and basketball could change if they joined a more competitive conference than the Big East. In the case of joining the Big Ten, Syracuse's basketball fortunes would likely improve while their football wins would likely decline.

Why Syracuse Doesn't Make Sense:
Athletically speaking, Syracuse' relevance in athletics is limited to basketball (until Jim Boeheim retires). The Syracuse Orangemen are today part of the Big East, and from this blogger's point of view are way better served in that conference. Syracuse offers the Big Ten very little value in terms of athletics, academics. Syracuse is about as regionally proximate as Pitt to other Big Ten teams. The other problem with Syracuse is their football venue, the Carrier Dome. The Big Ten finally rid itself of the MetroDome in Minneapolis. Any addition of Syracuse should include a clause demanding that a proper, modern, outdoor facility be constructed for Syracuse football.

From a recruiting standpoint, the addition of Syracuse doesn't necessarily add any new recruiting grounds or strengthen existing regional recruiting pipelines for the Big Ten.

Likelihood Syracuse Joins the Big Ten:
In my view, the Big Ten conference is better off with 11 teams than adding a Syracuse. Likelihood is very low, or just a few percentage points above zero.

4. Rutgers



Why Rutgers Makes Sense:
Rutgers doesn't make sense. The schools is based in East Rutherford, NJ and close to NY city. There are few if any rivalries or connections in athletics, aside from some games played against Penn State in the distant past.

Why Rutgers Doesn't Make Sense:
Rutgers is an eastern, coastal school and really does belong in the Big East in terms of football. Rutgers is not proximate to any Big Ten schools, aside from Penn State.In basketball, well, does Rutgers even play basketball?

Likelihood Rutgers joins the Big Ten?
A few percentage points below Notre Dame ever joining, which means never. Rutgers is in the Big East conference. Right where they belong.

4. The Missouri Tigers



Why Missouri Makes Sense:
Wait a minute. The Missouri Tigers belong to the Big 12, don't they? What the....?

Well, yes they do. But Missouri has always been the red-headed step child when they were part of the Big 8 and even today as member of the Big 12 North division. Nobody liked them. And Missouri certainly didn't like anybody else either. During the 1970s and 1980s, Big 8 powers Oklahoma and Nebraska sweated bullets when they faced the Missouri Tigers on the gridiron. Actually, of all the candidates listed so far none provide quite the complete athletic package of both strong football and basketball programs and traditions that Missouri does. The Tigers are bitchin' in both. Columbia is regionally proximiate to most Big Ten schools, and offers opponents tough venues in football and basketball. In college football, Missouri's program has been on the rise recently while playing in a tough conference (Big 12). In basketball, Missouri remains a respectable and competitive force. The Tigers have an existing non-conference rivalry with the Fighting Illini of the Big Ten.

Why Missouri Doesn't Make Sense:
Two main arguments against Missouri:
1.) Missouri is already part of Big 12 and
2.) Distance.

In reverse order, the Tigers campus is 240 miles south of Iowa City, and some Big Ten traditionalists might say that's just too far away for the Penn State's, Ohio State's and Michigan's to travel. I disagree.

Minneapolis, Minnesota is 830 miles from State College, PA. Columbia, MO is 778 miles from State College, PA. Nittany Lions and Gopher fans travel well. So do Missouri Tiger fans. Distance is not an big issue.

And first, Missouri has it's Big 8-based "Border War" rivalry with Kansas. Missouri also has it's intersectional hatreds for Oklahoma and Nebraska as well. Missouri is part of the Big 12 and fits nicely in the Big 8ish North Division. But Missouri could continue such rivalries in non-conference play as a member of the Big Ten. Also, the Big 12 can easily add good, regional programs from the state of Texas to replace a Missouri such as SMU, TCU, Houston or Rice. Even Utah, BYU and Colorado State come to mind here as meaningful replacements. The Big 12 would not want to lose Missouri. But if the choice were open to the Missouri Tigers, I think they might pounce on it.

Likelihood Missouri Joins the Big Ten:
If Pitt were the most likely to join and Notre Dame is the least likely to join, then I would put Missouri in second place behind Pitt in terms of all candidates.

5.) The Iowa State Cyclones


Why Iowa State Makes Sense:
They have a good basketball tradition and an annual rivalry with Iowa.
They are regionally proximate and low risk.

Why Iowa State Doesn't Make Sense:
Iowa State is a small university and athletically hasn't had much to crow about since Earle Bruce left town in 1979. Their value-add to the Big Ten is nominal and would be equivalent to adding another Minnesota-level athletic program to the conference.

Likelihood Iowa State joins the Big Ten:
Probably never, but much more likely than a Rutgers, Notre Dame or a Syracuse.

Other candidates and some quick notes:

Boston College:
I like this school very much. It's got a decent athletic program history, is part of the ACC, and has good academics. It's also got some minor history with Big Ten teams like Penn State and Michigan on the gridiron. The academic upside is high. The athletic upside is nominal.

Marquette University:
No football program. And that's a shame. I will always call these guys the Warriors. We don't need any more "Eagles" mascot teams for crying out loud. In basketball, the Marquette Golden Eagles would be an outstanding addition to the Big Ten. In football, well they'd offer the Big Ten zero, unless Marquette brought their football program back from the dead. Not that I don't believe Milwaukee and the state of Wisconsin is too small a football market, but it's risky. Indiana can somehow miraculously support 3 Division 1A college teams, and Wisconsin can't? Whatever.

Louisville:
Good basketball school. Improved football program over the last several years. Regionally proximate as Kentucky borders southern Illinois, Indiana and Ohio.

Summary
The Big Ten should add a 12th team. The conference should do all it can to preserve the intersectional rivalries of Purdue-Indiana, Michigan-Ohio State, Michigan-Michigan State, Penn State-Ohio State. The Big Ten conference should also do what it can to promote new rivalries. The best candidate for the Big Ten expansion is Pittsburgh. The second best candidate is Missouri. The least likely candidates are Notre Dame and Rutgers.

NFL Scouts Really Dislike the Spread Offense.

Great article from Cincinnatti.com regarding NFL coach frustration in evaluating college players that played under a spread offense scheme.

"The NFL guys I talk to on a daily basis are getting frustrated," Mayock said. "And I'm like, 'It's too bad, guys, because that spread offense is not going away.' "

- Mike Maycock, NFL Network Draft Analyst.

In my view, the NFL has got to change anyway. For the most part, NFL football on Sundays is either outstanding, because 2 of the top 5 teams in the league are playing each other, or it's just godawful. There's nothing in between.

The running game in the NFL is ridiculously boring. Run, run, pass, punt.
No amount of quarterback sissy-slides or Peyton Manning tightend-pointing audibles is going to change my mind.

In college football, we can observe matchups between spread offense teams versus power I, or pro set type offensive teams. Faster teams can shred the bigger and stronger teams. Some Saturdays the muscle teams are simply too much for the spread option finesse teams. There's balance.

In the NFL, you have Pittsburgh vs. St. Louis. Both running pro-set, vanilla offenses. Quarterbacks with rocket propelled grenade launchers for arms shooting footballs downfield to flamboyant, megalomaniacal wideouts.

The NFL's own offering needs variety. And I, for one, am pleased that the college football ranks are coughing up smaller, faster, stronger and more aggressive athletes and playing styles. I'm pleased that college coaches are forcing inventiveness and greater creativity upon the NFL's cobweb-covered playbooks.

There was a time when the NFL running back threw a crap load of touchdown passes and punted just as often.

It was the 1930s and 1940s

Times change.

And the NFL will too.