The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame is as relevant as the WWE Hall of Fame. Fun to talk about, but not going to lose any sleep over it.
I have no problem with anyone that made it in. The four listed by the OP were Iconic in their time.
I have no problem with any of the left out bands mentioned by the OP. Kansas and The B-52s in particular stand out as bands that should be there already.
Oasis, Sinead O'Connor, and Jane's Addiction were ROCK STARS that weren't mentioned in the OP. You can't tell the story of rock and roll without them.
I believe that it was stated that the West Coast teams will not have HOME kickoffs at noon Eastern, but that they can expect to have some ROAD kickoffs at noon Eastern.
At the end of the day, we are probably only talking about 1 game a year per team. If USC at Michigan is a FOX pick, then that ends up at noon. But I don't expect a Peacock or FS1 game with USC to be a noon kick. USC plays at UCLA, Washington, Michigan, Minnesota, and Maryland next year, so likely only one game with a chance to be a FOX noon game.
Mostly you've got it right. Two minor exceptions and one other addition:
They had to do some moving around last year in Year One of the contract for CBS, as they had the SEC for one more year. But going forward, every 3:30 game should be CBS.
NBC has some sort of option to move a Notre Dame game (or two?) each year to primetime instead of 1:30 pm, in place of a Big Ten prime time game. I believe that this would yield a FOX Big Ten Prime Time game once or twice a year head-to-head with that prime time Notre Dame game. And then NBC gets the noon kick off on that day.
Fox is also trying to get a Friday night Prime Time game each week. Presumably this would be the 4th best game each week, and feature a lot of Oregon, Washington, and UCLA home games (or, perhaps, some East Coast or Midwest Big Ten teams hosting that normally don't get as many national games). Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State have strongly pushed back (or opted out) from hosting Friday night games.
I recall hearing somewhere that roughly 1/4 of the eligible schools make the playoffs in (most) college sports. That’s a close number for College hockey.
So set the new requirements to be the top 256 universities that can participate in D1 Basketball, lowering it from the current 351. I’d probably be more aggressive and set targets to try to get it to 1/3 or about 180 schools.
Plenty of room for Cinderella, but fewer schools taking a piece of the pie (even though it’s already weighted heavily in favor of the Power Conferences). And fewer cream puffs on the schedule in non-con (especially for the Big XII gaming the system).
Somewhere, I saw that about 1/3 of all college football fans are B1G. And another 1/3 is SEC. And all the remaining teams make up about 1/3.
If the Big Ten isn’t getting about 1/3 of the CFP revenue, then they are leaving money on the table.
Therefore, if we are talking about automatic bids, The B1G should insist on four bids in a 12 team playoff.
The SEC on the other hand, probably likes their chances of getting 4-6 teams every year if there are no AQs, and having an opportunity to get more than 1/3 of the CFP pot.
I would prefer that the Big Ten tells ND “All or Nothing”. But… recent moves have shown that its all about money and the tv contract, and doesn’t have anything to do with academics, research, connecting with alums, travel and student health, etc. So the Big Ten won’t play hardball with Notre Dame if there is money to be made.
Therefore, I fully expect that once FSU and others break out of the ACC, that The B1G and ND come to an agreement somewhere between full membership and the current ND/ACC agreement.
I’m guessing full membership in all sports except football, and 6-7 Big Ten football games with some guardrails: like protecting the annual USC game, forcing the B1G to support the Shamrock series (ND Vs Maryland in Baltimore, Vs Rutgers at Yankee stadium, etc), and maybe protected or more-often-than-not games against Purdue, Michigan, and Michigan State. Also giving some preferential treatment to NBC in the TV selections.
This has nagged me for a long time. A defense getting a turnover is a huge win. But at their own one yard line is a very precarious spot.
A DB making a diving interception at the 1 yard line is a huge play to stop a touchdown drive but it sucks to have the offense come out and basically run it up the middle three times then punt.
So my new rule would be that any turnover inside the ten yard line automatically comes out to the 10 yard line. Gives the recovering teams offense some breathing room.
I’m open to debating 5 yard line or even 20 yard line. But 10 seems enough.
I’m less inclined to have a similar rule for turning it over on downs at the 1 yard line. Part of the advantage of going for it on fourth and goal from the 1 is if you fail, the other team is pinned deep. I expect we would see more field goals on 4th and goal inside the 5 if the defense got the ball at the 10 instead of the 1 or 2 yard line.
I expect most - if not all - of those 8 players will be going pro after 2024. So continuity for this year is my biggest concern for the DC hire.
We had a generational defense in 2023. Top 2 this century according to S&P+. With Wink providing continuity and keeping all of our players out of the portal, I expect the drop off this year will be somewhere in the range of Top 3 in all of college football in 2024. Which should be enough to make the 12 team playoffs. The offense will determine if we are Big Ten champs or seeded somewhere between 5 and 11.
2025 will be a major reset for the defense.
if Wink is here for only one year, that’s fine! That’s great! Clink can learn for one more year and then be the full time DC. And by that time, there should be more analysts available from the Chargers, Seahawks, or Ravens that we can bring in to coach.
This can only be good news for our Defensive players in this years draft. Four teams presumably running the Ravens D next year, and only one college team running the Ravens D.
if you want a plug-and-play defender we’ll versed in this system, there are seven guys with three years experience playing in this system (plus Josh Wallace with one year playing this system)…. And that’s it.
Aside from “we’re a good football team” Oregon adds nothing to the Big Ten and more specifically, The University of Michigan.
From an educational standpoint, they will rank 17th out of 18. From a research standpoint, they are a vast outlier and don’t fit at all.
From a travel standpoint for Olympic programs, they are a burden (and more so than USC-UCLA).
Looking at it from the “planting a flag in the region”, there is no reason for Michigan to be there. There are a dozen other states that would be more important from a recruiting standpoint (both student body and athletes) as well as connecting with alums.
They are the only Big Ten school that received more money in donations for the Athletic Department than their Endowment over the last 15-20 years.
They are also one of the smallest student bodies in the Big Ten (about half the size of most Big Ten schools).
Unlike Nebraska, they aren’t a natural geographical rival, and their fans aren’t going to fill our stadiums.
There just isn’t a whole lot about Oregon that makes sense, other than helping FOX.
The competition we have in The Big Ten - especially with adding USC and UCLA, and presumably Florida State soon, as well as another ACC school or three - is plenty.
Aside from travel, Oregon is going to get all of these benefits to their academics, research, recruiting, etc, and we aren’t getting any of that in return (like we did with USC/UCLA, or Penn State, or Maryland & Rutgers).
This is one of the reasons adding Oregon to the Big Ten was a horrible decision. If Oregon remained in the remnants of a PAC-10 or ended up in the Big XII, I’m not sure they get Bair.
A lot can change in two years. Maybe Lanning ends up the coach at LSU or Florida in the next two years, and Bair reopens his recruitment (and/or transfers; I don’t remember how it was classified for Andrew Gentry after he committed to Virginia but ended up here before ever arriving at UVA).
This is a question for someone smarter than me… but Jesse Minter had four years with the Ravens, but only one as the official DB coach. He obviously had tons of College DC experience.
Clinkscale has three years in the system under McDonald and Minter. Elston has two years in the system.
So, is 2-3 years in a system enough to fully grasp it? I get that not everyone has the knack for calling plays. But how much more experience do you need in the system? Or is there a major advantage to coaching with the Ravens instead of for Michigan (as far as calling plays at Michigan)?
I do want there to be one or two gray hairs on the staff for a young coach like Sherrone, but if Clink shows the aptitude for calling the defense, I don’t think he’s at a disadvantage for not coaching with the Ravens.
Caden Prieskorn is great. But he was not a freshman sensation. He played at a prep school for a year, then played four years at Memphis (including both a redshirt and a COVID year). His fourth year at Memphis was good, and led to him transferring to Ole Miss, where he had a breakout year in year five.
Best: Regression would hit TCU. Wisconsin would be mediocre this year; needing time to adjust to the new offensive system and new coaching staff.
Worst: I thought Northwestern would be 1-11. But I also thought Illinois would improve after last year and finish around 9-3 and compete for the B1G West.
I don’t know what defensive system Charlotte used. But NHG did have one healthy year and one injured year of learning our defensive system.
Also: he went to a program of known friend and trusted agent Biff Poggi. I can’t imagine that Biff would take a bad apple transfer after being around NHG for a year or two.
If he came back as a starting LB assuming Colson is gone, sign me up.
This is what I’m thinking. Up until this point, Michigan would have stayed loyal to the Big Ten. But now, let’s say Amazon or Netflix or even Fox wanted an 8 team football only superconference. I’m sure that Michigan listens now.
Michigan, Notre Dame, Texas, Alabama, USC, Georgia. Start there. I’m sure Ohio State would join. The last spot can be Florida, Oklahoma… I don’t care.
That Superconference could schedule two conference games per week. And each game would draw 6-18 Million viewers. And probably net each team about $200 Million in TV revenue per year.
Not too terribly exciting, but I went to Brother Rice, so we were a feeder to Michigan Football in the 80s. My freshman year at Michigan had four guys from my high school. Two were in my graduating class, one of whom had his HS locker next to mine every year. Three of the four guys became starters.
The more interesting thing is that one of my best friends in high school went to Michigan with me. We were both engineers. He befriended a girl, who was dating another student. She broke up with her boyfriend after a year, and after about six months, started dating my friend. They married, living happily ever after.
The ex-boyfriend: some engineering student named Larry Page.
I'm a Clarkston resident, and I've seen Des play about a dozen football games, and about a dozen basketball games. I would love to see him end up at Michigan.
A couple of items for reference: Clarkston is a pretty deep team, so a lot of players play only one way. Brody Kosin is a TE committed to Indiana, and I've only seen him on defense for Hail Marys (he's 6'6" and the center on the basketball team). Also, last year, Clarkston had a workhorse RB Ethan Clark who signed with Princeton and seemed to carry about 40 times a game. Based on Des's workload last year, I was expecting to see Des become the workhorse RB. That hasn't been the case.
I'm guessing they are trying to limit his wear and tear. But he is all over the field. He returns punts, plays WR, runs reverses / end arounds / sweeps, is the Wildcat QB on 4th and short and two point conversions, and probably throws a pass out of the wildcat or a jet sweep every third game. The Wildcat formation with 10 blockers and Des taking a direct snap is Clarkston's standard on those critical plays. He probably gets 10-15 touches per game, but they are often the most critical.
He is noticeable on defense too, from coverage and interceptions, to sacks. Even against West Bloomfield a few weeks ago, his athleticism stood out. West Bloomfield has 5 of the top 25 players in the state in the senior class, last I checked, and two of the top 15 juniors.
Based on his recruiting profile, it seems that he is targeted for safety, but I see him as a bit stronger/thicker than Paige or Moore, so I'm thinking a better comp is Michael Barrett. An HSP that develops into a LB and is a secret weapon on Special Teams for throwing/running fakes.
I don't know much about him personally, but a neighbor with a 10th grade son on JV said that Des personally reached out to his son to get him to join him in the weight room, and said Des is very hard working and pushes himself and the younger kids.
So, as far as a Harbaugh guy, Des checks boxes of hard working, leadership, versatility, athleticism, and multi-sport star.
BTW, Des is always the most powerful and strongest player on the basketball court, but still has elite speed and quickness for the OAA. I've seen Des play Rochester Adams on the basketball court twice last year, and against Brady Prieskorn. And Des was certainly the more aggressive player. (Prieskorn was active and aggressive on the football field - he was a scary opponent at DE and based on one game, I'd love to see him give DE a try - but seemed pretty mellow and "take it as it comes" on the court).
If the argument is for travel for LA schools, I believe the LA schools would prefer adding either Stanford/Cal or ASU/UA. They can visit both schools in a weekend without a connecting flight, and the flights are much shorter. The other 14 Big Ten schools, though, would now need to double our west coast travel. Which so far, Presidents and ADs do not want to do.
Along with UNC/UVa, I think Washington is the best "fit" for The Big Ten. I just think that The Big Ten isn't expanding "just to expand". So between that, and the added travel, and the tv value that they bring it's not enough to get Washington into The Big Ten.
As for Stanford... I know they have historically butted heads with USC in the PAC. So I'm not going to guess as to how that would play out politically, and if USC would be totally against Stanford and Cal (or Washington and Oregon) joining. Also, Stanford doesn't carry the SF market. It would connect B1G schools to alums in SF, like Rutgers does in NYC, but that doesn't mean the average fan in SF cares about Stanford.
The value for TV contracts is very, very top heavy. The Fox noon, CBS 3:30 pm, and NBC prime time games are all that really matters. The value of FS1, Peacock, and BTN games pale in comparison (as does Men's basketball games, let alone the rest of the sports teams)
That gives (usually) six Big Ten teams a premier nationwide audience each week. Michigan, Ohio State, USC, and Penn State are going to hoard those games. Historically, games like Michigan or Ohio State vs bottom tier teams like Northwestern and Indiana generally get selected by FOX and ESPN over games like Wisconsin-Iowa or Michigan State-Nebraska unless both teams are top 15.
The networks don't see Oregon and Washington on the level of Michigan/Ohio State. I think Gene Smith made the comment that Oregon and Washington "didn't pencil out". Only Notre Dame brings that high end brand that compares to UM/OSU (although Florida State might - I haven't seen it definitively stated one way or another).
Oregon and Washington would be above average brands amongst Big Ten teams, and bring more value to the league than an average team. But that doesn't matter because the value of Michigan, Ohio State, and USC is exorbitant, bringing up the average substantially. The additions of USC/UCLA, and current market forces have combined to make the bar much, much higher now than it was for Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers.
USC has made it clear they don't want more PAC schools, and they don't want to give Oregon, in particular, access to Southern California football recruits. USC wants Big Ten membership to be a differentiator vs other PAC schools.
Big Ten presidents are ok with one trip to the West Coast every other year for most sports, but adding Oregon/Washington doubles that number. Presidents don't appear to be interested.
Finally, LA to Oregon/Washington is about the same as to Nebraska. It really doesn't help LA schools with travel. If travel is a concern, or the LA schools want to add someone, the "regional" schools for USC/UCLA are Arizona State/Arizona and Stanford/Cal.
Lots of Problems with Oregon (and Washington). Biggest issue is that right now, TV networks don't see the value, and won't offer pro rata for those schools to The Big Ten. And Presidents have made it very clear they do not want to lose a single dollar if they are adding a school.
Reportedly, the FOX contract has a pre-negotiated addition for adding exactly one school: Notre Dame.
Additionally, in many of the broad academic/research metrics that The Big Ten uses, (and assuming Washington joins as a pair), Oregon would rank around 17th or 18th in the Big Ten.
Finally, the state of Oregon would add very little to Michigan and Big Ten schools as far as available student body, football and athletic recruiting, alumni, etc.
Pretty much, all Oregon has to offer The Big Ten is a strong football program over the last 25 years, that has been mightily propped up by Phil Knight.
Washington would be an excellent addition to The Big Ten based on many factors, except probably the most important right now: They don't increase value to the TV contracts. It also doesn't help that their location helps no one - including USC/UCLA.
I, of course, want to go back to 10 schools. However, since the horse is out of the barn...
UNC and UVA are probably both Top 5 public schools along with Michigan, Cal, and UCLA. Needless to say they are Flagships in their state.
The States of North Carolina and Virginia rank 8th and 12th in population. These are the two largest states without a B1G/SEC school.
Both schools have broad, successful athletic departments, often finishing in the Top Ten in the Learfield Cup.
These two schools have the best fit and look most like current B1G schools. I think the academically elite Presidents/Chancellors in the B1G start here.
Notre Dame is obviously a slam dunk if they want in. And then adding FSU and Miami. After the ACC is sorted out, only then do I see the B1G taking a second look out West. Now they have more teams in the East, so the amount of road trips out west are more split up.
AAU is not a hard and fast requirement, but over the last ~15 years of realignment, it's been an easy shorthand for The Big Ten's overall view of a particular University outside of football performance/brand/tv ratings.
At this time, it appears that any Big Ten decision on expansion is not only driven by money, but specifically by easily calculated TV Contract money (as opposed to the cable subscriptions in Md/DC and NJ/NYC).
That being said, I expect that the University Presidents will still weigh everything through the lens of Risk Management, and a 100-year decision. UCLA and USC look like Big Ten schools as far as academics, research, a national brand and a flagship school, large endowments, large alumni bases, broad sports programs, etc. You can expect that these schools would vote similarly to the traditional academic heavyweights in the Big Ten like Michigan, Wisconsin, Northwestern, and Minnesota, as well as the athletic heavyweights, like Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State.
For this reason, I think the Big Ten will be very cautious with Oregon and Clemson. While they have strong football success over the last ~25 years, they aren't the brand names with 100 years of football relevance. They aren't terrible schools, but they would be similar to Nebraska in that they really don't do much for the Big Ten as far as research, academics, opening a market for athletic recruits and student body recruits, reaching alums, large alumni bases, endowments, etc. Those schools need the Big Ten a hell of a lot more than the Big Ten needs them.
Notre Dame is Notre Dame and in a class of their own. The reported value that they would bring makes them a no-brainer to add, despite a lack of research.
UNC and UVa, like USC and UCLA, look like Big Ten schools and offer a lot even if their football teams aren't substantial. They would likely vote like Michigan within the Big Ten. Clemson and Oregon would likely vote like Nebraska and be much more hyper-focused on football than academics or broad athletics or health/safety.
Florida State and Miami offer a lot across the board, but I would rather see them added alongside a few academic powerhouses (assuming we do expand - I'd be happy staying at 16 or stopping at 18 with ND + 1)
Yeah, unfortunately, BeIN went out of their way to bid on the US road games in the Hex. Except for Mexico, as ESPN bought the US (English) rights to all Mexico home games.
I can't speak to the specifics of each clip, but Brother Rice played just about the toughest schedule in the state last year. Cass Tech, AA Pioneer, Toledo St Francis, and Cincinnati La Salle before the Catholic League of De La Salle, Catholic Central, Orchard Lake St Mary's, UD Jesuit and then the state playoffs, including Muskegon in the Finals. Malzone's only now entering his Junior year, so there is time to strengthen his arm.
Last year, Brother Rice won their second straight Div 2 title with Cheyne Lacanaria as the starting QB. By mid-season, however, Malzone had picked up the offense so well that the coaches were forced to give him playing time, and start a platoon with the defending state champion qb. Not that bad. Lacanaria has graduated so the door is wide open for Malzone to take over the job for himself.
His show is 3-6 pm, and it's mostly Detroit Sports + UM/MSU, but will throw in some Western Michigan University and Grand Rapids Griffins and anything else local to GR. I believe that he broadcasts from the Detroit / Southfield area still, while his producer is live in GR. I listen on iheart radio. But I'll definitely be checking Drew out. I wouldn't be shocked though, to hear that Baligian ends up at 10 am on 105.1.
This appears to be one of his "spectacular misses".
Obviously, Michigan gets dinged not only for poor seasons 3, 4, and 5 years ago, but also for poor recruiting ratings in those years. Also, while we have every reason to be optimistic about Devin Gardner, according to his methodology, he doesn't have a lot of experience. Same thing with needing to replace a bunch of starters, even if we might be better at some of those positions (like Interior OL).
Slovaks Tomas Tatar and Tomas Jurco took part in the Slovak pre-Olympic camp, while Petr Mrazek attended the Czech camp.
Also, these camp invite lists are by no means final. Daniel Alfredsson and Gustav Nyquist could still make Sweden's roster, while Jakub Kindl could still make the Czech roster.
Is in Klinnsmans dog house for taking a sabbatical. My guess is he plays in the gold Cup for our B Team and is back on the team for the September games at Costa Rica and vs Mexico in Columbus.
In International Games, the home team owns the global rights. So in this case, BeIN purchased the US rights for this game from Jamaica. It is likely it was part of a package deal, as ESPN would of course have no interest in a bundle of Jamaica games, just this one. So this is not a case of 'lack of respect for US soccer' but rather the screwy international TV rights getting in the way.
Recent Comments
The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame is as relevant as the WWE Hall of Fame. Fun to talk about, but not going to lose any sleep over it.
I have no problem with anyone that made it in. The four listed by the OP were Iconic in their time.
I have no problem with any of the left out bands mentioned by the OP. Kansas and The B-52s in particular stand out as bands that should be there already.
Oasis, Sinead O'Connor, and Jane's Addiction were ROCK STARS that weren't mentioned in the OP. You can't tell the story of rock and roll without them.
I believe that it was stated that the West Coast teams will not have HOME kickoffs at noon Eastern, but that they can expect to have some ROAD kickoffs at noon Eastern.
At the end of the day, we are probably only talking about 1 game a year per team. If USC at Michigan is a FOX pick, then that ends up at noon. But I don't expect a Peacock or FS1 game with USC to be a noon kick. USC plays at UCLA, Washington, Michigan, Minnesota, and Maryland next year, so likely only one game with a chance to be a FOX noon game.
Mostly you've got it right. Two minor exceptions and one other addition:
They had to do some moving around last year in Year One of the contract for CBS, as they had the SEC for one more year. But going forward, every 3:30 game should be CBS.
NBC has some sort of option to move a Notre Dame game (or two?) each year to primetime instead of 1:30 pm, in place of a Big Ten prime time game. I believe that this would yield a FOX Big Ten Prime Time game once or twice a year head-to-head with that prime time Notre Dame game. And then NBC gets the noon kick off on that day.
Fox is also trying to get a Friday night Prime Time game each week. Presumably this would be the 4th best game each week, and feature a lot of Oregon, Washington, and UCLA home games (or, perhaps, some East Coast or Midwest Big Ten teams hosting that normally don't get as many national games). Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State have strongly pushed back (or opted out) from hosting Friday night games.
Historical CFP projections:
https://www.si.com/college/2022/12/21/college-football-playoff-history-with-12-team-field
I recall hearing somewhere that roughly 1/4 of the eligible schools make the playoffs in (most) college sports. That’s a close number for College hockey.
So set the new requirements to be the top 256 universities that can participate in D1 Basketball, lowering it from the current 351. I’d probably be more aggressive and set targets to try to get it to 1/3 or about 180 schools.
Plenty of room for Cinderella, but fewer schools taking a piece of the pie (even though it’s already weighted heavily in favor of the Power Conferences). And fewer cream puffs on the schedule in non-con (especially for the Big XII gaming the system).
Like Mike Hart but quicker
Somewhere, I saw that about 1/3 of all college football fans are B1G. And another 1/3 is SEC. And all the remaining teams make up about 1/3.
If the Big Ten isn’t getting about 1/3 of the CFP revenue, then they are leaving money on the table.
Therefore, if we are talking about automatic bids, The B1G should insist on four bids in a 12 team playoff.
The SEC on the other hand, probably likes their chances of getting 4-6 teams every year if there are no AQs, and having an opportunity to get more than 1/3 of the CFP pot.
I would prefer that the Big Ten tells ND “All or Nothing”. But… recent moves have shown that its all about money and the tv contract, and doesn’t have anything to do with academics, research, connecting with alums, travel and student health, etc. So the Big Ten won’t play hardball with Notre Dame if there is money to be made.
Therefore, I fully expect that once FSU and others break out of the ACC, that The B1G and ND come to an agreement somewhere between full membership and the current ND/ACC agreement.
I’m guessing full membership in all sports except football, and 6-7 Big Ten football games with some guardrails: like protecting the annual USC game, forcing the B1G to support the Shamrock series (ND Vs Maryland in Baltimore, Vs Rutgers at Yankee stadium, etc), and maybe protected or more-often-than-not games against Purdue, Michigan, and Michigan State. Also giving some preferential treatment to NBC in the TV selections.
This has nagged me for a long time. A defense getting a turnover is a huge win. But at their own one yard line is a very precarious spot.
A DB making a diving interception at the 1 yard line is a huge play to stop a touchdown drive but it sucks to have the offense come out and basically run it up the middle three times then punt.
So my new rule would be that any turnover inside the ten yard line automatically comes out to the 10 yard line. Gives the recovering teams offense some breathing room.
I’m open to debating 5 yard line or even 20 yard line. But 10 seems enough.
I’m less inclined to have a similar rule for turning it over on downs at the 1 yard line. Part of the advantage of going for it on fourth and goal from the 1 is if you fail, the other team is pinned deep. I expect we would see more field goals on 4th and goal inside the 5 if the defense got the ball at the 10 instead of the 1 or 2 yard line.
I expect most - if not all - of those 8 players will be going pro after 2024. So continuity for this year is my biggest concern for the DC hire.
We had a generational defense in 2023. Top 2 this century according to S&P+. With Wink providing continuity and keeping all of our players out of the portal, I expect the drop off this year will be somewhere in the range of Top 3 in all of college football in 2024. Which should be enough to make the 12 team playoffs. The offense will determine if we are Big Ten champs or seeded somewhere between 5 and 11.
2025 will be a major reset for the defense.
if Wink is here for only one year, that’s fine! That’s great! Clink can learn for one more year and then be the full time DC. And by that time, there should be more analysts available from the Chargers, Seahawks, or Ravens that we can bring in to coach.
Steve Morisson…
Paul Jokisch
Steve Morisson
Gannon Dudlar
Marc Milia
Grant Perry
He should immediately announce he is doing some football camps in Georgia, Alabama, Florida…
This can only be good news for our Defensive players in this years draft. Four teams presumably running the Ravens D next year, and only one college team running the Ravens D.
if you want a plug-and-play defender we’ll versed in this system, there are seven guys with three years experience playing in this system (plus Josh Wallace with one year playing this system)…. And that’s it.
Hausmann without a filled circle?
No mention of Zinter? Or Benny? Give them some love!
Aside from “we’re a good football team” Oregon adds nothing to the Big Ten and more specifically, The University of Michigan.
From an educational standpoint, they will rank 17th out of 18. From a research standpoint, they are a vast outlier and don’t fit at all.
From a travel standpoint for Olympic programs, they are a burden (and more so than USC-UCLA).
Looking at it from the “planting a flag in the region”, there is no reason for Michigan to be there. There are a dozen other states that would be more important from a recruiting standpoint (both student body and athletes) as well as connecting with alums.
They are the only Big Ten school that received more money in donations for the Athletic Department than their Endowment over the last 15-20 years.
They are also one of the smallest student bodies in the Big Ten (about half the size of most Big Ten schools).
Unlike Nebraska, they aren’t a natural geographical rival, and their fans aren’t going to fill our stadiums.
There just isn’t a whole lot about Oregon that makes sense, other than helping FOX.
The competition we have in The Big Ten - especially with adding USC and UCLA, and presumably Florida State soon, as well as another ACC school or three - is plenty.
Aside from travel, Oregon is going to get all of these benefits to their academics, research, recruiting, etc, and we aren’t getting any of that in return (like we did with USC/UCLA, or Penn State, or Maryland & Rutgers).
This is one of the reasons adding Oregon to the Big Ten was a horrible decision. If Oregon remained in the remnants of a PAC-10 or ended up in the Big XII, I’m not sure they get Bair.
A lot can change in two years. Maybe Lanning ends up the coach at LSU or Florida in the next two years, and Bair reopens his recruitment (and/or transfers; I don’t remember how it was classified for Andrew Gentry after he committed to Virginia but ended up here before ever arriving at UVA).
So… in no particular order… train wrecks:
Baylor 2017
Penn State 2012
Marshall 1971
SMU 1989
This is a question for someone smarter than me… but Jesse Minter had four years with the Ravens, but only one as the official DB coach. He obviously had tons of College DC experience.
Clinkscale has three years in the system under McDonald and Minter. Elston has two years in the system.
So, is 2-3 years in a system enough to fully grasp it? I get that not everyone has the knack for calling plays. But how much more experience do you need in the system? Or is there a major advantage to coaching with the Ravens instead of for Michigan (as far as calling plays at Michigan)?
I do want there to be one or two gray hairs on the staff for a young coach like Sherrone, but if Clink shows the aptitude for calling the defense, I don’t think he’s at a disadvantage for not coaching with the Ravens.
Chris Creighton as OC and someone for Sherrone to lean on as a former HC
Grant Newsome to OL
Sherrone Moore as HC and TE coach
Hart/Bellamy/Campbell stay as RB, WR, QB coaches
Ryan Osborn from Charlotte as LB coach (or Steve Morrison from BGSU as LB coach)
If there isn’t another Ravens trained coach to be DC, give it to Clink.
Go outside for a DB replacement or S/T coordinator. Especially if they can recruit. Or promote from within like with Kirk Campbell.
Caden Prieskorn is great. But he was not a freshman sensation. He played at a prep school for a year, then played four years at Memphis (including both a redshirt and a COVID year). His fourth year at Memphis was good, and led to him transferring to Ole Miss, where he had a breakout year in year five.
Bring back Dan Villari!
He’s…
He’s not retiring.
He’s returning to East Lansing. They couldn’t get Urban, but they can get Saban!
/s
Best: Regression would hit TCU. Wisconsin would be mediocre this year; needing time to adjust to the new offensive system and new coaching staff.
Worst: I thought Northwestern would be 1-11. But I also thought Illinois would improve after last year and finish around 9-3 and compete for the B1G West.
Danger 5 is amazing.
Not a bad introduction for a midcarder, but the guys at the top of the card will make him regret calling them out.
I don’t know what defensive system Charlotte used. But NHG did have one healthy year and one injured year of learning our defensive system.
Also: he went to a program of known friend and trusted agent Biff Poggi. I can’t imagine that Biff would take a bad apple transfer after being around NHG for a year or two.
If he came back as a starting LB assuming Colson is gone, sign me up.
This is what I’m thinking. Up until this point, Michigan would have stayed loyal to the Big Ten. But now, let’s say Amazon or Netflix or even Fox wanted an 8 team football only superconference. I’m sure that Michigan listens now.
Michigan, Notre Dame, Texas, Alabama, USC, Georgia. Start there. I’m sure Ohio State would join. The last spot can be Florida, Oklahoma… I don’t care.
That Superconference could schedule two conference games per week. And each game would draw 6-18 Million viewers. And probably net each team about $200 Million in TV revenue per year.
Not too terribly exciting, but I went to Brother Rice, so we were a feeder to Michigan Football in the 80s. My freshman year at Michigan had four guys from my high school. Two were in my graduating class, one of whom had his HS locker next to mine every year. Three of the four guys became starters.
The more interesting thing is that one of my best friends in high school went to Michigan with me. We were both engineers. He befriended a girl, who was dating another student. She broke up with her boyfriend after a year, and after about six months, started dating my friend. They married, living happily ever after.
The ex-boyfriend: some engineering student named Larry Page.
I got nothing right now.
I'm a Clarkston resident, and I've seen Des play about a dozen football games, and about a dozen basketball games. I would love to see him end up at Michigan.
A couple of items for reference: Clarkston is a pretty deep team, so a lot of players play only one way. Brody Kosin is a TE committed to Indiana, and I've only seen him on defense for Hail Marys (he's 6'6" and the center on the basketball team). Also, last year, Clarkston had a workhorse RB Ethan Clark who signed with Princeton and seemed to carry about 40 times a game. Based on Des's workload last year, I was expecting to see Des become the workhorse RB. That hasn't been the case.
I'm guessing they are trying to limit his wear and tear. But he is all over the field. He returns punts, plays WR, runs reverses / end arounds / sweeps, is the Wildcat QB on 4th and short and two point conversions, and probably throws a pass out of the wildcat or a jet sweep every third game. The Wildcat formation with 10 blockers and Des taking a direct snap is Clarkston's standard on those critical plays. He probably gets 10-15 touches per game, but they are often the most critical.
He is noticeable on defense too, from coverage and interceptions, to sacks. Even against West Bloomfield a few weeks ago, his athleticism stood out. West Bloomfield has 5 of the top 25 players in the state in the senior class, last I checked, and two of the top 15 juniors.
Based on his recruiting profile, it seems that he is targeted for safety, but I see him as a bit stronger/thicker than Paige or Moore, so I'm thinking a better comp is Michael Barrett. An HSP that develops into a LB and is a secret weapon on Special Teams for throwing/running fakes.
I don't know much about him personally, but a neighbor with a 10th grade son on JV said that Des personally reached out to his son to get him to join him in the weight room, and said Des is very hard working and pushes himself and the younger kids.
So, as far as a Harbaugh guy, Des checks boxes of hard working, leadership, versatility, athleticism, and multi-sport star.
BTW, Des is always the most powerful and strongest player on the basketball court, but still has elite speed and quickness for the OAA. I've seen Des play Rochester Adams on the basketball court twice last year, and against Brady Prieskorn. And Des was certainly the more aggressive player. (Prieskorn was active and aggressive on the football field - he was a scary opponent at DE and based on one game, I'd love to see him give DE a try - but seemed pretty mellow and "take it as it comes" on the court).
If the argument is for travel for LA schools, I believe the LA schools would prefer adding either Stanford/Cal or ASU/UA. They can visit both schools in a weekend without a connecting flight, and the flights are much shorter. The other 14 Big Ten schools, though, would now need to double our west coast travel. Which so far, Presidents and ADs do not want to do.
Along with UNC/UVa, I think Washington is the best "fit" for The Big Ten. I just think that The Big Ten isn't expanding "just to expand". So between that, and the added travel, and the tv value that they bring it's not enough to get Washington into The Big Ten.
As for Stanford... I know they have historically butted heads with USC in the PAC. So I'm not going to guess as to how that would play out politically, and if USC would be totally against Stanford and Cal (or Washington and Oregon) joining. Also, Stanford doesn't carry the SF market. It would connect B1G schools to alums in SF, like Rutgers does in NYC, but that doesn't mean the average fan in SF cares about Stanford.
The value for TV contracts is very, very top heavy. The Fox noon, CBS 3:30 pm, and NBC prime time games are all that really matters. The value of FS1, Peacock, and BTN games pale in comparison (as does Men's basketball games, let alone the rest of the sports teams)
That gives (usually) six Big Ten teams a premier nationwide audience each week. Michigan, Ohio State, USC, and Penn State are going to hoard those games. Historically, games like Michigan or Ohio State vs bottom tier teams like Northwestern and Indiana generally get selected by FOX and ESPN over games like Wisconsin-Iowa or Michigan State-Nebraska unless both teams are top 15.
The networks don't see Oregon and Washington on the level of Michigan/Ohio State. I think Gene Smith made the comment that Oregon and Washington "didn't pencil out". Only Notre Dame brings that high end brand that compares to UM/OSU (although Florida State might - I haven't seen it definitively stated one way or another).
Oregon and Washington would be above average brands amongst Big Ten teams, and bring more value to the league than an average team. But that doesn't matter because the value of Michigan, Ohio State, and USC is exorbitant, bringing up the average substantially. The additions of USC/UCLA, and current market forces have combined to make the bar much, much higher now than it was for Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers.
This probably isn't the case.
USC has made it clear they don't want more PAC schools, and they don't want to give Oregon, in particular, access to Southern California football recruits. USC wants Big Ten membership to be a differentiator vs other PAC schools.
Big Ten presidents are ok with one trip to the West Coast every other year for most sports, but adding Oregon/Washington doubles that number. Presidents don't appear to be interested.
Finally, LA to Oregon/Washington is about the same as to Nebraska. It really doesn't help LA schools with travel. If travel is a concern, or the LA schools want to add someone, the "regional" schools for USC/UCLA are Arizona State/Arizona and Stanford/Cal.
Lots of Problems with Oregon (and Washington). Biggest issue is that right now, TV networks don't see the value, and won't offer pro rata for those schools to The Big Ten. And Presidents have made it very clear they do not want to lose a single dollar if they are adding a school.
Reportedly, the FOX contract has a pre-negotiated addition for adding exactly one school: Notre Dame.
Additionally, in many of the broad academic/research metrics that The Big Ten uses, (and assuming Washington joins as a pair), Oregon would rank around 17th or 18th in the Big Ten.
Finally, the state of Oregon would add very little to Michigan and Big Ten schools as far as available student body, football and athletic recruiting, alumni, etc.
Pretty much, all Oregon has to offer The Big Ten is a strong football program over the last 25 years, that has been mightily propped up by Phil Knight.
Washington would be an excellent addition to The Big Ten based on many factors, except probably the most important right now: They don't increase value to the TV contracts. It also doesn't help that their location helps no one - including USC/UCLA.
I, of course, want to go back to 10 schools. However, since the horse is out of the barn...
UNC and UVA are probably both Top 5 public schools along with Michigan, Cal, and UCLA. Needless to say they are Flagships in their state.
The States of North Carolina and Virginia rank 8th and 12th in population. These are the two largest states without a B1G/SEC school.
Both schools have broad, successful athletic departments, often finishing in the Top Ten in the Learfield Cup.
These two schools have the best fit and look most like current B1G schools. I think the academically elite Presidents/Chancellors in the B1G start here.
Notre Dame is obviously a slam dunk if they want in. And then adding FSU and Miami. After the ACC is sorted out, only then do I see the B1G taking a second look out West. Now they have more teams in the East, so the amount of road trips out west are more split up.
AAU is not a hard and fast requirement, but over the last ~15 years of realignment, it's been an easy shorthand for The Big Ten's overall view of a particular University outside of football performance/brand/tv ratings.
At this time, it appears that any Big Ten decision on expansion is not only driven by money, but specifically by easily calculated TV Contract money (as opposed to the cable subscriptions in Md/DC and NJ/NYC).
That being said, I expect that the University Presidents will still weigh everything through the lens of Risk Management, and a 100-year decision. UCLA and USC look like Big Ten schools as far as academics, research, a national brand and a flagship school, large endowments, large alumni bases, broad sports programs, etc. You can expect that these schools would vote similarly to the traditional academic heavyweights in the Big Ten like Michigan, Wisconsin, Northwestern, and Minnesota, as well as the athletic heavyweights, like Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State.
For this reason, I think the Big Ten will be very cautious with Oregon and Clemson. While they have strong football success over the last ~25 years, they aren't the brand names with 100 years of football relevance. They aren't terrible schools, but they would be similar to Nebraska in that they really don't do much for the Big Ten as far as research, academics, opening a market for athletic recruits and student body recruits, reaching alums, large alumni bases, endowments, etc. Those schools need the Big Ten a hell of a lot more than the Big Ten needs them.
Notre Dame is Notre Dame and in a class of their own. The reported value that they would bring makes them a no-brainer to add, despite a lack of research.
UNC and UVa, like USC and UCLA, look like Big Ten schools and offer a lot even if their football teams aren't substantial. They would likely vote like Michigan within the Big Ten. Clemson and Oregon would likely vote like Nebraska and be much more hyper-focused on football than academics or broad athletics or health/safety.
Florida State and Miami offer a lot across the board, but I would rather see them added alongside a few academic powerhouses (assuming we do expand - I'd be happy staying at 16 or stopping at 18 with ND + 1)
Interesting that out of 19 players in those six years, that 5 of them transferred out.
I believe three would be due to playing time and getting passed by younger teammates, and two were “homesick”.
In the new portal world, this may become much more common throughout college football.
Logan Brown is transferring to Kansas.
I can't speak to the specifics of each clip, but Brother Rice played just about the toughest schedule in the state last year. Cass Tech, AA Pioneer, Toledo St Francis, and Cincinnati La Salle before the Catholic League of De La Salle, Catholic Central, Orchard Lake St Mary's, UD Jesuit and then the state playoffs, including Muskegon in the Finals. Malzone's only now entering his Junior year, so there is time to strengthen his arm.
Last year, Brother Rice won their second straight Div 2 title with Cheyne Lacanaria as the starting QB. By mid-season, however, Malzone had picked up the offense so well that the coaches were forced to give him playing time, and start a platoon with the defending state champion qb. Not that bad. Lacanaria has graduated so the door is wide open for Malzone to take over the job for himself.
I remember reading FO a few years ago on this and did some digging. Here's what he said at the beginning of last year:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/fei-ratings/2012/fei-preseason-primer-2012
This appears to be one of his "spectacular misses".
Obviously, Michigan gets dinged not only for poor seasons 3, 4, and 5 years ago, but also for poor recruiting ratings in those years. Also, while we have every reason to be optimistic about Devin Gardner, according to his methodology, he doesn't have a lot of experience. Same thing with needing to replace a bunch of starters, even if we might be better at some of those positions (like Interior OL).
Slovaks Tomas Tatar and Tomas Jurco took part in the Slovak pre-Olympic camp, while Petr Mrazek attended the Czech camp.
Also, these camp invite lists are by no means final. Daniel Alfredsson and Gustav Nyquist could still make Sweden's roster, while Jakub Kindl could still make the Czech roster.
Jimmy King had a cameo with the Pistons.