The Big Ten this week embarks on its first nine-game conference schedule, rekindling the debate whether all Power Five conferences should play the same number of league games in the era of the College Football Playoff.The Atlantic Coast Conference and Southeastern Conference have eight-game conference schedules. The Big 12 and Pac-12, and now the Big Ten, play nine league games.Those leagues tout their nine conference games as a way of boosting schedule strength and, hopefully, increase their members chances of being selected for the playoff. But there is another component. Conference games tend to be more attractive inventory for league television networks and partners, and they also help keep stadiums full, compared with matchups against lower-tier competition.Nebraska coach Mike Riley argued consistency in number of conference games across the Power Five is a matter of fairness.I think that probably with the playoffs at stake, he said, that should be equitable that way.Ohio State coach Urban Meyer said he hadnt thought about conferences playing the same number of league games but added, Coach Riley has a good point there.The College Football Playoff selection committee evaluates each teams body of work, with strength of schedule part of the criteria, with no regard to how that schedule in composed. It also does not take a position on how conferences determine their champions.I really believe the data points that are going to be evaluated to decide who is going to be a national championship-caliber team should be decided the same way, Northwestern coach Pat Fitzgerald said. If that means we all play nine, we all play eight, we all play 10 in the Power Five, I dont really care what we do and how many we play. We should just be playing the same if were going to be evaluated the same way.The SEC decided in 2014 to continue with its eight-game conference schedule with a requirement that each team play at least one nonconference game against a Power Five opponent. Tennessee athletic director Dave Hart said last month that the SEC has not had any discussions about reconsidering conference scheduling.ACC athletic directors are scheduled to meet next month and could discuss future football scheduling. The ACC is mulling whether to continue with eight conference games but require each team to play two nonconference games against Power Five opponents, or whether to go to nine conference games and require one non-conference game against a Power Five team.Were the only sport in America that doesnt have the same set of rules for everyone that plays, Florida State coach Jimbo Fisher said. Ive never figured that out. Everyone goes to their own neighborhood and makes their own rules. Im for uniform for everything across the board in everything we do. Why cant we play the same number of games, same conference championship?Even if all Power Five conferences played the same number of league games, it wouldnt necessarily create the same criteria for the playoff selection committee to consider. For example, a team playing eight conference games along with two nonconference games against high-caliber opponents could be held in higher regard than a team with a nine-game conference schedule that, depending on the year, could include crossover games against bottom feeders and weak non-conference opponents.Also at issue: keeping alive nonconference geographical rivalry games, many of them between SEC and ACC teams, and maintain the flexibility in nonconference scheduling that allows schools to generate the significant revenue that comes with playing seven home games.In the Big Ten, the nine-game conference schedule is not embraced by everybody. East Division teams will have five conference games at home and four away in even-numbered years, with West Division teams following that schedule in odd-numbered years.Minnesotas Tracy Claeys and Northwesterns Fitzgerald would prefer 10 conference games so each team would get five at home and five on the road.There is a huge advantage to playing home football games, especially in some of these cathedrals of college football we have in Big Ten play, Fitzgerald said. The traditional powers of our conference, it might not impact them that much. But the programs like ours, that are trying to build from historically being in the bottom of the conference to building to the middle of the conference and fighting and scratching and clawing to get to the top... having four home games and the other side has five makes it really challenging.---AP Sports Writers Joe Reedy in Tallahassee, Florida, Dave Campbell in Minneapolis and Steve Megargee in Knoxville, Tennessee, contributed.---Online:AP college football website: http://collegefootball.ap.org What is the best Chinese web site for cheap Jerseys .C. -- Todd Fiddler scored a hat trick, including the overtime goal, as the Prince George Cougars survived an 8-7 win against the Kamloops Blazers in Western Hockey League play Sunday. What is a good website to buy sports jerseys . Numbers Game looks into the Canadiens securing the services of Thomas Vanek in a trade with the New York Islanders. The Canadiens Get: LW Thomas Vanek and a conditional fifth-round pick. https://www.wheretobuycheapjerseys.com/ . LOUIS -- Theres no telling how these wacky World Series games will end. What is the best site to buy team jerseys from China . Klitschkos management company says the bout will be the Ukrainian fighters 25th world championship fight. The 1.83-meter (6-foot) Leapai defeated the previously unbeaten Denis Boytsov in November to become the WBOs mandatory challenger. What is the best place to buy Cheap Jerseys . As he recorded his 23rd and 24th points of the evening, a segment of the sellout Air Canada Centre crowd expressed their appreciation for the Raptors point guard with a smattering of MVP chants. Should clubs use early picks on ruckmen? Can outside midfielders be snared late? What about key forwards? ESPN AFL draft expert Christopher Doerre has assessed recent history to answer the burning questions ahead of this years draft.Historical contextRuckmen: Good ruckmen can come from anywhere on draft day. There have been many rookie success stories over the years with Dean Cox, Aaron Sandilands, Shane Mumford, Sam Jacobs and Darren Jolly among the most notable.In more recent times, two big men selected mid-draft in Todd Goldstein (pick 37, 2006) and Max Gawn (pick 34, 2009) have developed into arguably the two best ruckmen in the game today.In the first round, Nic Naitanui (pick No. 2, 2008) and Brodie Grundy (pick 18, 2012) are among the better rucks taken inside the first round with Naitanui at his best as influential as any and Grundy one of the most exciting young rucks in the game.It is interesting to note that historically, the strike rate with ruckmen taken inside the first round is low. In some cases, with those taken in the first round, injuries derailed or shortened careers. In other cases, the players have not developed as expected. Justin Koschitzke, Josh Fraser, Hamish McIntosh, Matthew Leuenberger, Max Bailey and Matthew Kreuzer are among the most notable first-round selections to have injury-ravaged careers or have had their careers cut relatively short.In just as many cases, other rucks selected in the first round have not developed as hoped, with Ayce Cordy, Daniel Gorringe, Billy Longer, Matthew Lobbe and Shaun Hampson among the more recent underachievers. Since the 2005 draft, clubs have been relatively more cautions taking ruckman inside the first round.One theory with ruckmen taken early is that they are exposed too early to the ruck at AFL level. Others theorise that because tall players generally come into their own in their early to mid-20s, developing into their bodies much later, late-blooming ruckmen turn out to be the best ones. This makes selecting ruckmen through the draft a challenge, with clubs needing to project ahead and consider what the young rucks will be like in six-plus years time.To play the percentages, clubs would be advised to search for a diamond in the rough through the rookie draft, as -- other than exceptional cases where a ruckman is clearly better than everyone else available, such as Grundy -- clubs are better off spending time identifying the undervalued ruckman during the season and considering who has some attributes which may in time translate to success at AFL level.Key forwards: The better key forwards for the most part in recent times have come as either first-round selections or father-sons. Nick Riewoldt, Matthew Pavlich, Jarryd Roughead, Josh Kennedy, Jack Riewoldt and Tom Lynch are among the elite key forwards taken inside the first round. Jonathan Brown, Travis Cloke, Tom Hawkins and Jarrad Waite among the notable father-son choices. There are exceptions, with Jeremy Cameron selected by GWS as a 17-year-old and Taylor Walker joining Adelaide as a NSW/ACT scholarship holder at the time.There are also some productive key forwards who have come in the second round and even in the rookie draft. While there are always exceptions, the key finding in recent drafts is, a first-round selection is required to select a good or great key forward. There are still as many key forward misses as there are successes early in a draft, but thats the chance that needs to be taken, with correct talent identification key.Beyond selecting key forwards inside the first round, the key to selecting good tall forwards is about selecting superiority of talent. A suitable formula is to look for players who have points of difference, have the performances on the board (high mark and goal numbers) as juniors and have shown continued growth and improvement over the years (both physically and in performance, to suggest future upside). The more of these boxes that are ticked and the more convincingly, generally the more successful the key forward will be at AFL level, pending a good run with injury and good coaching, player development and veteran leadership from within the playing group to help support their growth and development.Key defenders: Like with key forwards, though to a lesser extent, a large portion of the high-end key defenders have been selected inside the first round. Alex Rance, Daniel Talia, Michael Hurley, Harry Taylor, Ben Reid, Darren Glass, Luke McPharlin and James Frawley are among those most notable names.With that said, there have still been key defenders taken in other stages in the draft who have had or are currently producing highly successful careers. Ted Richards (pick 27, 2000 to Essendon before being traded to Sydney where he established himself), Brian Lake (pick 71, 2001), Sam Fisher (pick 55, 2003), Michael Johnson (pick No. 8, preseason draft, 2004), Cale Hooker (pick 54, 2007), Tom McDonald (pick 53, 2010) and Jeremy McGovern (2011 rookie draft, selection 44) are among some of those names. Adelaide in the early 2000s did a superb job finding a highly successful key defence duo in Ben Rutten and Nathan Bock, who were selected in the 2001 and 2002 rookie drafts respectively. It just takes better talent identification outside the first round to pick the right key defenders.Increasingly, key defenders are asked not only to restrict the influence of their direct opponents, hold their own in the one-on-one contests and have the closing speed to stay with their match-ups on the lead. Today, there is a greater reliance on reading the flight and taking intercept marks. One-on-one marking and superiority of one-on-one body work is also a major ingredient clubs look for from their key defenders, with gaining of possession more advantageous than halving a contest, in contests where it is reasonably achievable.Given this understanding of the modern game and the history of where good key defenders come from in the draft, clubs should be looking for key defenders with strong marking ability who read the ball in flight to a high level and display excellent body work and one-on-one strength. In the junior ranks, the more talented key position players often start off as key forwards before becoming a defender - sometimes this will be in the form of a key forward making the switch back, in other cases it will be a key defender who takes lots of contested marks.If a club has a first-round pick and needs a key defender, the first round is a good place to be choosing to increase the chances of securing a key defender of AFL quality. Outside the first round, clubs would be advised to look specifically towards key position players with outstanding contested marking ability and body work, with a view towards developing them into key defenders.*With the following positions because of positional ambiguity and several players playing different roles or different positions over the years, several genuine stars of the game have not been included in the following examples, to simplify things and maximise the clarity of the analysis.Inside midfielders: Inside the first round, historically the safest draft day bets, and players with the greatest upside, are inside midfielders taken inside the first round.The key to drafting good inside midfielders over the years has been the selection of those who win a high volume of contested ball. It should come as no surprise that the following batch of first-round draftees were or are prolific contested-ball winners:Chris Judd (pick No. 3, 2001), Scott Pendlebury (No. 5, 2005), Joel Selwood (No.7, 2006), Patrick Dangerfield (10, 2007), Ollie Wines (No. 7, 2012), Marcus Bontempelli (4, 2013) and Patrick Cripps (13, 2013) are among the best choices in recent drafts.While clubs have had great success in selecting inside midfielders in the first round, it is not the only area of the draft that has proven successful over time. Sam Mitchell (pick 36, 2001), Dane Swan (58, 2001), Matthew Boyd (rookie draft, 2001), Matt Priddis (rookie draft, 2006), Robbie Gray (55, 2006), Rory Sloane (44, 2008), Tom Rockliff (preseason draft, pick No. 5, 2008) and Nat Fyfe (pick 20, 2009) among some of the better recent midfielders taken outside the first round.Among the notable father-son selections are Gary Ablett (pick 40, 2001 - father-son to Geelong before joining Gold Coast for the 2011 season), Jobe Watson (father-son, pick 40, 2002) and Josh Kennedy (pick 40, 2006, father-son, drafted by Hawthorn and traded to Sydney).So, while the strike rate is fantastic for inside midfielders taken in the first round, it is also possible, with correct talent identification, for clubs to find good midfielders anywhere in the draft or in the rookie draft. Particularly when the depth of midfielders available is strong.Outside midfielders: There is substantial ambiguity with outside midfielders because they are often asked to play on the ball, forward or back.With that said, in previous drafts, the more successful outside midfielders tend to possess a combination of good numbers, endurance, skills and decision-making. Some of the prime examples of this type include first-rounders Andrew Gaff (pick No. 4, 2010), Lachie Whitfield (1, 2012), and Josh Kelly (2, 2013) with Mitch Duncan (pick 28, 2009) featuring in the second round.The better outside midfielders for the most part are first-rounders. With that said, outside players taken in the first round can be high risk and often fail to live up to expectations. Most years there are outside players selected inside the first round who may have a few attributes that suggest they may develop into damaging players at AFL level, but dont tick all the boxes up to a high enough standard.With outside types, while the better players tend to come inside the first round, serviceable outside players can be selected late or in the rookie draft, which puts it down to whether clubs are willing to pay a lot for good outside types, orr settle for a lower level but still serviceable type later.ddddddddddddGeneral forwards: Like with ruckmen, general forwards can be found anywhere on draft day. There are some first-round success stories such as Cyril Rioli (pick 12, 2007) and Chad Wingard (pick No. 6, 2011) with some others transitioning over time into midfielders, though the list of misses inside the first round far exceeds the list of successes specifically when looking at those players drafted and developed to become pure forwards.There have been many terrific forwards selected outside the first round over time, with Stephen Milne (rookie draft, 2000), Steve Johnson (pick 24, 2001), Eddie Betts (preseason draft, 2004), Steven Motlop (pick 39, 2008), Michael Walters (pick 53, 2008), Luke Breust (rookie draft, 2008) and Jamie Elliott (prelisted as a mature age talent by GWS in 2011 and traded to Collingwood) just some of them.Given the success clubs have had from all over the draft with general forwards, it would be advised for AFL clubs to pass on forwards early, unless they project to become a midfielder, and take forwards after the first round or as rookies, with early picks not always needed to find good forwards.A good forward usually must have high levels of natural talent. Often they will be freakish at ground level, possess goal-sense and often possess incredible athleticism or marking ability with the performances and heavy scoreboard impact in most cases present during their junior careers.General defenders: Down back, there are also large portion of multi-positional types who can play to a high level and have featured inside the first round.Robert Murphy (pick 13, 1999), Corey Enright (pick 47, 1999), Nick Malceski (pick 64, 2002), Heath Shaw (pick 48, 2003, Collingwood father-son), Shannon Hurn (pick 13, 2005), Grant Birchall (pick 14, 2005), Easton Wood (pick 43, 2007 national draft), Brodie Smith (pick 14, 2010) and Sam Docherty (pick 12, 2011) are among the standout general defenders.With that said, there have been successful general defenders taken later in the draft and even in the rookie draft with Dane Rampe (2013 rookie draft) and Zac Williams (2013 rookie draft) two notable recent examples of general defenders who are by position two of the better examples in the AFL today.As with inside midfielders, if you want one of the better backmen, clubs can use a first-round selection to get one but with correct talent identification, good general defenders can also be identified later in the draft or as rookies.Dynamics of this years draftRuckmen: Only one ruck, Tim English, is likely to feature early. Views with English vary with some believing he will be the next Dean Cox given his mobility, accumulation of the ball around the ground and skills. Others view him as unlikely to be more than an above-average ruckman with below average strength and power, hands overhead that are not always clean and an unclear capacity to pose a threat forward of centre.On the other hand, there is substantial depth of ruckman later in this years draft with Rowan Marshall, Darcy Cameron and Oscar McInerney as mature-agers in the mix. Sean Darcy, Tony Olango, Max Lynch, Jeremy Goddard, Jordan Sweet and Peter Ladhams among the ruckmen from the under-18 competitions nationally may be considered for AFL list positions.From a historical context given the low success rate with ruckmen taken in the first round, and the strong depth of players available late draft or as rookies, clubs this year may be better off waiting until late in the national draft or in the rookie draft in their searches for a potentially developable ruckman.There is also substantial top-end quality of ruckmen projected to feature inside the first round in 2017 which clubs will also be well aware of.Key forwards: This years draft is a shallow for key forwards, with a lack of top-end options.Todd Marshall is likely to be selected in the 10-20 range as the first key forward selected. He has the talent, with several points of difference such as his cleanness at ground level at his height and his athleticism. On the other hand, he is not a sure thing with his production for a key forward matching up unfavourably by comparison to recent key forwards taken inside the first round, with only the 22 goals from his 11 TAC Cup games and just over three marks per game.Following Marshall, the strong-bodied Patrick Kerr may feature somewhere around the 20-30 range, though his numbers also are underwhelming with only the 12 goals in the TAC Cup from his eight games and relatively less pronounced points of difference.Josh Battle has also attracted interest and may also slot into the 20-30 range. His production and goal-per-game numbers are relatively better than that of Marshall or Kerr, with 24 goals from his eight TAC Cup games, but at 192cm his best position is less clear. He may possibly become more a third tall than a key forward at AFL level.With the key forward stocks lean this year and all having their various question marks, clubs may, if looking for a stop gap, consider SANFL star Brett Eddy if looking for someone who can immediately fill a list hole. Otherwise, clubs may wait until next years draft which appears to have a stronger group of key forwards towards the top end.Key defenders: Griffin Logue is this years top-rated key defender. He may fit inside the top 10 this year with Sydney rumoured to have strong interest.Athletically, Logue is excellent and has the strength to hold his own in the contest and limit the influence of his direct opponent. With that said, Logue is not a prolific contested or intercept mark, with only nine marks over four games during the AFL Under-18 Championships and from that, just the two contested marks. Therefore, a top-10 selection may be considered by some to be too early for Logue.From the second round onwards there will be other key defenders who may represent stronger value with Brennan Cox and GWS Academy talents Zachary Sproule and Harrison Macreadie potentially coming under consideration.Late draft or as rookies, Tyler Keitel and Matthew Sully as mature-agers may also enter the minds of clubs looking for a quick fix.Inside midfielders: One of the major strengths in this years draft is the depth of midfielders.There are strong options in the first round. In the second and third rounds, Willem Drew, Kobe Mutch, Jonty Scharenberg, Zac Fisher, Dylan Clarke and Jack Graham are among those who may and represent value. They each lack in one or two areas with speed, skill or in the case of Fisher, size deficiencies but each have the performances on the board that suggest they each may be able to contributes to a midfield group.Late in the draft and in the rookie draft, another tier down, there is a long list of capable midfielders with the performances on the board and some attributes of their own.Given this dynamic, with such strength and depth of midfielders throughout the draft, this year is as good as any to be selecting inside midfielders from any area in this draft.Outside midfielders: The outside midfielders this year are for the most part players who push forward, up onto the wing or back, or combine inside and outside roles through the midfield rather than pure outside midfielders. Potential top overall selection Hugh McCluggage may be the closest thing as the one outside player this year with the production, endurance, skills and decision-making to be an elite outside midfielder. Though with his finishing on goal and delivery to targets inside 50m so exceptional, he is just as valuable in the front half as he is up on a wing or through the midfield.This year, picking outside midfielders and multi-positional mids in any portion of the draft is discretionary based on whether clubs feel the players theyre looking at fit their lists and can become best 22 players, ahead of their existing group.General forwards: In the first round there is a long list of forwards who also have the capacity to play through the midfield. McCluggage is top of that list with Ben Ainsworth, Tim Taranto, Oliver Florent, Daniel Venables, Will Hayward, Jy Simpkin, Shai Bolton and Sam Powell-Pepper also possibly set to feature inside the first-round.There is also substantial depth of forwards in this draft class who could develop into forwards long-term. Ben Ronke, Lachlan Tiziani, Joshua Begley, Dan Allsop, Kym LeBois and mature-agers Liam Ryan and Willie Rioli are some of the forwards who may receive consideration in the back-end of the national draft or as rookies.Overall with the quality of forwards who can push up through the midfield in the first round, if someone who can rotate between the front half and midfield is required, the first round is the position to do that and this year is the ideal year to capitalise in the surplus of this type.Late and rookie draft is also a terrific place to be selecting general forwards this year given the depth and historically some of the names who have come late.General defenders: Projected top-two selection Andrew McGrath is likely to be the first general defender taken.Overall the depth of general defenders throughout the draft is high. Jack Scrimshaw likely features inside the top 10. Alex Witherden and Jarrod Berry may each be selected somewhere in the 10-20 range. Jordan Ridley, Jordan Gallucci, who may become more a half-back flanker in the AFL, and Isaac Cumming may feature around the 20-30 range. The depth of names are evenly distributed throughout all the way down to the latter rounds of the national draft.Given this dynamic, this is a good year for clubs to be selecting general defenders. There is value and options throughout the draft, with clubs having the flexibility to take general defenders depending on their best available preferences or around list needs with their other selections. ' ' '