The Sporting News ranked all 18 Big Ten football head coaches from best to worst going into the 2025 college football season. Some are really established, others need some work and there’s still some questions with new blood.

At the top of the Big Ten are some truly elite coaches in college football these days. In fact, the conference has three top 10 coaches nationwide residing right in this conference.

Let’s dive into The Sporting News’ rankings of Big Ten coaches. Their ranking is reflected in order and then their national ranking in parentheses.

Day is the best among Big Ten coaches after winning a national title for the first time last season. He’s also second in the nation behind Kirby Smart of Georgia.

Day is 70-10 in his career and Ohio State has produced 24 NFL Draft picks over the last three years. His only bugaboo currently is the four straight losses to Michigan.

Lanning is 35-6 at Oregon since his Georgia DC days. He comes in as Sporting News’ second best Big Ten coach and top 10 overall. 

Last year, the Ducks went 13-0 and won the Big Ten before being upset as the No. 1 seed in the CFP. The next logical step is winning it all, but there’s no question Lanning is among the game’s elite coaches.

Some people would say Franklin is not an elite coach, perhaps due to lack of postseason success like some others. But he’s the third best in the Big Ten and top 10 nationally.

He finally led Penn State to the playoff last year, coming up one game shy of the national title game. He has a Big Ten title under his belt, albeit nearly 10 years ago, but Franklin’s 2025 team could end up winning it all.

Riley is 81-24 in his career, but just 26-14 during his time at USC. He’s still among the better Big Ten coaches and nationwide, but the pressure is mounting to deliver in a big way out west.

The first Big Ten season didn’t go that well, which included losses to Maryland, Michigan and Minnesota. Riley is also 4-10 against ranked teams with USC.

Cignetti lit the world on fire in the Big Ten last season, leading Indiana to 11 wins and the College Football Playoff. That’s good for top five in the conference.

There’s a tougher schedule this year, so it’ll be interesting to see if Cignetti can duplicate his success. He’s a proven winner, so he’s to not be underestimated.

With over 200 wins on his resume, Ferentz is one of the best coaches of the 21st century. He’s still one of the best in the Big Ten and throughout the country as well.

Ferentz’s defense and run game at Iowa is always a solid piece of the puzzle. But the passing game has to be fixed in 2025 and transfer QB Mark Gronowski could be the key. If Ferentz were able to win a Big Ten title at this stage of his career, start building the statue!

Bielema is just 28-22 at Illinois but 125-80 overall as a head coach. Make no mistake, Illinois is trending in the right direction after a 10-win season.

He could vault up this list if the Illini make the College Football Playoff or compete for the Big Ten title. Let’s see if the good vibes keep rolling in Champaign.

Fickell was actually just named to CBS Sports’ hot seat list because he’s gotta get it going. But the Badgers coach still has top tier qualities to have success in the Big Ten.

In fact, Fickell is still a top 30 coach in the country, probably due to his success at Cincinnati. But, Wisconsin’s old school approach for 2025 could prove successful.

This is already Fleck’s ninth season at Minnesota and in the Big Ten, hard to believe right? Fleck is 56-39 with the Gophers and actually 6-0 in bowl games.

Off the rip, you could probably swap him and Fickell and no one would bat an eye. While he’s been successful, Fleck lacking a Big Ten title game appearance is probably what holds him back from a higher ranking.

Moore showed a lot of moxie last year when he officially took over as head coach. He saw a lot of success in the Big Ten and nationally when coaching under Jim Harbaugh before that though.

He led Michigan to wins over USC, Ohio State and Alabama last year, so that looked good for the resume! But now, the expectations to compete for the Big Ten and the College Football Playoff are back.

Everyone’s now waiting for the Matt Rhule Year 3 jump at Nebraska. So that means he’s going to lead them to a Big Ten title right? Or at least the conference championship? 

Yes, that’s been Rhule’s trajectory at Temple and Baylor, so naturally that’ll happen again! Okay, we have to see the games play out first, but Rhule could quickly rise up this list.

Fisch went 6-7 during his first season at Washington, losing the Sun Bowl. The debut season in the Big Ten wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t special.

Fisch rebuilt an Arizona team by Year 3, giving him the opportunity at Washington after Kalen DeBoer left for Alabama. He’s a solid coach, but it’s a wait and see approach in a loaded conference over the next couple of seasons.

Schiano got Rutgers to back to back bowl games as he rebuilt the program in second stint. During his first ‘go round, the Big Ten was in the far future, but he had a lot of success.

The Scarlet Knights had some missed opportunities and winning seven games, rather than nine or 10 against a manageable schedule last year probably didn’t do him any favors. But, Rutgers should compete for another bowl game this year due to New Jersey’s own.

It’s too early to tell if Smith is going to be highly successful or not at Michigan State. Coming from Oregon State over to the Big Ten was a big move, considering he left his alma mater.

Going 5-7 with a new roster isn;t bad, but it isn’t great. So perhaps if Smith makes a bowl game with the Spartans this year, he’ll rise up the ranks. In six seasons Oregon State, Smith had a breakthrough year, in Year 5, in 2022 with 10 wins and a Las Vegas Bowl win.

Locksley is lower on the Big Ten list this year but not too low nationally. The Terrapins are going to have to rebuild going into 2025 as expectations are lower than previous seasons.

Locksley led the Terrapins to bowl wins three straight seasons but went 4-8 last year. 2025 might be no different, but he’s been good enough during his time to get something cooking and maybe surprise some folks.

Foster’s coached one season, so like Smith, it’s too early to tell how he stacks up against other Big Ten coaches. UCLA had some positives last year, but nothing stellar.

He gets Nico Iamaleava at QB this season, so that’ll help and bring in a lot of attention. After starting 1-5, Foster led the Bruins to a 4-2 finish, so there’s reason for optimism this fall

Braun took over on the fly in 2023 for Pat Fitzgerald, who was fired amid a hazing scandal. He promptly went 8-5 and won the Las Vegas Bowl.

Unfortunately, the Big Ten caught up to Northwestern and the Wildcats went 4-8 last season. So right now, it’s a little Jekyll and Hyde for Braun going into Year 3.

Odom resurrected his head coaching chops with a 19-8 record in two seasons at UNLV. But his time at Missouri was very up and down between 2016-19.

Now in the Big Ten, Odom has a big undertaking: rebuilding Purdue after the Ryan Walters era. He’s last in the conference per Sporting News right now, but there’s plenty of room to grow.

RALEIGH, N.C. – When the Carolina Hurricanes selected Justin Poirier in the fifth round of the 2024 draft, the bulk of the buzz surrounded the fact that he was the first 17-year-old to score 50 goals in the QMJHL since Sidney Crosby.

Although he dealt with a few injuries this past season, the forward dazzled again, following up his historical season with a 43-goal campaign and bringing his total to 210 points in 181 junior games.

Now, instead of going back to the Maritimes, where he would have had little left to prove and undoubtedly dominated again, Poirier has the chance to try a fresh challenge this fall: the college game.

Carved by the changing landscape of NIL in the NCAA, it’s a new route for development, allowing Canadian Hockey League (CHL) players to make a jump that had previously been outlawed. As a result, the general feeling is that the CHL will shift toward younger talent, and some players will then eventually graduate to a bigger and more pro-like college game, a step taken this week by prospective first overall selection in the 2026 NHL Entry Draft, Gavin McKenna.

Taking on stronger and more mature competition is exactly what Poirier is looking for as he heads to the University of Maine.

“I spoke with my agent, with (Canes Development Coach Kevin McCarthy), the other coaches here, the development guys, and in order to be ready to play in the AHL or NHL one day, I have to play against older and bigger guys,” Poirier said at this month’s Development Camp.

The new agency in charge of regulating name, image, likeness deals in college sports sent a letter to schools Thursday saying it had rejected deals between players and donor-backed collectives formed over the past several years to funnel money to athletes or their schools.

Those arrangements hold no “valid business purpose,” the memo said, and don’t adhere to rules that call for outside NIL deals to be between players and companies that provide goods or services to the general public for profit.

The letter to Division I athletic directors could be the next step in shuttering today’s version of the collective, groups that are closely affiliated with schools and that, in the early days of NIL after July 2021, proved the most efficient way for schools to indirectly cut deals with players.

Since then, the landscape has changed yet again with the $2.8 billion House settlement that allows schools to pay the players directly as of July 1.

Already, collectives affiliated with Colorado, Alabama, Notre Dame, Georgia and others have announced they’re shutting down. Georgia, Ohio State and Illinois are among those that have announced plans with Learfield, a media and technology company with decades of licensing and other experience across college athletics, to help arrange NIL deals.

Outside deals between athlete and sponsor are still permitted, but any worth $600 or more have to be vetted by a clearinghouse called NIL Go that was established by the new College Sports Commission and is being run by the auditing group Deloitte.

In its letter to the ADs, the CSC said more than 1,500 deals have been cleared since NIL Go launched on June 11, “ranging in value from three figures to seven figures.” More than 12,000 athletes and 1,100 institutional users have registered to use the system.

But the bulk of the letter explained that many deals could not be cleared because they did not conform to an NCAA rule that sets a “valid business purpose” standard for deals to be approved.

The letter explained that if a collective reaches a deal with an athlete to appear on behalf of the collective, which charges an admission fee, the standard is not met because the purpose of the event is to raise money to pay athletes, not to provide goods or services available to the general public for profit.

The same would apply to a deal an athlete makes to sell merchandise to raise money to pay that player because the purpose of “selling merchandise is to raise money to pay that student-athlete and potentially other student-athletes at a particular school or schools, which is not a valid business purpose” according to the NCAA rule.

Sports attorney Darren Heitner, who deals in NIL, said the guidance “could disproportionately burden collectives that are already committed to spending money on players for multiple years to come.”

“If a pattern of rejections results from collective deals submitted to Deloitte, it may invite legal scrutiny under antitrust principles,” he said.

On a separate track, some college sports leaders, including the NCAA, are seeking a limited form of antitrust protection from Congress.

The letter said a NIL deal could be approved if, for instance, the businesses paying the players had a broader purpose than simply acting as a collective. The letter uses a golf course or apparel company as examples.

“In other words, NIL collectives may act as marketing agencies that match student-athletes with businesses that have a valid business purpose and seek to use the student’s NIL to promote their businesses,” the letter said.

AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports

Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

Audio By Carbonatix

Karina Munoz competes for the University of Iowa in gymnastics. The rising senior eats a well-rounded diet rooted in protein, both simple and complex carbohydrates, and plenty of vegetables.

She has learned how to listen to what her body needs on the day of competition!

Munoz, a native of New Jersey, committed to the Hawkeyes as a former Junior Olympic champion and Level 10 DP National qualifier in gymnastics. Iowa immediately put her in the lineup for all-around competition. She captured seven event titles and 13 top-three finishes as a freshman, earned First Team All-Big Ten honors as a sophomore and notched multiple career-bests on floor and on vault as a junior.

The new agency in charge of regulating name, image, likeness deals in college sports sent a letter to schools Thursday saying it had rejected deals between players and donor-backed collectives formed over the past several years to funnel money to athletes or their schools.

Those arrangements hold no “valid business purpose,” the memo said, and don’t adhere to rules that call for outside NIL deals to be between players and companies that provide goods or services to the general public for profit.

The letter to Division I athletic directors could be the next step in shuttering today’s version of the collective, groups that are closely affiliated with schools and that, in the early days of NIL after July 2021, proved the most efficient way for schools to indirectly cut deals with players.

Since then, the landscape has changed yet again with the $2.8-billion House settlement that allows schools to pay the players directly as of July 1.

Already, collectives affiliated with Colorado, Alabama, Notre Dame, Georgia and others have announced they’re shutting down. Georgia, Ohio State and Illinois are among those that have announced plans with Learfield, a media and technology company with decades of licensing and other experience across college athletics, to help arrange NIL deals.

Outside deals between athlete and sponsor are still permitted, but any worth $600 or more have to be vetted by a clearinghouse called NIL Go that was established by the new College Sports Commission and is being run by the auditing group Deloitte.

In its letter to the ADs, the CSC said more than 1,500 deals have been cleared since NIL Go launched on June 11, “ranging in value from three figures to seven figures.” More than 12,000 athletes and 1,100 institutional users have registered to use the system.

But the bulk of the letter explained that many deals could not be cleared because they did not conform to an NCAA rule that sets a “valid business purpose” standard for deals to be approved.

The letter explained that if a collective reaches a deal with an athlete to appear on behalf of the collective, which charges an admission fee, the standard is not met because the purpose of the event is to raise money to pay athletes, not to provide goods or services available to the general public for profit.

The same would apply to a deal an athlete makes to sell merchandise to raise money to pay that player because the purpose of “selling merchandise is to raise money to pay that student-athlete and potentially other student-athletes at a particular school or schools, which is not a valid business purpose” according to the NCAA rule.

Sports attorney Darren Heitner, who deals in NIL, said the guidance “could disproportionately burden collectives that are already committed to spending money on players for multiple years to come.”

“If a pattern of rejections results from collective deals submitted to Deloitte, it may invite legal scrutiny under antitrust principles,” he said.

On a separate track, some college sports leaders, including the NCAA, are seeking a limited form of antitrust protection from Congress.

The letter said a NIL deal could be approved if, for instance, the businesses paying the players had a broader purpose than simply acting as a collective. The letter uses a golf course or apparel company as examples.

“In other words, NIL collectives may act as marketing agencies that match student-athletes with businesses that have a valid business purpose and seek to use the student’s NIL to promote their businesses,” the letter said.

Pells writes for the Associated Press.