LINKEDINCOMMENTMORE

The Michigan football team once again is looking up to Ohio State in the Big Ten, at least when it comes to coaching jobs.

That’s according to Tom Fornelli of CBS Sports, who on Tuesday ranked the Buckeyes and Wolverines Nos. 1 and 2 when it comes to the best job in the Big Ten.

But, according to Fornelli, it’s really not that close.

“There wasn’t a whole lot of doubt in my mind about which team was going to be No. 1 in these rankings,” he wrote. “Don’t get me wrong, I at least entertained the idea of somebody else, but it was never seriously considered. Ohio State has everything you could want as a coach. A bunch of money, a ton of fan support, a school interested in athletic success, strong high school football within the state and a strong enough brand to recruit across the country if you choose to do so. It’s one of the best gigs in the sport.”

Michigan, meanwhile, was Fornelli’s “clear-cut” second choice. “There’s money, history, a loyal (and large) fan base and a well-known brand,” he writes. “One of the problems for Michigan, though, is that while Detroit still produces talent, there isn’t as much within the state’s borders as there used to be.”

And, while it might serve as another point of debate between bitter rivals in a series in which Ohio State has won the last five meetings, the Michigan job at least appears to have the clear upper hand over its in-state rival, Michigan State, which is coming off a 3-9 season and a load of offseason turmoil.

The Spartans job checks in at No. 7 in Fornelli’s Big Ten rankings, barely squeezing into the top half.

“Mark Dantonio has done a lot for Michigan State over the last decade,” Fornelli writes, “but while that may make this seem like it should be considered a better job, I just don’t agree. It’s still a good job, as there are no glaring weaknesses in the program. It’s just there isn’t much that’s elite, either. Plus, the in-state talent is dwindling, and despite recent results, it’s still Michigan State competing with Michigan for supremacy, not the other way around.”