Badgers Football 2019

[MrTPlush]

They get embarrassed by Illinois and people want to talk CFP?

 

Lol at this point they should be thrilled to even play in the Big Ten Championship game. They essentially have to win out to have that opportunity and even then they don’t control their destiny.

[yourout]

....

I think there's a pretty decent shot they don't even play for the B10 Championship much less win it. Losing in Minnesota certainly looks plausible.

 

Can we all just agree that it would be to the benefit of the B10 to have 2 undefeated teams meet in Indy for the championship game??

That way - whichever team wins the B10 is assured of having someone in the 4 team playoff.. Its too easy for the committee to figure out a way to exclude a B10 champion that has a loss (any loss)..

 

Remove any playoff doubt...

 

I would rather have a toe amputated then have Minnesota in the playoffs.

[MadThinker88]

....

I think there's a pretty decent shot they don't even play for the B10 Championship much less win it. Losing in Minnesota certainly looks plausible.

 

Can we all just agree that it would be to the benefit of the B10 to have 2 undefeated teams meet in Indy for the championship game??

That way - whichever team wins the B10 is assured of having someone in the 4 team playoff.. Its too easy for the committee to figure out a way to exclude a B10 champion that has a loss (any loss)..

 

Remove any playoff doubt...

 

I would rather have a toe amputated then have Minnesota in the playoffs.

 

I have a similar feeling regarding my brother-in-law & his alma mater (Meatchicken).

But when the 1st championship game was played he was sending me texts supporting the B10 over Oregon...

[young guns]

I just don't think it's a very realistic goal anymore.

So? What else are going to do? Should our goal be to lose to ohio st, win the rest and then lose to ohio st or Penn st again because that's more realistic? I dont know about you but reality doesnt play too much into my sports goals.

[adambr2]

I just don't think it's a very realistic goal anymore.

So? What else are going to do? Should our goal be to lose to ohio st, win the rest and then lose to ohio st or Penn st again because that's more realistic? I dont know about you but reality doesnt play too much into my sports goals.

 

I mean you can set whatever goals you wan, but I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. No, of course you don't go into a game with the goal of losing it. Obviously the goal for the Milwaukee Bucks going into every game is to win the game, but that doesn't mean one of their ultimate goals is "win every game this season." The UW men's basketball team might have an ultimate goal of winning the NCAA championship this year, but that's obviously not realistic.

 

I usually feel better the day after a game and have more perspective, but in this case, I don't see it. To me, we were exposed as frauds yesterday and don't deserve to be in the playoff conversation at all. We're no more playoff contenders than Baylor and SMU and Minnesota.

 

It's not simply losing that game but how it was done. I understand, as others have pointed out, that flukey things happen, like Georgia and South Carolina.

 

But being up 13 points, with 19 minutes left in the game, down at the 21 yard line of the lowly Illini, and finding ways, over, and over again of somehow letting a team without a single conference win to not only win but rally from a big deficit is just unfathomable.

 

No real CFP contender is losing that game against that team yesterday from 4:44 in the 3rd yesterday in 10,000 scenarios. It's unimaginable. Yet, we found a way. It's no exaggeration to say it's the worst Badger loss I've seen in my lifetime.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

A very Badgers thing to do would be defeat Ohio State and lose to Iowa.

 

Before that game went south, I felt very convinced the Buckeyes would roll the Badgers. I think the Badgers are the same 3-loss, Pinstripe Bowl team they almost always are.

[PeaveyFury]

I think the Badgers are the same 3-loss, Pinstripe Bowl team they almost always are.

 

I don't think this claim is any less of reactionary, incorrect hyperbole than it was yesterday.....

 

The "three-loss" Badger team that played in the Pinstripe Bowl last year actually was 7-5. The Pinstripe Bowl is the 7th-ranked Big Ten Bowl. If you think there are 6 Big Ten teams that will be better than Wisconsin at the end of the year, I think your thinking is incorrect.

[DuWayne Steurer]

I can't wait for the Badgers to lose to either OSU or Penn St so that people can come back and tell me that I'm wrong about the thing I'm actually saying is "nearly impossible" to do.

 

sigh.....

 

It's not that you're wrong, I just don't think it's a very realistic goal anymore.

 

If they can end up still playing in a New Years 6 bowl, I'll be thrilled.

 

I think there's a pretty decent shot they don't even play for the B10 Championship much less win it. Losing in Minnesota certainly looks plausible.

 

How many more ways can I say "almost impossible"?

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I think the Badgers are the same 3-loss, Pinstripe Bowl team they almost always are.

 

I don't think this claim is any less of reactionary, incorrect hyperbole than it was yesterday.....

 

The "three-loss" Badger team that played in the Pinstripe Bowl last year actually was 7-5. The Pinstripe Bowl is the 7th-ranked Big Ten Bowl. If you think there are 6 Big Ten teams that will be better than Wisconsin at the end of the year, I think your thinking is incorrect.

 

It was hyperbole, and a half joke. But they lost 3 games from 14-16 and were in the Outback/Cap One for what seemed like 20 years. I was just saying that I watched them struggle with a Northwestern team while Ohio State put 50 on them. They're not on their level, which is what a lot of people started to think they were. Of course, in true WI fashion, they'll probably beat them now and lose to Nebraska.

 

You can almost always pencil the Badgers in for losing a stupid game like that every year. It's the kind of thing that has prevented the program from taking that next step. They're not a top tier program and sit at the top of the tier just below it. Obviously, they are at a bunch of recruiting and financing and ethics disadvantages, but it's still true.

[young guns]

I just don't think it's a very realistic goal anymore.

So? What else are going to do? Should our goal be to lose to ohio st, win the rest and then lose to ohio st or Penn st again because that's more realistic? I dont know about you but reality doesnt play too much into my sports goals.

 

I mean you can set whatever goals you wan, but I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. No, of course you don't go into a game with the goal of losing it. Obviously the goal for the Milwaukee Bucks going into every game is to win the game, but that doesn't mean one of their ultimate goals is "win every game this season." The UW men's basketball team might have an ultimate goal of winning the NCAA championship this year, but that's obviously not realistic.

 

I usually feel better the day after a game and have more perspective, but in this case, I don't see it. To me, we were exposed as frauds yesterday and don't deserve to be in the playoff conversation at all. We're no more playoff contenders than Baylor and SMU and Minnesota.

 

It's not simply losing that game but how it was done. I understand, as others have pointed out, that flukey things happen, like Georgia and South Carolina.

 

But being up 13 points, with 19 minutes left in the game, down at the 21 yard line of the lowly Illini, and finding ways, over, and over again of somehow letting a team without a single conference win to not only win but rally from a big deficit is just unfathomable.

 

No real CFP contender is losing that game against that team yesterday from 4:44 in the 3rd yesterday in 10,000 scenarios. It's unimaginable. Yet, we found a way. It's no exaggeration to say it's the worst Badger loss I've seen in my lifetime.

Because you seem to be refuting that it is possible they can still end up in the playoff by saying it's an unrealistic goal. I get that a lot of things they did yesterday are things bad teams do. And I'm not saying, nor anyone for that matter, that this team is going to run the table looking like the team that played Michigan, but it could happen. And that's what we are trying to say while at the same time saying it's not really likely to happen.

[wildcat83]

Only fell to 13 in the AP. I actually thought it would be worse.

[MrTPlush]

So what would it take to get Paul Chryst fired? Is that a near impossible thing as long as the Badgers are half relevant? Look, I am not saying the guy is bad, but he has yet to have an impressive road/neutral win. Given he doesn't get many shots on the weak side of the Big 10, but its becoming a trend.

 

2018: 0-2

2017: 0-1

2016: 0-2 (They beat #8 Michigan State on the road...but lets be honest, they weren't actually good)

2015: 0-1

 

Is it impossible to get a coach that is going to be a little more unique? Chryst is like the ultimate game manager. If he were playing Madden he would hit 'suggested play' every single time. Seems destined to be a guy to always lead them to a nice 3 loss record, have some nice wins at home, but never get the big win(s) needed to be something more.

[tmwiese55]

While embarrassing loss, you guys are massively overreacting here. Upsets happen all year in CFB, coaches don't get fired for it. He has the highest win % in school history. 4 days ago this is the best team we've ever had, or at least since RW. Which I still think is true today. Lose a game, hot seat. They crapped the bed, no doubt, but it happens. Wonder if Clemson regrets not canning Dabo for all those "Clemsoning" losses prior to 2016ish. OSU has had a game like this almost every year for years, though I don't see it this time. I think they're winning it all.

 

Badgers are always a 9-3 Pinstripe Bowl team? Really? A game they've been to one time? Orange Bowl and Cotton Bowl the previous two seasons. 13 wins the season before. They play a "NY Day" bowl almost every year (I know not always on NYD anymore due to schedule changes but you know what I mean on that level).

 

Now lets also remember there is only 2 seniors on the two-deep on D right now. This is set up by the clear uptick in recruiting the last few years and the D is set up to be very good for years to come.

 

The biggest thing to be concerned about IMO, and I said this on here in the offseason, is that the O still hasn't gotten up to close to the level it was when PC left in 2012ish. While better this year since we have a good QB. I'd have thought after 5 years we'd be back to just dominating on O like they did from 2009-13ish. The post RW teams didn't have a QB and still could just roll over people running the ball against 9 man fronts. Do we need Bostad back as OL coach instead of LBs? Who is calling the plays? They don't tell us. If PC isn't calling plays he needs to get back to it. The offenses at Pitt scored tons of points. What's taking so long for it to come back here?

 

Basically, if you had the offenses from PCs last run here combined with our current D system, they really could do some damage.

 

For what Plush just put, you're discounting they've won every bowl game(including two big name programs in USC/Miami). You're not counting beating LSU. A few at Iowa wins, at Nebraska wins.

[yourout]

I think it is far easier to get to a basketball final 4 than to the college football playoffs.

With the way college football recruiting is the deck is really stacked in favor of the Alabama's and Ohio State's.

[MrTPlush]

For what Plush just put, you're discounting they've won every bowl game(including two big name programs in USC/Miami). You're not counting beating LSU. A few at Iowa wins, at Nebraska wins.

 

I didn't include bowl games because, personally, I think the results can be real fluky and not meaningful. I am sure the college cares a bunch for money reasons...but I don't.

 

I didn't include LSU because we all know Lambeau was a home game.

 

Iowa? Nebraska? Good wins, but hardly a major accomplishment. We go into nearly every one of those games favored to win.

[tmwiese55]

So you found a way to not count other tough and good wins in order to point out the losses. It's fine but it is what it is in a nothing will ever be good enough other than Ringz and finding the negatives type attitude. Then down the line if they do get a couple of those and make a playoff, but lose (as they should vs Bama types) then someone will say whoopdie do, not like we can beat the big boys to win it all. not saying you would, but someone will. The ESPNification of everyone's thinking to "Ringzz or bust" has a negative trickle down effect. We'll never be OSU, really just have to accept that at UW or might as well just not follow.

 

Also, they would've been underdogs in several of the games I listed.

[MrTPlush]

So you found a way to not count other tough and good wins in order to point out the losses.

 

No, I simply didn't include games that weren't elite-level games...because that is what I was after. The only debatable game I left out was the Orange Bowl...but as I said I don't like the randomness that comes with those games. You had a Miami team that got upset by Pitt as a #2 team and then playing for a chance to get into the playoff got absolutely throttled by Clemson. At that point it is really easy to question the fight in any given team/player.

 

So maybe Chryst has one statement win to his resume...maybe not. Depends on your view when it comes to bowl games.

[tmwiese55]

Sooo LSU doesn't count being a top 5 program and a clear dog to them. Then yea sure we can win games, but only if the other team doesn't care, OK. You're basically going into this hindsight looking with the mindset that any game that we won there is an excuse for and doesn't count as a big win (since the team we beat can't be that good since we beat them, chicken/egg type thing). This comes back to that article posted on the main page with the "It always end in a loss" type of thing. Thinking like this will always leave you disappointed and negative.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

He is not even in the firing conversation.

[PeaveyFury]

For what Plush just put, you're discounting they've won every bowl game(including two big name programs in USC/Miami). You're not counting beating LSU. A few at Iowa wins, at Nebraska wins.

 

I didn't include bowl games because, personally, I think the results can be real fluky and not meaningful. I am sure the college cares a bunch for money reasons...but I don't.

 

I didn't include LSU because we all know Lambeau was a home game.

 

Iowa? Nebraska? Good wins, but hardly a major accomplishment. We go into nearly every one of those games favored to win.

 

Yeah, this is pretty absurd selectivism. Other than the quality wins that you've determined don't meet your randomly and subjectively applied criteria, they have no quality wins.

[Jimbo]

Is that the worst loss of all time for Wisconsin in regards to spread?

 

31 point favorites might be hard to beat.

 

I don't follow the B1G closely to enough to know what level Illinois plays at, or if the 31-point spread was warranted.

 

That said, it didn't dawn on me until Saturday night that this may be the worse loss...ever.

 

So Brew, you and I were thinking the same thing. Off the top of my head:

Losing at home to Minnesota 1985-ish.

Losing at Minnesota 1993.

Almost losing at home to then 1-AA Boise State (but they won in the last minute). Same with Cal Poly.

I'm too lazy to search the internets for point spreads that far back.

 

Other than that, can't think of anything in the last 40 years that come close.

[MrTPlush]

Sooo LSU doesn't count being a top 5 program and a clear dog to them. Then yea sure we can win games, but only if the other team doesn't care, OK. You're basically going into this hindsight looking with the mindset that any game that we won there is an excuse for and doesn't count as a big win (since the team we beat can't be that good since we beat them, chicken/egg type thing). This comes back to that article posted on the main page with the "It always end in a loss" type of thing. Thinking like this will always leave you disappointed and negative.

 

I don't typically get excited about beating a #5 team Week 1 when they ended up spending more weeks unranked that season and were never higher than #18 after that game. I am thinking LSU just wasn't elite. Of course I also mentioned not including a Michigan State game where they were #8 in the nation...but unless you are convinced we hurt their feelings so bad they only one three games that year (Furman, Notre Dame, and then only Rutgers after we played them)...again, they weren't actually good. I will definitely go in hindsight and mention how a team was overrated when we played them. Neither of those occasions did we beat a Top 10 team.

 

I already said I care nothing about weighing the meaningfulness of any bowl game period...win or loss. The results are just too random for me to take them seriously. I just used that game as an example of why it can be. Again, if you want to consider beating Miami a true elite matchup win have at it...then Chryst has one.

 

Chryst is nowhere near being fired, but I don't think he is that good of a coach. Average would be a good word for him. Hopefully he improves over the years. While I much prefer the way he has ran the offense this year vs. years past it still seems to leave a ton to be desired. For as many years as he has been here I would have expected the offense to be better than it has been.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

He is going to have to really suck to get fired. Most other sexy picks to coach UW would view it as a stepping stone to get somewhere else. The appeal of Chryst was stability and knowing UW was his destination job.

 

I don't follow the team super closely but he appears to have done a pretty good job so far. If Mertz stays at WI and doesn't pan out, then that conversation may gain traction. I don't want to use the word rebuilding, because that's not what Wisconsin is doing, but I guess I think they are still a program in transition, and it seemed liked Mertz is a huge part of that.

[MrTPlush]

He is going to have to really suck to get fired.

 

Sure, that is the beauty of a college coach. You can get into a situation where consistency will keep you a job forever. Someone can go to Wisconsin and have a forever job based on beating up the weak side of the Big 10. I think things would be a lot different if we played Ohio State and Penn State every single year. Then beating them would be a lot more essential. Instead it is and will always be easy to shrug off those losses. While Wisconsin may not be Ohio State good all the time I do think they should be beating them and Penn State more than they have recently.

[tmwiese55]

 

Sooo LSU doesn't count being a top 5 program and a clear dog to them. Then yea sure we can win games, but only if the other team doesn't care, OK. You're basically going into this hindsight looking with the mindset that any game that we won there is an excuse for and doesn't count as a big win (since the team we beat can't be that good since we beat them, chicken/egg type thing). This comes back to that article posted on the main page with the "It always end in a loss" type of thing. Thinking like this will always leave you disappointed and negative.

 

I don't typically get excited about beating a #5 team Week 1 when they ended up spending more weeks unranked that season and were never higher than #18 after that game. I am thinking LSU just wasn't elite. Of course I also mentioned not including a Michigan State game where they were #8 in the nation...but unless you are convinced we hurt their feelings so bad they only one three games that year (Furman, Notre Dame, and then only Rutgers after we played them)...again, they weren't actually good. I will definitely go in hindsight and mention how a team was overrated when we played them. Neither of those occasions did we beat a Top 10 team.

 

I already said I care nothing about weighing the meaningfulness of any bowl game period...win or loss. The results are just too random for me to take them seriously. I just used that game as an example of why it can be. Again, if you want to consider beating Miami a true elite matchup win have at it...then Chryst has one.

 

Chryst is nowhere near being fired, but I don't think he is that good of a coach. Average would be a good word for him. Hopefully he improves over the years. While I much prefer the way he has ran the offense this year vs. years past it still seems to leave a ton to be desired. For as many years as he has been here I would have expected the offense to be better than it has been.

 

 

LSU finished that year ranked 13th. Get the W vs us and they're top 10. But, since they lost to us they're not top 10 so it doesn't count.

 

Again, if you just "yea, but" everything you're eventually only going to get to the negative.

 

First, not good until you win big road games. Beat Iowa, MSU Neb types a bunch: Yea but you don't beat big programs with elite speed. Beat LSU Auburn USC MIA and usually hang within 1 score to OSU. Yea but you now need to play those game on the road at their stadium and they have to win all the other games they play or it doesn't count. Plus, if they had lost the game prior to you that means they now don't care so that doesn't count either. Now for an example this year (and by no means am I predicting) they win at OSU then beat PSU in the title game. but get smashed by Bama in the playoffs. Then it's yea but you can't win it all anyway and they're not really legit or good enough. Or say we beat OSU in the next couple years at home, then it's yea but you didn't do it on the road. With that kind of selectivism and narrowing your criteria until you're down to only the Ls you're only going to have a negative view. You're grasping for a way to discard any good thing to only focus on the negative.

 

Bottom line, they're never going to be OSU. Stomping our feet and pouting and demanding new coaches because they're not is just futile. They're going to be on the 2nd-3rd tier of teams, that's it and we might as well accept it. Sometimes you're going to get the stars aligned and pull out the great year, most years you won't. Should we hold them to higher standard than what Iowa is holding Ferentz to, yes absolutely. But firing guys because they're not OSU isn't right either.

 

And you saw my criticism on the O as a major critique that I have questions on too. So it's not like I'm sitting here with some homer glasses on. There is clear areas they can improve there and it's feasible to do it (wouldn't take some drastic change to recruiting/academics since it was being done just a few years ago). Something should be tweaked on the O side of the ball to get back to that level.