The New Look Badgers - 2023

[Voyageur]

Don't pay a whole lot of attention, but I noticed that Ohio State, after beat #5 Notre Dame by two scores, dropped a spot. Michigan, after whipping up on powerhouse Colorado State, climbed up four.

You're right. It's way too early to take any stock in the rankings. All that matters at this point is not adding anything into the "L" column.

 

[Poppa San]

You're right. It's way too early to take any stock in the rankings. All that matters at this point is not adding anything into the "L" column.

Thing about rankings is the blue bloods get the benefit of doubt so that they'll start higher and not fall as far.
Say Rutgers has a magical season and wins the B1G undefeated. At the playoff bid meeting they would be left out if Notre Dame, Clemson, LSU and Oklahoma were also undefeated. Not because they aren't top 4 but because they aren't a blueblood to draw eyeballs with.

 

[Voyageur]

Thing about rankings is the blue bloods get the benefit of doubt so that they'll start higher and not fall as far.
Say Rutgers has a magical season and wins the B1G undefeated. At the playoff bid meeting they would be left out if Notre Dame, Clemson, LSU and Oklahoma were also undefeated. Not because they aren't top 4 but because they aren't a blueblood to draw eyeballs with.

I think you're right. We'd be hearing how the Big 10 was a weakling in that given year. How we had nobody good enough to be there. They'd even look past all the non-conference records. The only way they'd be considered is if the Big 10 as a whole, won all but one or two non-conference games, and those losses were to top 10 teams. It's the same excuse we've been hearing by the pickers every year, when they try to load two SEC teams into the final 4.

There's no doubt those making the decisions are biased, and the bloodline is all that matters to them. To that end though, we have seen some teams slip through that probably shouldn't be there, because they just plain aren't good enough.

That's about the only reason I agree with the idea of a 12 team playoff. At least you separate the good from the bad early on, to get to a more representative group of top teams at the end. It takes a lot of the human error out of the equation, when it comes to picking them. But, even that is a problem, when you figure that down around 11 or 12, there might be a team that doesn't quite get there, but is really on a roll, and could make waves.

 

[Poppa San]

That's about the only reason I agree with the idea of a 12 team playoff.

In all the other college sports you can play your way into the championship game. But not football. You can play your way out by a "bad" loss. It takes an invite to get there.
I'm predicting in 15-20 years the NCAA no longer controls the major sports. The mega-conferences are almost to the point they can start their own rules body and admit the athletes are semi-pro players. More like club teams than official school sponsored amateur teams.

 

[weeds]

You guys are killing me! Actually, Washington State's nickname used to be Wazzu. I'm old school!

Then there's the old fan wear. It's a "pump coat," with an "i" replacing the "u." They'd cheer; "U-rah-rah, sis-boom-bah!" Wazzu was well known then.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

A couple of those "young" college men look like Harry Truman when he was President.

 

[weeds]

Well, Wisconsin boy, Di(kert, sure won his homecoming. Great job Coach ... you pushed all the right buttons.

 

[Mondio]

W. State played hard all game. WI made too many mistakes. Big penalties on every drive in the 2nd half it seemed. Turnovers didn’t help. Kicking game sucked. Lots to clean up if the want to win anything this year

 

[longtimefan]

W. State played hard all game. WI made too many mistakes. Big penalties on every drive in the 2nd half it seemed. Turnovers didn’t help. Kicking game sucked. Lots to clean up if the want to win anything this year

Lot of top teams lost yesterday..wierd day

 

[realitybytez]

Kicking game sucked.

that's an understatement. i've seen high school kickers do better.

 

[weeds]

Badgers had a little fun beating Bob and Harry's Polytechnical Institute and Convenience Store 66-7 yesterday. Wish they had expended a little more energy last week but, as they say, no sense skating on last year's ice, eh?

 

[lambeaulambo]

Starting to rethink the whole Jim Leonhard DC thing...this D stinks

 

[Voyageur]

It isn't a question of Leonhard's defense, it's a level of talent. The Buckeyes have superior athletes across the board, and for the Badgers, making it worse, it's a down year, having graduated so many defenders from last year.

What the Badgers played against yesterday was potentially the winner of the national championship. They have it all working on both sides of the ball, and Stroud is, in my opinion, the #1 candidate for the Heisman.

 

[longtimefan]

Sorry to say but Wisconsin needs to lower the requirements for players.

This has always been an iasue

 

[longtimefan]

COLUMN: Time For a Change?

Should Wisconsin reduce its academic requirements for its student athletes?

247sports.com

That was issue back in 15

 

[Voyageur]

I don't know that it's going to make that big of a difference if you lower the standards to be honest. The program lacks the money of the big dogs.

 

[longtimefan]

I don't know that it's going to make that big of a difference if you lower the standards to be honest. The program lacks the money of the big dogs.

Lack the money because cant win.

Cant win because wont lower the standard???

 

[Voyageur]

Lack the money because cant win.

Cant win because wont lower the standard???

Your interpretation of what I said is totally wrong. I did NOT say we don't get the money because we can't win. I said it takes money to win. I stand by the statement that the academic standards is one of the major reasons we have problems recruiting athletes. It reduces the pool available significantly.

First, Academic standards. Even thought the article deals with Anderson, when he was head coach for a short time, the standards still exist, and because of it, recruiting is more difficult. Understand, I'm not saying it's bad, I'm just saying that the pool of players is lessened considerably, because of the requirements to even get into the University. Take it for what it's worth, it's fact. Good or bad? It depends on how you view it. In my eyes - which is a personal perspective - I believe college is for education, and sports is an extra, therefore support the academic standards, even if that means you can't win as often as you'd like, in many sports.

COLUMN: Time For a Change?

Should Wisconsin reduce its academic requirements for its student athletes?

247sports.com

Next is money. Money for world class athletic facilities, and huge amounts of money for recruiting. Wisconsin spends as little as possible on recruiting in most cases. For elite level programs, it's spend to recruit the best athletes, and in most cases, the academic standards are much lower, so their results on athletic ability is much stronger. Here's just a sampling of recruiting money spent.

College football's 10 biggest spenders in recruiting

.

247sports.com

Where does Wisconsin rank? You'll find that we end up around 50th in spending, and at an extremely low level of spending. Want a sign of where spending for recruiting has gone? Between NIL deals for athletes, and lavish trips to universities, it's out of hand, and Wisconsin will never have this amount of alumni donations to cover the costs. Living here in Texas, I know where several of the schools are heading with their recruiting, and to be candid, it ain't pretty. A school like Wisconsin, that plays it all by the rules established when they meant something is never going to win this battle. Imagine, $280,000 for one trip for less than 10 athletes and their families, for one weekend, at the U. Who would cover the costs of this one for Wisconsin, when it's over half of what their entire recruiting budget would be, including salaries of everyone out there doing the job. Khalif was right about how the lack of money hurts. Accepting it can help change perspectives.

Even if the $280k is somewhat inflated, it still shows where the problem is. Texas will become a powerhouse again, joining the SEC, and spending their Monopoly money to recruit the best athletes, along with other SEC giants, and half of them will hardly be able to sign their names with an "X."

Whys of Texas: Yeah, the Longhorns spent $280,000 on Arch Manning’s visit. And? So? | Opinion

If the Texas Longhorns get ArchManning to sign a national letter of intent – which he likely will in December – wasn’t it money well spent?

www.usatoday.com

So, anyway, that's how the game is played in today's world of college football. I don't know about anyone else, but when the Badgers win 10 or 11 games, and head to a bowl game, I think they've done a great job, including recruiting. They've earned their wins, not bought them by throwing money at kids that sometimes don't even belong in college.

 

[Mondio]

We're at a point where football and basketball should start paying colleges for use of their facilities and completely disassociate themselves from any final strands of "academia" they try to hang on to.

 

[longtimefan]

Your interpretation of what I said is totally wrong. I did NOT say we don't get the money because we can't win. I said it takes money to win. I stand by the statement that the academic standards is one of the major reasons we have problems recruiting athletes. It reduces the pool available significantly.

First, Academic standards. Even thought the article deals with Anderson, when he was head coach for a short time, the standards still exist, and because of it, recruiting is more difficult. Understand, I'm not saying it's bad, I'm just saying that the pool of players is lessened considerably, because of the requirements to even get into the University. Take it for what it's worth, it's fact. Good or bad? It depends on how you view it. In my eyes - which is a personal perspective - I believe college is for education, and sports is an extra, therefore support the academic standards, even if that means you can't win as often as you'd like, in many sports.

COLUMN: Time For a Change?

Should Wisconsin reduce its academic requirements for its student athletes?

247sports.com

Next is money. Money for world class athletic facilities, and huge amounts of money for recruiting. Wisconsin spends as little as possible on recruiting in most cases. For elite level programs, it's spend to recruit the best athletes, and in most cases, the academic standards are much lower, so their results on athletic ability is much stronger. Here's just a sampling of recruiting money spent.

College football's 10 biggest spenders in recruiting

.

247sports.com

Where does Wisconsin rank? You'll find that we end up around 50th in spending, and at an extremely low level of spending. Want a sign of where spending for recruiting has gone? Between NIL deals for athletes, and lavish trips to universities, it's out of hand, and Wisconsin will never have this amount of alumni donations to cover the costs. Living here in Texas, I know where several of the schools are heading with their recruiting, and to be candid, it ain't pretty. A school like Wisconsin, that plays it all by the rules established when they meant something is never going to win this battle. Imagine, $280,000 for one trip for less than 10 athletes and their families, for one weekend, at the U. Who would cover the costs of this one for Wisconsin, when it's over half of what their entire recruiting budget would be, including salaries of everyone out there doing the job. Khalif was right about how the lack of money hurts. Accepting it can help change perspectives.

Even if the $280k is somewhat inflated, it still shows where the problem is. Texas will become a powerhouse again, joining the SEC, and spending their Monopoly money to recruit the best athletes, along with other SEC giants, and half of them will hardly be able to sign their names with an "X."

Whys of Texas: Yeah, the Longhorns spent $280,000 on Arch Manning’s visit. And? So? | Opinion

If the Texas Longhorns get ArchManning to sign a national letter of intent – which he likely will in December – wasn’t it money well spent?

www.usatoday.com

So, anyway, that's how the game is played in today's world of college football. I don't know about anyone else, but when the Badgers win 10 or 11 games, and head to a bowl game, I think they've done a great job, including recruiting. They've earned their wins, not bought them by throwing money at kids that sometimes don't even belong in college.

My????? Was wondering if that is why we cant compeat

I am with you 100 percent

 

[Voyageur]

My????? Was wondering if that is why we cant compeat

I am with you 100 percent

Somebody told me the other day that the new 12 team football playoff format will level the playing field. I had to laugh. It isn't designed to do that. It's designed to bring more money in for schools to split, and it won't change the skills level of teams taking the field. No matter how you slice it and dice it, the elite programs will remain the elite, as long as they spend to stay there.

I laugh about the Arch Manning deal. I'm going to guess his NIL deals going to the University of Texas will exceed a couple of million dollars a year, and new car of immense value to drive every year, and an apartment that would cost all of us several thousand dollars a month to rent, for chump change. He won't mind sitting for a year, as a red-shirt freshman, if Ewers is still going strong.

Meanwhile, Ewers is making over a million a year, from what I've heard. Not bad for a college QB. No matter what anyone says, it was the NIL money doled out by UT supporters who lured him back with money.

I like the Badger model better. It's more honest, and above board. No dark money floating around out there, making kids rich, before they even prove they can play a game.

My feeling is that it's nearly impossible for the Badgers to ever compete against teams with unlimited budgets, and lower academic standards. If they do, it's a stroke of genius.

When I realize just how good Jim Leonhard's defenses have been, I marvel at what he's done. I expected the loss to OSU, and the way it happened. We just don't have the horses to beat a team like them. They're one of the best that money can buy.

 

[lambeaulambo]

Umm...no its time to tell the AD Mcintosh to clear out his desk. All of the UW sports teams except womens hockey and volleyball are in the trash can. Time to retool. If anyone here doesn't think the whole nepotism thing isnt real, think again. I'll get the Merv Griffin set out of the dumpster. lol - UW is a clown car joke in reference to atheltics.

 

[longtimefan]

More people arrested and ejected from the game than badgers had yards in rushing

 

[Sanguine camper]

Basically it's a lack of talent. Recruiting is failing and it shows. Other than Herbig and Allen, the rest of the roster is pedestrian. The Badgers are starting to remind me of the Morton years.

 

[longtimefan]

Basically it's a lack of talent. Recruiting is failing and it shows. Other than Herbig and Allen, the rest of the roster is pedestrian. The Badgers are starting to remind me of the Morton years.

See previous posts on that

 

[weeds]

I understand LT's comment regarding academic standards and wouldn't disagree with that assertion. The belief that from an athletic standpoint, the Badgers won't be able to compete with the OSU's and SEC's of the NCAA has been floated since the 70's.

Wisconsin and Northwestern were perennial also-rans in the Big Ten ... the year-in-and-year-out bottom feeders because athletes then, as now, could not meet the academic requirements which were extremely high. I think that the income potential is the motivator for today's athlete and when you hear a good number of these supposed 'student/athletes' try to piece a coherent sentence together it becomes more and more evident as to what is wagging the dog.

UW just is not a destination school for 5-star recruits. Those who do care about academics can still get the same quality of education if they choose to, at a school that is essentially an NFL minor league affiliate as they could at Wisconsin. UW used to have the rep for being a prestigious learning facility - I don't think that is the case any longer. Further, I believe that most of the 'name' college football players in for example the SEC couldn't get in to UW. Academic standards at the power schools are more of a sliding scale.

In any event, losing to Brett Bielama, and his lovely wife, is kind of a gut punch.